Every child needs and deserves to be cared for at home not to be sent into day care. Instead of funding places in day care the government should enable people to stay at home with their children.

Do mothers have a right to work? No one has that right.

If couples decide to have children then they should think ahead and decide who will stay at home.

Children are being ruined and childhood is being lost by a culture of 'want want want'. No one can have everything they want.
People need to face up to the fact that if you can't afford something - you can't have it.
Too many people make the excuse of having to work.They need to reprioritise their lives. Children deserve more than to be in day care.

Ann Sloan, Barking, Essex

Why doesn't this article mention cost? I cannot work, not even part-time, because I'd spend more than 80% of my earning on the nursery. I'd rather work part-time, than stay at home full time, as my son is 2, and 2 years with no second income were v. tough. I don't understand, why women in this country let the government get away with such stupid policies. Many European countries subsidize nurseries - in all Scandinavian countries nurseries cost less than 100 pounds per month and they are excellent quality.

Anna, Winchester,

I have always been very career orientated, but 2 months before I am due to graduate in a vocational subject following a long degree course, I am 7 months pregnant. Choosing not to make plans to work in the near future has been a big decision for me,as I had always anticipated entering emplaoment immediately on qualification, and I am very fortunate for the support of my partner. Although our child was not planned, we both accept that parenthood is not without concessions, and one of these will be my salary. Childcare is expensive, but in many ways I see children as a luxury and these costs as something that should be taken into account when embarking on parenthood.

May, LIverpool,

Michael has made an important point here, the figures appear to contradict the argument?? Can you clarify?

As for cost of childcare, it should be costly in order to attract highly qualified professionals. it is madness to follow Gordon Brown's policy of encouraging mothers or fathers to leave their children with low paid 'carers' or over worked teachers.

It would be great for society if more families took responsibility for looking after their children, and working more flexibly. If the government spent more here, and less on consultants and unsuccessful regeneration projects, we may start to see a difference.

Of course this does mean a shift in employer attitudes, but it is starting to happen.

As a working mum for over 25 years, I can only offer advice from my personal experience. If you spend most of your life chasing professional goals, you end up wondering why. Time invested in your family is much more satisfying, but it takes you years to realise it!

Dee, Brighton, E Sussex

Rosemary Bennett's interpretation of this matter is most odd. She effectively states that the following figures amount to 'concrete evidence that parents are choosing to care for babies themselves'.

No. of nursery places in 2002: 424,500
No. of children at nursery: 377,805

No. of nursery places in 2006: 725,115
No. of children at nursery: 561,964

In other words, there has been a 48.74% increase in the number of children attending nursery - hardly evidence supporting Ms Bennett's case. The fact that there has, over the same period, been a 70.82% increase in the number of available nursery places is irrelevant. This only demonstrates that there has been an excessive increase in the number of available places, which should have provided the focal point for Ms Bennett's article.

Stephen Weare, Esher,

Choice is a twin edged sword, whether a woman wants to work or not, part time full time, nursery or family childcare there are benefits and negatives to weigh up. As a nursery owner I have to weigh up whether I can afford to subsidise my business any longer with the negative constraints placed upon me by regulations, rising staff, fuel and supply costs. On the positive side parents love our service, the children develop confidence and life skills and we do love to see them grow. Parents may think the charges are high but with our cost one thing is for sure I will only ever be rich in experience and joy.

Michael Graham, Newbury, England

I detect a smidgeon of glee in this issue. Can't help seeing an unspoken agenda: "Greedy cows, thinking they can be mums and have paid jobs. This'll show 'em."

The fact is, the industry forecasts were wrong, hence the surplus of places.

Nothing to do with career women repenting their crime of bad mothering, though you could argue that what the statistics actually tell us is that women don't aspire to "have it all" and never did.

Empty nursery places could mean employment legislation with more flexible working hours and longer maternity leave is beginning to take effect.

Now we've got the chance to stay at home longer, that's what many of us are doing.

We didn't go to work to "have it all”, we did it because we needed the income. Have it all, indeed. Do it all, more like.

