Except they do, if you actually read them. Saying they were charged $40 “to hold their baby after his birth” is untrue because of what it omits, which is that a) there is every chance they would have been charged $40 anyway, and “skin-to-skin” was just a placeholder for classifying that time in the OR and b) that…

So, let me get this straight - you took this story from a Reddit thread that has multiple clear explanations for this charge (which is not for just “holding the baby” but for skin-to-skin in the OR), one of which you even included. The couple isn’t bothered. And you still go with that headline?