You cannot help noticing her. She is smart, svelte and sophisticated. Dressed in a black ensemble, beautifully accessorised with expensive, understated jewellery, every hair of her carefully coiffeured head in place, she makes a devastating impression. Unbelievably, she is the mother of three children aged six, four and two. She apologises for being late but her husband and she had to attend a cocktail party before coming to dinner. She is charming and vivacious as she speaks of her fitness class, her most recent trip abroad, and her work. As a high profile executive, she travels frequently. Her husband, a banker, is equally busy. Clearly, the two of them have a hectic life, at work all day and at parties all evening. Somebody mentions the exciting life they lead. Her husband agrees. “There isn’t anything we want to do that we don’t,” he says.

It is a remark that is vaguely disturbing. Surely, I think to myself, we aren’t supposed to do anything we want to do if we have three young children? “So who looks after the children while you are out?” I ask the mother. “Oh, we have very reliable servants,” she explains.

Am I the one who is out of sync, I wonder, when I meet another young woman a few days later. She too has children, a seven-year old girl and a five-year-old boy, and both she and her husband have important jobs. I ask her whether she is home most evenings. “I’m afraid not,” she said, “Our social life is pretty frenetic but our work makes it necessary.”

As I look around, I see many other examples of families where both parents have high-powered jobs. A new style of parenting seems to have become the order of the day with well-placed professionals and this seems to involve absence. Able to afford good domestic help, these high-flyers seem almost unconcerned about allowing servants to take their place. Yet, is this really a good idea? And aren’t the real losers the parents?

Far be it from me to suggest that these children will have problems when they grow up. There is, after all, no guarantee that the children of stay-at-home mothers end up better adjusted and happier than those of workaholic (or playaholic) parents. Nor am I blaming mothers for working full time. Professionally qualified, it would be a tragic waste if they did not fulfil their potential. But with both parents working flat out, is it really necessary to have a social life that takes up every evening, however desirable and expedient it may be?

Ironically, the compulsion to work gruelling hours, which includes a hectic social life, stems from the desire of parents to provide nothing but the best for their children. But if they are not going to enjoy seeing their children grow up, wouldn’t it be simpler not to have any?