Back in the real world there are some who have to live with the heartache knowing there is nothing more to be done the children are lost the home is lost the childhood is lost, you will never reclaim those lost years and the memories will not be made. The pain will be with you evermore and any future contact will be a grim reminder of what was lost at a time you could have saved it, now is that time but you cannot stop the passage of time and the happy memories I have of the time with my father will not be continued on in my children. I have done nothing wrong not a monster

Dave Farmer, Broxbourne, England

Melissa Brown is right. There is a staggering blank spot in this debate, which affects 9 out of every 10 comments here. This is presented incorrectly as a binary choice between the mother raising the children or working. What about the Dads!? Reduced hours for both parents is the only humane way.

Anna, Cambridge, UK

I did both.
When I worked and the nanny looked after my son, "friends" continually told me : "how can you do it, leave him al day ?"
Then I stopped working. " Are you not concerned withdrawing from the work-force ?" were the comments then.
To each his own !

maria, daventry, uk

simon of reading - I'm sure paying for mortgagesWAS less of an issue in that "golden age" -the mid 20th century. Post WW2 people didn't have the houses to get mortgages on, they were in ruins. As for second income, women often had to resign on marriage.

diana, derby,

THe most expensive ' childcare' is that provided by a mum at home who gives up her entire salary, pension and future job opportunities in order to take care of the little ones. Her costs are equal to the pay packet forfeited. So why is it mums at work with a 2nd income who qualify for most support?

M Lewis, Salisbury, UK

Let's get one thing straight: mothers go to work through P O V E R T Y. I am the 'boss' of 9 people, but we could not afford the mortgage on our 2 bed property unless my wife worked. I only wonder what it is like for those 'below' me.

I dream of living in the mid 20thC - the time of wealth.

simon, reading, uk

Our baby is five months and we've made the decision I won't be returning to work. We'd be better off financially if I did, but this is a job you can't put a price on. So it's no sacrifice to give up paid work. Our children will love me more than any boss ever will. Families always have a choice.

Clare, London,

Oddly the matter of who looks after children is off the political agenda. If the government wants paid childminders to bring up the next generation of children, the money could be given to mothers, so that the mother could decide for herself. What will happen in 30 yrs if there is a mistake here?

Elizabeth Cockerell, St Neots, Cambs

To Amanda Holden:
Mortgage on two-bed terrace house no garden = £2000 per month
Council tax = £220 per month
Husband's net salary after tax = £2,500
Remainder for food, bills and transport = £280

Can you live off this? You smug. Or should I just live off benefits? Plenty do. What's better?

D, London, UK

It's laughable that the author suggest that nannies have been around for one generation. It is perhaps true that fewer people had nannies after the Second World War, but I had two nannies and I am nearly 30. This is not the first Times article to seemingly pander to the new middle-class.

James, London,

My wife and I switched to part time work in order to look after our own children. If people looked at what their true income was, after paying for childcare would they consider doing their job for that figure? If my wife was earning £100K a year I would leave work in a heartbeat. Rob Hirst has it.

Paul, Liverpool,

If you want to live in a comfortable (not luxurious) house, give your children a decent education and save for retirement then you need two incomes. We don't go out. When I think about putting my very young son into childcare I feel terrible but we have no choice, simple as that.

Charlie, wageslavesville,

Finances aside, it's actually quite hard to be a stay at home Mum if you've worked hard in your career and are used to working full time. Give working mothers a break - childcare is a shared responsibility

Lisa, Warrington,

D of London, you've hit the nail on the head. You don't want to give up your lifestyle to look after your children. It's really all about you. When we had kids, we went without to bring them up. Try asking your kids whether they'd rather you were with them during the week or a nanny.

Nick, Eastbourne, UK

If you have children, look after them!
Is that too difficult a concept?
How can young humans ever learn to love and be loved (not lip-service) if nobody really cares enough to rear them?
If you can't afford two cars for a few years, or holidays, well it was your choice. Be responsible!

Charlotte Peters Rock, Knutsford, England

What would G. Orwell say of the plethora of articles such as this by "middle-class" and "lucky" Camilla-types? G.O. described Boys' Weeklies as creating a "standard of life .. set up as the ideal". For the reader, "the same fantasy all the time, pretending to be richer than you are". Aagghh!

Kirsten, Milan, Italy

If you can't stay home and take care of them, don't have them. We have reliable birth control methods these days, and the planet is far too populated as it is.

Deborah, Cambridge, USA

I stay at home full time with my child, as i feel its the best thing i can do for her, But i am constantly being made to feel guilty or inadequate because i dont work, usually comments ate made from people who dont have any children!!

Louise, Co. Durham,

I didn't like being a housewife in the 60s but managed 6 yrs till they were at school. Then coped with 2 jobs (helped by friends) - no time for myself, the gym etc or holidays without the kids. - Busy but fun. Look at the rewards: a loving, very close large family who always knew me but no Nannies

Heidi Hankinson, Fowlmere Royston, UK

"..in one generation"?? Haven't you read any history books about the huge numbers of Victorian working women (not middle class housewives) obliged to leave their babies and children with childminders who fed the little darlings gin to keep them quiet?

