What I was trying to do, Quint, was not to argue for leaving children at home as to keep them safe.
I just wanted to point out the logical flaw in your argument:
if the danger arises from an accident happening to Mother outside the house, then the children's safety is not enhanced by them being with Mother.
if, on the other hand, there is no accident to Mother, then this whole part of the argument falls to the ground
unless, indeed, you can prove that accidents are less likely to happen to women accompanied by children (everything else being equal)- which I think you would have difficulties with statistically
The only possible circumstance where your initial argument might apply is indeed the one you quote where worry about children left at home might turn somebody into a dangerous driver. But then that's less likely to happen to somebody who is relaxed about leaving their children in the first place. And most people believe in observing speed limits, not stepping out in front of red lights etc wherever their children may be.
There may well be other dangers in leaving children at home, but this one is a non sequitur.
Logic. They used to teach it in schools when I was a nipper.
This is not being silly. It is an argument commonly used to make mothers feel guilty, so it's worth establishing whether it actually holds water as an argument or not. I can't see that it does.