ONCE again I feel a sense of real frustration as I listen to news reports and read your front page report, as I believe that, every time this issue of equality for women is raised, a major, relevant factor is ignored (“Scotland’s women biggest losers in gender pay gap”, The Herald, August 23) .

It is perfectly possible that the “unequal” position of some women is the result of a deliberate, conscious choice with which they are perfectly happy and therefore their being included in the general statistics of a study of inequality skews the result.

The fact is mentioned that many women are in part-time work or in lower paid jobs and enjoy no career progression or increase in remuneration, but there is no acknowledgement that this may be their own choice and they may have no desire to change it, and no effort seems to be made to quantify this situation in any research.

There are hundreds, perhaps even thousands, of women around the country – and I know quite a few myself – who would much prefer to spend more time with their family, especially in their pre-school years, and have greater input into their children’s lives and development but are unable to do so through financial pressures. A mother who wishes to stay at home until her children are school age is doubly financially disadvantaged, by foregoing an extra income for the household and by not being eligible for any payment towards childcare. Unfortunately, many have their choice made by the huge debts that the banks encouraged in the past, by ridiculous levels of mortgages and personal loans they persuaded folk to take on.

In addition, there is the social and media pressure from the drive for equality itself, which seems to promote the view that a woman is only of value to society if she is in paid employment and that is the only way she can strive to become “equal” to men. Otherwise she is just regarded as not pulling her weight and not contributing to the common good. But many of these women have made a choice, and probably sacrifices, because they put a higher value on having greater input in the care and upbringing of their children, to turn them into good, reliable members of society in the future. Perhaps the clamour for equality is actually stifling the voices of such women.

I do find myself wondering if the rise, over recent times, of bad behaviour, juvenile crime, stressed teenagers and even teenage suicides could be related to a much weakened bond with parents, which leaves young people feeling that they cannot take their problems to their parents and that no-one is there who is sufficiently close to them to listen and take them seriously when they cannot cope themselves.

I know it is unfashionable nowadays to admit it, but is it not time that we respected those who want to stay at home for more time with their children and concentrated on making this choice more possible, rather than pushing all women into the same mould to achieve some theoretical ideal of equality?

P Davidson,

Gartcows Road, Falkirk.