Mothers on the payroll?

She just got her logic askew. Don't worry about it too much, phoenix!

I can understand mothers having to return to work to pay the bills, mortgage etc, but fail to see how this fits with the second sentence of this womans letter, namely:

Why then are mothers who long to stay at home forced to work in order to pay for nursery fees, which are subsidised by the Government?

I really don't understand.

It does seem to raise a lot of questions, but provide very few answers.

I am trying to envisage how this would work. Would a woman who is struggling with a job and family be required to contribute through her taxes to another woman who chooses to stay at home. Why should she?
I have a horrible feeling that the middle class woman who stays at home will be lauded as a good mother, and the less privileged mother will be dubbed a benefits scrounger.

I think the point is that motherhood is not the only important job, but it is an important job.

I can see how mad it looks to be subsidising nursery fees so that mothers can go to work to earn enough to pay the mortgage, when, given the choice, they would prefer to stay at home and bring up their children. The only thing stopping them is lack of dosh. I am sure that some families would much prefer the nursery subsidy to be paid to them directly so that they can bring up their own children and not have to farm them out.

One of my DDs is in a job that she hates but she has no choice but to do it to pay the bills - she would far rather be at home giving her children the sort of upbringing that she wants for them rather than the one the care facilities give them.

However paying mothers for being mothers is a can of worms open to exploitation - I do not know what the answer is, but I do think that mothers who are not career-minded but would prefer to mother their children need to be given some sort of chance.

Phoenix, I am not the newspaper police! I can't get any English papers here so I just read every one that is free online, which gives me a pretty wide spectrum of views!

Thank goodness it isn't only me! I read it a couple of times, none the wiser, then ran it past Mr P (who again is home a day early, yippee!) and he didn't get it either. I'm expecting a few responses in the letters column of tomorrows paper!

Greatnan , I only buy the DT for the crossword, honest!

I agree, phoenix, it doesn't make sense. Mothers who 'long to stay at home' may be forced to work for economic reasons, but not solely to pay for child care. I think she probably knows what she means, but has expressed it badly.

And isn't being the queen a pretty important job? The Telegraph.....hm, might have guessed.

She had my hackles up with her first sentence . So motherhood is the only job that matters? I wonder if she would think that if she needed a woman surgeon? Motherhood is not a job, surely, although it is very hard work.

I used to know a lot of mothers who enjoyed their non-working life very much, with coffee mornings, mums and toddlers groups, etc. Why the hell should that be funded by taxpayers?