I saw a truly shocking sight at Asda in Hollingbury, Brighton, this week which keeps playing on my mind.

A little girl, no more than three, judging from her size and baby talk, was staggering around in 3in heels.

Not as small girls often do, clomping around in mummy's shoes - but in her own ankle boots. She could not walk. She did a very strange totter. She would not have been able to run, let alone skip, jump or play.

Something to bear in mind is that a 3in heel on a 2ft tall child is possibly equivalent to a 7in heel on an average woman. We're talking high.

What on earth would possess a parent to allow this, presumably in the name of fashion? Are people really more interested in fashion than the health of their kids? Is it more of this sexualisation of tinies?

Not content with all the tiny copies of adult clothes - and what 20, 30 or 40-year-old woman really wants to be wearing the same as a toddler? - we now have tiny copies of our high-heeled shoes.

I have to own up, I am a killjoy.

My son had to wear Clark's sandals until he objected, about age five, and my ten-year-old daughter still isn't allowed high heels, unlike many of her friends.

Heels are designed to make a woman more sexy, they define the leg and arch the back - thrusting boobs and bum out. And then there's the wiggle a la Monroe. All fine for adult women, I have a couple of pairs myself. I won't start about the risks of damage caused by the body being thrown out of its natural line - you pay your money, you make your choice.

But little girls? Do you want your little ones to be taller, is that it? The potential damage to growing bones in the feet must be obvious. And the back, posture, the stress on muscles, the walk - imagine them walking down a steep hill. How can they play in the park on the way home in high heels? I'm sorry, it's child abuse in my mind.

And why, oh why, are shoe manufacturers making these items of torture?

-Kim Taylor, Brighton