Read more at my site:

http://motheratlarge.com

Motheratlarge, Edinburgh, UK

The Government introduced Full day care National Standards in 2001, these are mainly common sense actions which any well run nursery would normally observe.
However the civil service body put in charge of there enforcement is the Early Years branch of Ofsted, their dragonian enforcement of these standards has vastly increased the cost of childcare. The huge amount of usless paper work generated by these' jobworths' has forced nurseries to greatly increase their prices so that many mothers who would like to send their children to a nursery and return to work cannot afford to do so.
To add to this the government policy has forced local councils to open many state subsidised nurseries in Sure start areas at vast cost to the taxpayer, these have greatly added to the number of nursery places available to the detriment of private day care operations which are often struggling to cover their costs.
Hence the many empty places in nurseries.

The Truth, Portsmouth, UK

OK so the mnarket is over suppied as the industry forecasts were wrong - not much news there - show me a sector where it doesn't happen from time to time. Biut the problem is likely to reduce as nursery places are set to reduce not increase as your article cleims. The fact is the government is pushing provision towards low specialism one size fits all children's centres which will increasingly soak up local authority provided places and force higher cost but alos often more specialist private nursery facilities out of the market

Antigone, London,

Why do so many people complain about the cost of childcare? These people are raising your children! They should be paid well above what they're getting - and those who choose to farm out the care of their kids to strangers should be thankful they can do so at all. If you can't afford to have one parent stay home with the kids - don't have them.

sarah, Calgary, Canada

Every child needs and deserves to be cared for at home not to be sent into day care. Instead of funding places in day care the government should enable people to stay at home with their children.

Do mothers have a right to work? No one has that right.

If couples decide to have children then they should think ahead and decide who will stay at home.

Children are being ruined and childhood is being lost by a culture of 'want want want'. No one can have everything they want.
People need to face up to the fact that if you can't afford something - you can't have it.
Too many people make the excuse of having to work.They need to reprioritise their lives. Children deserve more than to be in day care.

Ann Sloan, Barking, Essex

Michael from maidenhead's maths is out but it's still a rise of 48.68% in take up (let's call it 49% rounded - or even 50% is more accurate than the story here)

Antigone, London,

Oh 'round the clock child care' - only if you can access it via the state or can afford it.

Right now I've spent 10 days trying to find child care in my area - my disabled wife fell and broke her leg which has required emergency childcare as she is still in the hospital.

I am currently relying on my elderly parents to care for one of my children and the good will of my employer to allow me time to take my 2 older children to school before coming to work.

However, because I work (full time) I get virtually nothing in support - however if I had walked away from my wife and kids, or been a substance abuser/child abuser then all the support would have been thrown at them.

Over the last few years I have found that governments do not wish to support families.

They only support those who wish to take from society and not take an active and productive part.

The nanny state only nannies those who wish to be nannied, the rest who wish to work and provide get very little...

Jim, ayrshire, Uk

I find the assumption that there are only two choices: children cared for by mother or children go to daycare and that it is always women who have to make a decision between working or caring for their child(ren). It takes two people to make a child, there is therefore at least a third option which is that the child(ren) is/are cared for by their father while their mother works. Not all women have inferior earning potential to that of their partners, there are some situations in which it works out best for the family for the mother to work and the father to care for the children. Articles that focus on the mother as the only childcare option are embarassingly old fashoined, research has shown that what a child needs is a strong relationship with a primary carer, there was no evidence that there was any benefit to the child in this primary carer being the mother. This focus on the mother as primary carer is offensive - men are not the major earner in all relationships.

mal, Auckland, NZ

I object to the the notion that women are juggling careers and parenthood because it is fashionable..."The ideal of a woman juggling a full-time career with the demands of motherhood is going out of fashion" and the "have-it-all" generation, this presents such a narrow and ignorant view of the decisions many parents have made. I chose to return to my career on a part time basis so that i could spend some time with my daughter however I appreciate that financial demands mean some women have to return on a full time basis. I am working because the bills have to be paid and because I enjoy my work. When will everyone stop telling us what we should be doing, stop talking about the negatives associated with children in nursery and start appreciating it is a difficult decision. I certainly don't feel like "I have it all", I feel like I compromise every day on work issues, my daughter, finances and career aspirations, and I am not following any 'fashion'.

