You don't have to be a single mother like me to find the following story infuriating. In fact, you don't even need to be a parent; just a human being with the most basic grasp of what's right and wrong.

Two English mothers, who gave birth within a few months of one another, had a private arrangement to take care of each other's daughter two days a week as part of their job share. Everyone involved was happy.

The mothers could work the necessary and sometimes unsociable hours of their shared job without feeling under pressure, knowing that their children were with a friend who would understand and could be trusted implicitly.

The children benefitted from a regular routine in relaxed surroundings, being given special personal care in a familiar and loving environment each day. Even their employers were pleased as they were both relaxed and flexible within their special arrangement.

You'd think that these resourceful women should have been applauded and held up as examples to us all for finding such a simple solution to a real modern-day dilemma in the true spirit of companionship and community - and you'd be right.

Of course, it did work perfectly for a while - until the bureaucrats at Ofsted, the education watchdog, got wind of it. Following a 'tip off' left on one of their charming 'anonymous whistle-blower' phonelines, an inspector duly visited them to investigate.

His conclusion? That they were 'running an illegal child-minding business' and, unless the arrangement ended immediately, they would be prosecuted.

Apparently, the stringent rules now in place to 'protect the child' state that friends cannot gain 'reward' for looking after a child for more than two hours. Although no money had exchanged hands between the two mothers, they were told they were breaking this law because the free childcare each offered to the other was deemed as a 'reward'.

If their agreement was to continue, the women were told they would have to register with Ofsted and abide by the countless rules and regulations - including criminal background checks - which apply to professional childminders and kindergartens.

This brought their ideal arrangement to an abrupt and unpleasant end. For them - as for many part-time working mothers - registering as a professional minder was simply not a viable option. As a result one of the women has now been forced to send her baby to a local nursery which, at £260, is a third of her monthly salary.

To make matters worse, she has since received a letter from Ofsted warning her to expect 'random surveillance' at any time to make sure she is following the ruling by the book.

Any mother in their right mind would be justified to feel utterly let down, if not actually violated, by such a despicable over-reaction to a purely personal and private arrangement.

The fact that this comes from an organisation originally created to protect children but seems so determined to assume guilt and to prove wrong-doing that they are prepared to set up surveillance of homes almost defies belief.

George Orwell's image of an oppressive dystopia springs to mind.

If it was me, I'd contact Watchdog, my MP and anyone else who would listen before you could say "human rights".

But the most incredible fact in this whole sorry state of affairs is that both women are actually detectives working for the CID ... and as such will have already undergone the most carefully scrutinised security screening imaginable.

Yes, this did happen in England and yes, I think we are different over here.

However, according to the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety of Northern Ireland, the same law exists here, but has just not yet been challenged.

Let's hope that it is after this debacle and that the powers that be have the common sense to draw a thick black line through that most antisocial and divisive clause and do it quickly. Otherwise who knows what might follow? Criminal checks on volunteers who drive children to football matches?

Oh, hang on a minute - that's happening already ...