Unintended consequences plague politics. Policies introduced with the best intention can end up disadvantaging the very group they were meant to help. This is the case with maternity leave.

The Government’s aim was to put an end to the days when women, especially the lowest paid, were forced to return to work sooner than either they or their babies were ready. They extended maternity leave entitlements again and again. The UK now offers a year’s leave exclusively to mothers. And the clue to why it has produced unintended consequences is in that word “exclusively”.

Almost all other European countries have more generous leave entitlements for parents but few have taken the British route of making that entitlement exclusive to mothers. The norm elsewhere is to have a period of maternity leave, for recovery and breastfeeding, followed by parental leave that both mother and father can use, often with an earmarked time for fathers. This has encouraged more fathers to play an active role in caring for their small children.

The UK model, by contrast, reinforces the notion that children are a mother’s responsibility solely. It actively prohibits men from becoming more involved, sidelining a new generation of dads who want to share care. And it means that unscrupulous employers know that it is women, rather than all potential parents, who are likely to take leave, with the result that they can discriminate against them.

Katherine Rake is a director of the Fawcett Society

Times Recommends

• Police beg us for food. What hope is there?
• Moral darkness that engulfed Baby P
• More to Advent than cheap chocolate