Dr Sarah Atkinson, Nottingham, UK

Unfortunately Michael from Maidenhead (see above) needs to go back to school for both English and Maths lessons! Apart from the basic errors ('sent', 'calcuation', '562,00'), his grammar is poor ( 'their English', 'their Maths' (the author is an individual, apparently female) 'there were 378,000 attended nursery').

His Maths requires even greater attention. A rise from 378,000 to 562,000 (even these figures are slightly awry) represents a 48.67% increase (where does 67% come from?). Nought out of ten!

Stephen, Esher,

It's not clear from the article what kind of nursery places we are talking about here. Is it daycare - available 8am-6pm - or is it 'nursery school' - from 9am-3pm? Because there is a huge difference in terms of how that helps women to go back to work (and never mind the issue of expense, as others have mentioned). It isn't practical in every career or job to work part time, and certainly jobs which fit in with school hours are hard to come by. When faced with trying to organised extra care around school-hours nursery places for a not yet 4 year old, no wonder women are choosing to stay at home, even if it isn't what they ideally would like.

Margot, Toronto, Canada

I can't believe how this story has been concocted from a complete misunderstanding of the figures - figures you include in the article itself.

The takeup of nursery places has increased from 378,161 in 2002 to 561,964 in 2006.

But, but, NO! Working mothers are bad. Must... fit... figures... to... story...

Mike, London,

Unfortunately Michael from Maidenhead need to go back to school (if not nursery!) for both English and Maths lessons. Poor spelling, terrible grammar and even worse maths! Since when was a rise from 378,000 to 562,00 (sic) an increase of 67%?

Stephen, Esher,

I get very angry when newspapers use the phrase "have-it-all generation" when referring to mothers who go out to work. The reality is that many mothers do not have the option of staying at home with their children because they have to earn money to pay the bills.

Tracy Coryton, Crediton, Devon

So if I read your stats. correctly, there are around 634,475 children in daycare in 2007, compared to around 378,161 in 2002 - isn't that the opposite of the line you are taking in your article. Rather sloppy of you.

Polly Barker, London,

Children need dedicated parents. Dedicated parents allow one partner to be at home for the whole day. This should be considered and agreed by everybody who wants to be a parent. Incidentally, everybody who wants to own a car, should also own a parking space.

paul allen, High Littleton, Bristol, BANES

akai ringo's point shouldn't go un-heeded. Here in the UK we enjoy phenomenal benefits compared with our US and Canadian counterparts. We may have some way to go before we enjoy all the benefits of Scandanavia, but where we are in a situation where there is more choice for women - part time work with paid holidays, protected rights, pension etc is something we are beginning to accept as the norm.
Let's applaud the choice that many (but by no means all) of us have, and carry on campaigning for this choice to be available to all. Childcare is still too expensive, and therefore prohibitive for some families.
This article failed to mention that some families are able to balance childcare between parents, thus also reducing the requirement.

Joanne, Midlands, UK

I think the article misses one key point. Cost.

My wife is at home with our two boys simply because we cannot afford childcare on her £18,000 salary. She does not earn enough after tax to cover £56 (£28 x 2) a day costs.

The high prices in nurseries are forcing people like ourselves to look at any alternative as opposed to full time employment. Its a shame, my wife loved her job.

Simon Regg, Hertford,

Are they also aware that by 2010 Government wants all Nursery and Play School care headed by graduates? This will increase costs and threaten small play groups. How many graduates will want to work for the minimum wage or just above it?

Andy, Worthing , UK

Why are the first 3 paragraphs repeated?

Peter, Flensburg, Germany

Our local nursery costs in the region of £1106 per month per child Perhaps this is a further factor in their loss of popularity.

s.Barnett, london, surrey

You also need to have a look at the quality of some nurseries!

We looked at a number of nurseries for our 1st child and were horrified at what we saw at some of the large chains. Sure they met government standards and were (probably) safe enough, but bored, uncaring, unmotivated staff meant that the children were listless and grumpy. The children spent the day wandering around in unstructured play, supervised but very unstimulated. Unsurprisingly, you could see that the children didn't enjoy it at all.

