Andrew Brown: Paternity leave should not go too far

Now fathers of babies born from 3 April may be entitled to up to six months additional paternity leave if the mother has returned to work. Equivalent provisions exist for adopters who are told they have been matched with a child.

Do the new rules herald a change in attitudes? They were announced in January but do not appear so far to have caught the attention of those whom they are designed to benefit.

Employment lawyers have experienced very few inquiries on the subject compared to the flood of inquiries in connection with the abolition of the default retirement age, which also applies from this week.

It appears unlikely that this change, of itself, will have significant impact. Given the gender pay gap, the income sacrifice that may be involved in many cases could prove to be a barrier to its uptake.

Mr Clegg has said the UK government wants to go further and he envisaged a "properly flexible system of shared parental leave" for 2015, whereby employees can take "chunks" of leave as and when it suits them. Business leaders have expressed concern at the impact that this would have on employers seeking to plan their workforce requirements.

Indications are that the right to request to work flexibly might be opened to grandparents or "close" family friends, so that they too can ask to alter their working pattern to look after children for whom they do not have parental responsibility.

However, extending the scheme in this way may increase the scope for abuse. It would be difficult for employers to police whether the employee is genuinely seeking the change in order to look after children.

The changes applying from this week are manageable. More onerous requirements could result in resentment of those who take advantage of the provisions. To "go further" may be to go too far.

• Andrew Brown is a senior solicitor in Anderson Strathern's employment unit