A mother has been given an official police caution for leaving her 14-year-old son in charge of his three-year-old brother. So at what age can children be left at home alone without parental supervision?

It's a story that would sound alarm bells for many mothers and fathers.

Any parent who sometimes nips out to the shops, leaving their children to look after each other, will take note.

Or with the prospect of a rare night out, the couple that offers £20 to a sensible teenage neighbour in return for keeping an eye on their little ones, may now think again.

A mother-of-three from the Thames Valley area has been cautioned by police after leaving her 14-year-old son at home with his little brother.

Sources quoted in the Sunday Times are reported as saying the mother, in her 40s, was away for 30 minutes, the time passed without "incident" and the toddler was never in any danger.

It's very rare to hear about cases like this, but is 14 too young to be babysitting and might more parents find themselves facing a caution?

I don't think this is easily resolved by sticking an age limit on it.

I know more than a few 15 to 18 year olds with less common sense than my 10 year old.

On the other hand there are plenty of teenagers out there with enough maturity to babysit a toddler.

I don't think this is easily resolved by sticking an age limit on it.

I know more than a few 15 to 18 year olds with less common sense than my 10 year old.

On the other hand there are plenty of teenagers out there with enough maturity to babysit a toddler.

I think the issue is what happens if something goes wrong. If toddler needs to attend A&E, it looksnvery suspicious if parent/guardian not present.

We used to be left alone (aged 8, 6, 5). If there were any problems, grandparents were on the end of a phone. Most we did was flood the kitchen.

I think the point is you can't judge whether someone is competent enough when "everything goes fine", everything going fine is not proof that the child was OK to be left in charge, a dog could be "in charge" overnight and if the baby sleeps through, then is the dog a good babysitter?

The problem with this is that unless someone can prove they have coped with an emergency then no one is "competent". Afterall who's to say that an 18 yr old would not panic if something was to happen

So presumably this means if a teenager has a baby then they're not fit to look after their own child.

Isn't that the case? The difference between being an adult and a child is exactly that a child shouldn't be given responsibility, you may as well call 14 year olds adults if you feel they're old enough.

As has been said, I don't think putting an age on it is appropriate TBH. If you can legally get married in this country at 16, have sex at 16 and therefore start a family at 16, I don't see why, say, a 16 year old can't look after a sibling. Is there a world of difference between a 16, 15 or 14-year-old?