We did find a good nursery with good standards and it's no surprise that this nursery has a waiting list while the local chain nurseries have plenty of spaces. When so many nurseries are not a caring environment for a small child, it's no surprise that women prefer to care for their children themselves.

Alex N, Winchester, UK

Most people i know are staying at home to look after their kids because its just to expensive to send the kids to day care.

By the time you co back to work part time the cost of care means your working just to pay the child care.

If the Government want women to work we need cheap or free child care.

Simon, Bristol,

"At home and proud of it " - and about time too! I myself, as a 'new man' who swapped roles with his wife and stayed at home to look after the kids in the 1980's, now find it gratifying to see that the job is being evaluated in its true light. Educational research is revealing to the public the vast range of skills needed for the job of parenting, and any parent - man or woman - who dismisses child-rearing as some kind of "drudgery" is simply ignorant of the facts. It's a highly skilled, challenging, responsible and rewarding job.

Edmund Burke, Kingston upon Thames, England

I think one of the reasons leading women to stay at home to look after the kids is, in part, the cost of childcare. Where we live in Fife we have relatively low cost childcare available, but this can still be around £700/month. This is nearly two thirds of my wife's income. We have taken the decision that it is better to sacrifice what little wages would be left over and have our kids brought up in the family home, than my wife work in a full-time professional job for £400/month (after childcare costs) and the kids brought up by childminders.

Perhaps the Government should think about promoting creche facilities in the workplace so that parents can be close to thier kids all day, while still working full-time.

Chris, Tayport, Fife

"have it all" mothers, why is it that the women are constantly being attacked, surely women have as much right to work as men, just as men have as much right to stay home and look after children as women do. It's all about the mother harming the child by going out to work, never mind the fact that the father is always out at work and may not even see their child much during the week, what effect does that have on the child......no one seems to be interested in this, lets just blame the mothers......make them feel guilty so they stay at home.

Liz, Kent,

I think part of the issue is that families (or single parents) cannot afford to go back to work full-time as the fees for nurseries/day care takes up most of the average woman's salary. This basically means you are working to earn money to put your child in full-time care with precious little left over at the end of the month so you might as well stay at home!

Until the government hands out better subsidies for parents I don't think the situation will improve.

Nicola, Leeds, West Yorkshire

Part time workers in the UK have the same rights as full time workers.

Social advantages are popularly supposed to outweigh the commercial disadvantages, but most employers would disagree.

bill, Darlington, UK

Nurseries have priced themselves out of the market. There are still plenty of women who prefer working to child minding but they need a very well paid job to afford that luxury. As to part time work, there is no proper job that can be done part time and employers will soon find ways of getting rid of employees of that sort.

g.o.edwards, chester, u.k.

Why does this article not mention Pre-Schools, only nurseries? In my area (fairly affluent outer London borough) many mums leave work to care for their babies but when they reach two and a half they take them to a Private / Voluntary Pre-school for just 2 or 3 hours per day and perhaps for only 2 or 3 days a week.
The government seems obsessed with providing full day care nursery places to enable mums to return to work full time and clearly most mums don’t want this. They do want a break of a couple of hours a day when their child is over two, and give their child the social interaction they need, and perhaps they do then want to work part time only.

Paul Taylor, Upminster, Essex

The reason nurseries are empty is because they are too expensive, and lack of funding from the government. It is forcing mothers who want to work into part-time hours because they cannot justify the cost of child care.

John, Liverpool, UK

I think the key to the downward drive is the comment "fees remained stubbornly high". This is caused by Government schemes to pay the nursery costs of poorer women which is creating an artificially high market. This in turn is creating a situation where unsupported women will be paying (for the average two children) £336 pw in nursery costs - which means a salary of around £25k - which out in Gloucester is above average - before they see any financial benefits to working. This is clearly directly linked to the recent reports that women are the worst paid "sector" of society, less well paid women can afford to work, effectively at the expense of higher paid women.
If politicians really dealt with what matters rather than posturing on topics the disgrace of female remuneration would be top of the political agenda.

Benjamin, Glos,

The Times should sent the author of this article back to school - their English may be good but their Maths is way off. A` simple calcuation shows that in 2002 there were 378,000 attended nursery. This has risen to 562,00 - an increase of 67%! I'm surprised such sloppy work makes for the main headline.

