There are obviously many misunderstandings on both sides of the debate about the now rejected nodal school system, as Lynne Nicholls pointed out (Letters. March 7).

One of these misunderstandings is that many of the people who voted against the nodal system were doing so not because we want to keep hold of "excess of choice" in secondary schools, but because we would have lost any chance of sending our children to schools local to us, leaving us with the lack of choice instead.

In this area, the catchment for Varndean would have shrunk so much from increased pressure for places that many children living close to the schools, including many, like us, who live next door to Dorothy Stringer and thus the other side of the schools complex from Varndean, would not have got into either school.

We would have had to drive our children, through increased school traffic heading towards Dorothy Stringer from around the city, to schools miles away.

The threat of this has undoubtedly given us an insight into the situation many children face from other areas of the city.

The nodal system, though, would have added traffic chaos in an area where many children are currently lucky enough to walk to school.

Less traffic must be good for all the city, mustn't it?

I hope this demonstrates we were not merely annoyed at dropping to just one choice of school to send our children to. In fact, many of us would have had a choice of neither.

The current admissions problems would not only have been shifted to the children who live close to the schools but would also have meant their parents adding to the numbers driving around the city every day.

We need to work together to find a fairer way forward than either the nodal system or the current system - but it must be for all the city's children, ours included, please.

-Vicky Cooper, Brighton