Emily, London,

'This weekend I overheard a woman of about my age in the gym'. What were you doing in the gym at the weekend? Surely quality time with your children is more important than pampering your body and your ego ?

Phil, Lincoln, UK

Under government advice, you're no longer allowed to stay home and look after your kids. All people of working age should be in a job, according to government rules. Maybe if we all just worked looking after someone else's kids, it'll keep the tax man happy.

Arthur, Newcastle,

The Ofsted report mentioned is misleading for 2 reasons:
1) Ofsted have become obsessed with paperwork rather than childcare. Many CMs are finding it difficult to keep up with all of these changes and are therefore downgraded.
2) 8,000 CMs have left in the last 2 years thereby skewing the figures.

Arthur Adams, Warrington,

Rob Hirst - right on! Its greed, shamelessly marketed as political correctness for women. The next step is the provision of a local child-care and family standards officer - that's commisar in soviet parlance or gauleiter if you speak German. Read the fine print in the rhetoric of our leaders.

KR, Stockport,

To D of London

What kind of life would they have if they lived on £40,000 a year....? A life where people think about things beyond "getting and spending" ?

Amanda Holden , London , UK

I was a working mum through mid-1960s/70s and 80s. It's a fallacy that 'mums didn't go out to work', enabled by a network of formal or informal child-care. What shocks me is that mums would think of going on holiday without their children. 'Don't go, mummy..' We always went as a family, always.

Margaret Stoll, Rochford, Essex, England,

The simple answer is tax. A stay at home mum generates no tax income for the treasury, but a mother going out to work and employing someone else to look after their child generates two taxable income streams. This is why the government encourages everyone out at work - to hell with the consequences.

Rob Hirst, Totnes, UK

Harvey, Women aren't just empty vessels born to rear children with no lives of their own. Also, I have absolutely no intention of giving up my £100,00+ a year salary to live on my husband's £40,000 a year salary. What life would my children have? They get me every evening and all weekend.

D, London, England

I hope all these parents who are farming their children out to other people will be happy when they are old and their children put them in a home and pay other people to look after them! Paying other people to look after your loved ones is no substitute for loving them yourself.

Suzy T., Birmingham,

Here's a radical idea, Uche ..how about fathers also taking care of their own children! Crazy!

Seriously, though, why is it such a assumption that it should be mothers always taking care of the childcare? Past actually breastfeeding, it's all equal. Jump into the twenty-first century.

Melissa Browne, London,

I can't stand working mothers, I couldn't give a damn whether they find nannies or not. Their ONLY job is to supervise their children 24 /7 for 20 years and FIND the patience to do so. I am tired of the particularly nasty spoilt brats found everywhere these days.

Harvey, Geneva, Switzerland

I was an IT Manager and while my daughter was in nursery we didn't have a problem. However now at school she has 18 weeks holiday and we just have no way of covering it.So I've given up full time work and I'll be contracting purely so I can cover school holidays. I don't know how other mothers cope

Liz, Ely, UK

That Emily Davison has a lot to answer for.

Simon, London,

Uche George - Here's a radical idea ... how about fathers taking care of their own children!

ifs, London, UK

Is it 'farming out' when you send your children to school, or take them to the doctor or hospital if they're ill? It doesn't make you a bad parent to allow qualified professionals to participate in your children's care and upbringing. As long as they're safe and happy, there is no problem.

Sarah, London, UK

My husband and I decided to move to a cheaper place to live and give up all the stuff, in order for me to stay at home and create a family life. It has taken a lot of sacrifice but we love our children, they are the results of the outpouring of our love for each other. They are our responsibility.

jackie, timmins, canada

Here's a radical idea, ..how about mothers taking care of their own children!

Uche George, London, England

Nothing new about childcare: women have always worked and either brought their children to work (farms, textiles) or had wet nurses/nannies/boarding school to care for them (upper classes). The stay-at-home mother is an urban, modern (1930s+) phenomenon and has always been a middle-class luxury.

MB, Edinburgh ,

If you have a couple of children, it is a full time job for someone else to look after them during work hours. Most people can't afford to pay a well qualified and educated person a decent salary out of their own taxed earnings. There is no getting around this simple fact.

PJ, Reading, UK

This well considered article exposes the fallacy of our child care nation. Our army of 'child care providers' have to be low paid otherwise regular provincial workers would not be able to afford them. If they are not well paid it follows that they will not be well qualified and mostly not very good

DW, Wuhan, China

"in only one generation, ... a job for other people"

Mary Poppins, boarding schools - the middle classes have always done this, but as more women now go out to work it is more common, but not new.

Adam, Oxford, UK

Sadly, very true. I am a nanny and so are lots of my friends. We do our best for the children, but it is heartbreaking to see the destabilising effects that regular changes in carers have on young children. How will they learn to bond with and trust in people if they keep going away?

Anna, London,

I found your article sad but unfortunately true, I have been a registered childminder for 14 years and only take on children if I am certain that I am able to commit to them until they or thier parents no longer need me, usually around the age of 12 when they begin at senior school.

jan taylor, london, England