Michael, Maidenhead, UK

It is very flexible in here, can start almost any time in the morning so you can send child to school or wait for carer to come in for your elder mother. Holiday; sick pay; etc will be prorota according to how many hours a week you work. Government has started this to encourage nurses to come back to hospital and many companies have offering the same system now.
I understand it is employers market other than employees for a long time now in Japan.
Kiyoko , England

kiyoko pullen (mrs), Hemel Hempstead, uk

excellent news, as with lower demand the cost of nursery care can now fall

Jane Keating, Birmingham, UK

This article seems to suggest that more mothers are staying at home and yet the maths proves that 346,954 extra nursery places are veing used now than in 2002. Surely this means that demand has been over-anticipated rather than that less parents are choosing to use nurseries.

Katherine, London,

I do think this is more to do with the fact that nurseries are so expensive. When you sit down and work out how much you will take home after paying nursery fees and tax, it will probably be very little.

This was certainly the case with me. I am a Chartered Accountant so on a pretty good wage, but when i had my twins almost three years ago, I worked out that going back to work while they were little would not benefit me at all as nursery fees were about £40 each per day. So i chose to take a career break and look after them myself. I know other mums who have gone back to work and have had to use savings for childcare costs just so that they could keep their jobs.

When faced with the choice of working for very little or staying at home with my children it was a very easy decision to make and i have loved every minute of it. I think it has benefited me as much as my children.

MBW, Warwckshire,

Stay at home with your kids if that's what makes you happy. But for God's sake, don't lose your 'work valuable' skills! If you can work, even 2 days a week - do it. Don't believe for a second that your husband may never leave you or die...What happens then? If you have been out of the workforce for more than 3 years you will struggle ot re-enter it.

N, London,

What precisely, please, does "part-time work" mean in the context of this article? In Japan, where I now live, large numbers of women are forced into what is called part-time work, which means payment by the hour, often for a 40-hour working week or longer, no paid holidays, no health insurance cover, and no protection of any kind against being laid off at a moment's notice. I am out of date with the situation in the UK and would welcome enlightenment..

akai ringo, Tokyo, Japan

What, a rejection of New Labour baby farms? perhaps literacy, numeracy and self esteem in children will rise, Gordon will have to stop it though, can't have all that lost tax from mothers and nursery workers not working full time.

Elenor, High Wycombe, UK

All that is required now is equal rights for men and women. Parents should have the choice of which parent stays at home to look after baby - in too many families the baby is forced to go to nursery because the mother earns more money than the father so has to go back to work, and of course the father is not allowed a year off in lieu of the mother.

Greg , Caterham,

In all these endless debate about women choosing to work or not and good luck to them, let's not forget that some women don't have a choice. My mother didn't and this was at a time when women weren;t really expected to work outside the home. And there wasn't much in the way of jobs either. This Goverenment seems obsessed with getting mothers to work with the state providing round the clock childcare. Why should anyone be made to feel gulity about staying at home?

carole, london, uk

Can someone enlighten me, please, on what "part-time work" means in the context of this article? In Japan, where I now live, a very large number of women are forced into what is called part-time working, which means that they are paid by the hour for work donw, have no paid holidays, no health insurance cover, can be laid off at any time at a moment's notice, and are generally regarded as inferior compared to "full-time company employees". Unfortunately, I am no longer up to date with the situation in the UK.

akai ringo, Tokyo, Japan

Agood thing is happening in the U.K. I suggest that this piece of news is allowed to be published in India where the modern mother is crazy of full time employment knowing very well that it is not good for her child to be left at home or at a nursery where the child is likely to feel left out.

C.N.Sanjeevi, Chennai 600086, India

Doesn't it all come down to one simple fact. People don't go to work for pleasure, but because they have to.

Feminists of a certain stripe have been seeking to persuade women that they need to have a job as part of their "identity" or of being "independent", but the brainwashing is wearing off. The ladies were too smart to fall for it indefinitely. If they can manage without going to work, they will sensibly do so.

Michael W Stone BA FBIS, Peterborough, UK