Ethics and Social Welfare 6 (2):132-142 (2012)

David Archard
Lancaster University
Much is said about the decline of the family, often in connection with the prevalence of certain social problems. In this article I consider two kinds of fear: (i) that the traditional family is disappearing; (ii) that new forms of family emerging are, in some or other respect, not worthy of the title. In themselves, neither fear, I argue, should give rise to pressing ethical concerns as such. On fear (i): if by ?traditional family? we mean one whose adult members are heterosexuals, normally married and bringing up, in a single shared residence, their own offspring to whom they are biologically related, then indeed this is threatened by certain laws, and social and biotechnological relationships that tolerate and make possible new kinds of parental relationships. But as there are clear ethical objections to the disadvantaging of non-traditional families, there is no clear-cut case that the decline of the traditional version is a bad thing. Fear (ii) typically reflects a concern about excessive separation of the social and biological aspects of parenthood?i.e., that the definition and function of the family in social terms has become detached from a strict biological understanding of such factors. I argue that this concern is misplaced, for various reasons. As a result, there is no good reason to worry that the family?in all of its myriad forms?does not have a future
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/17496535.2012.682501
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 68,944
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Is the Family to Be Abolished Then?Véronique Munoz-Dardé - 1999 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 99 (1):37–56.
The Fundamental Argument for Same Sex Marriage.Ralph Wedgwood - 1999 - Journal of Political Philosophy 7 (3):225–242.
Artificial Gametes: New Paths to Parenthood?A. J. Newson - 2005 - Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (3):184-186.

View all 6 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Is the Family Uniquely Valuable?Anca Gheaus - 2012 - Ethics and Social Welfare 6 (2):120-131.
The Fragmenting Family.Brenda Almond - 2008 - Oxford University Press.
The Family and Neoliberalism: Time to Revive a Critique.Bob Brecher - 2012 - Ethics and Social Welfare 6 (2):157-167.
Eros and the Future: Levinas's Philosophy of Family.Laura Duhan Kaplan - 1999 - Philosophy in the Contemporary World 6 (2):9-13.
Building Social and Economic Capital: The Family and Medical Savings Accounts.M. J. Cherry - 2012 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 37 (6):526-544.
Theories of Family in Ancient Chinese Philosophy.Zailin Zhang - 2009 - Frontiers of Philosophy in China 4 (3):343-359.
Must the Family Be Just?Brian Penrose - 2000 - Philosophical Papers 29 (3):189-221.
Family Resemblances and Criteria.Heather J. Gert - 1995 - Synthese 105 (2):177-190.
Family Medicine as a Social Science.Barry Hoffmaster - 1981 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 6 (4):387-410.


Added to PP index

Total views
86 ( #133,600 of 2,498,128 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #283,501 of 2,498,128 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes