4

The Ideal of the Family and the

Ideal Family

Chapter 1 offered a minimal definition of ‘the family’ as

a multigenerational group, normally stably co-habiting, whose
adults take primary custodial responsibility for the dependent
children. On such a definition there will be numerous and
varied familial forms – ones in which there is one adult,
where there is a pair of adults, or perhaps several; ones
whose adults are in a same-sex or heterosexual relationship,
who are married or merely co-habiting, who may even be
sharing their parental tasks across two residences; and ones
whose children are and are not biologically related to their
adult custodians. The definition provided allows us to dis-
tinguish between questions of whether or not some social
arrangement counts as a family (as opposed to a household,
for instance) and questions as to whether a familial form
is ideal, less than ideal, or undesirable. There are, in short,
both descriptive and normative questions to be asked about
the family which need to be kept separate and not confused.
The distinction is important. A fair number of the possi-
ble familial forms encompassed by the suggested definition
will be viewed by some as not ideal. Defenders of the tradi-
tional family, most obviously, will view with disfavour any-
thing other than a family whose married adults rear their
biological offspring. Such criticism can nevertheless best be
couched in terms of what kind of family is preferred, rather
than by simply legislating through definitional fiat that the
disliked form is not even a family. Chapter 1 cautioned

63

D. Archard, The Family: A Liberal Defence

© David Archard 2010
64 David Archard

precisely against the use of persuasive definitions to win

arguments in favour of some kinds of family by excluding
other kinds from the relevant conceptual category.
Nevertheless the definition offered here does characterise
the family in functional terms of what it does rather than
what it is. Interestingly, at least one introduction to the soci-
ology of the family which notes the difficulties considered
in Chapter 1 of supplying a unitary definition of the family
opts for a unifying functional account:

Broadly speaking, the family is a group of people related

by blood or by law, living together or associating with
one another to a common purpose, that purpose being the
provision of food, shelter, and the rearing of children.
(Wilson, 1991, p. 2; emphasis added)

A functional definition of ‘the family’ licenses an appraisal

of its different forms according to how well any particular
family or type of family fulfils its defining role, namely that
of the custodial care of dependent children. The better a
kind of family looks after its children, the better it is as a
kind of family or as an instance of a family. The functional
definition also allows for an appraisal of the family as such,
and thus provides the basis of an answer to the question of
whether there is something that could do a better job than
the family of doing what it is that the family is essentially
designed to do. We can thus separate, and address in turn,
two issues: whether the family is ideal, and whether there is
an ideal family.

Is the family ideal?

Maybe there are better ways of raising children than

by doing so within families. Amy Gutman’s distinction
between a ‘family state’ and a ‘state of families’ (Gutman,
1987, Chapter 1) cited in the Introduction helps. Whereas
a family state takes exclusive responsibility for the rearing
of the children within its jurisdiction, a state of families