COULD we really go back to the way things were? Three things have happened in the past week or so.
1. Teenage readers of Cosmo Girl have said overwhelmingly that they believe it is a man's duty to provide for his family. They would rather rely on their partner than be independent career women.
2. A survey by Mother and Baby magazine showed that only one in a hundred women wanted to go back to full time work after having a baby.
3. Trade and Industry Secretary Patricia Hewitt - who has always seemed to want mothers out of the maternity ward and straight back at work - said that the Government values stay-at-home mothers.
So are we going back to a 1950s-type future? Should we rush out and stock up on pinnies?
Probably not. The old-style family of father as breadwinner and mother at home looking after children is now in such a minority that they probably qualify for a Lottery grant.
But many mothers work out of necessity, not choice. If the Government were serious about their appreciation of stay-at-home mothers, then they would give them some incentive - a proper tax allowance would be a start.
That would give many more women a real choice about staying at home with their children and my guess is that those surveys are right and a lot more would do so - but only for a few more years, probably until the youngest had started school. Then they would want to be out in the world again.
Girls - despite their daydreams of marriage and motherhood - are out-performing boys at school. Latest research shows that they are out-performing them at university too.
So although being at home with your children can be wonderful and rewarding, there is a limit. Bright, educated young women are not going to hang around an empty house, knowing that men who are not as clever as they are, are out running the world. They will want to be out there too - even if they still get back in time to make the children's tea.
And men too. We've educated our boys to think of girls as their equals. They want as partners someone who will pull her weight, earn her share. They don't want some helpless little women sitting at home needing to be provided for, not once those early child-rearing days are over.
The daydream is cosy but the world has moved on. We need to find a better balance - but you can't put the genie back in the bottle.
Or the working mother back in a full time pinny.
HOORAY for Jan Krall. She's the mother who stood up to Education Secretary Charles Clarke this week on the subject of student loans.
Her main objection was not just the money, but the fact that it is encouraging young people to get into debt for vast sums of money, which is incredibly dangerous.
If you're going to end your university career at 21, almost £15,000 in debt - encouraged by the Government - then why should you worry about £1,000 on a credit card bill or a massive overdraft?
The student loan might well get paid off in a decade or so - but that easy, careless attitude to debt will affect lives for the next 50 years.
Published: 22/10/2003
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article