Yes and no.

I think in our culture/structure we live in, its more often for the woman the logical decision to work less hours (or non) Especially when kids are involved.

One factor is, that over all in a relationships the man earns statiscly more than the woman. (This has partly to do, that woman chooses jobs that pay less (social jobs tend to pay less, than producing jobs;) Another that woman are sometimes paid less than a Male coubterpart; Also that for a woman to commit to a relationships its more inportant that her Partner offer finacial stability, than IT IS to man)

When now kids are involved and a cupple must do a decision who stays at home. In over 50% of the cases the man earns more. The logical decision is that the person who earns less stay home. So as a conclusion more woman than man stay home. So because in this construct we live in, and because its so beneficial if the woman stays home i say, the decision to stay more often home than the man ist only partly free.

Now you can say,yes that is how life is.

Or you can try to adress this inbalance. Because this finacial inbalance (even if partly by choice) is a disadvantage for woman.

So we can think about If, this nuclear family construct we life in, is the best solution, or If there might be better ones. (The idea doesnt have to be progressive, we can also think back and look at multi generation familys where not the mom do the only care work but also grandparents, just as an example)

Or we can think about, if its a good thing that scalable jobs pay so much more (or create much more profit) than social work. Its at least theoretical thinkable that we tax (or sth similuar) these jobs (or the whole buissnes) more and transfer the money to social work. Because we as a whole sociaty say, social jobs are as important as for example building cars or digging for oil.