Whenever the issue of the traditional labour division in society is discussed, there is always somebody asking a question about nurses and women in similar professions and how we would deal without them.
While some of these people are probably just trolling, the question itself is valid and deserves an answer instead of a dismissal.
I should say let's look at the historical precedent first. In the Middle Ages, and later in Catholic countries up to and including the WWII period, the care of sick and elderly, when it could not be done by the family, was the domain of nuns and monks. Early childhood education, idem ditto. There is a 1960s (French, I think) movie about British pilots whose plane has been shot down by the Germans who for a time being hide in a Catholic hospital where all the nurses AND the doctors are nuns.
While there were no convents or monasteries in Lutheran countries, from what I've read, there were groups of women called holy deaconesses who basically fulfilled the same function, but for a limited time and could marry afterwards, if they so desired.
The traditional Catholic doctrine distinguishes between the women who have a religious vocation and whose duty it is to serve the society, and all the rest whose place is in the home whether they get married or not. I believe this doctrine has a Biblical basis since the Scriptures teach us that there are some people who have made themselves eunuchs for the Kingdom. Now one could argue whether a eunuch could mean a female in this context, but we all know that throughout the ages they have been women who showed very little interest in marriage, children and family life in general.
So if the Western society ever becomes traditional again, we'll probably go back to an arrangement of the similar kind, with family taking over some of the care tasks (that's already happening right now with homeschoolers or those who let their aged parents move with them).
In the meanwhile, there are many single women out there, who necessarily (unless they come from a very wealthy family) will look for a job. Now if these women decided to quit all other industries which could do just fine without female labour (did you know that a secretary used to be a male job?) and all became nurses/gynos/doctor's aides/special police forces who deal with women and children/school teachers etc, I do believe they would fight to get a job, because currently there are more working women than the positions in these branches. And, btw, nurses dealing with men could be male, too, you know.
It is my opinion that a society needs some female labour and that's why I disagree with all this piling on single women which happens on the dissident right. Not everybody is called to marriage and family life, plus there have always been women who used to marry late and spent their early years working, especially in Northern Europe.
Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments!