The Fragmenting Family

268 Pages·2008·1.36 MB·English

by  Brenda Almond

The Fragmenting Family
This page intentionally left blank
The Fragmenting
Family
Brenda Almond
CLARENDONPRESS · OXFORD
1
GreatClarendonStreet,Oxfordox26dp
OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford.
ItfurtherstheUniversity’sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship,
andeducationbypublishingworldwidein
Oxford NewYork
Auckland CapeTown DaresSalaam HongKong Karachi
KualaLumpur Madrid Melbourne MexicoCity Nairobi
NewDelhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto
Withofficesin
Argentina Austria Brazil Chile CzechRepublic France Greece
Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore
SouthKorea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam
OxfordisaregisteredtrademarkofOxfordUniversityPress
intheUKandincertainothercountries
PublishedintheUnitedStates
byOxfordUniversityPressInc.,NewYork
BrendaAlmond2006
Themoralrightsoftheauthorhavebeenasserted
DatabaserightOxfordUniversityPress(maker)
Firstpublished2006
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,
storedinaretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans,
withoutthepriorpermissioninwritingofOxfordUniversityPress,
orasexpresslypermittedbylaw,orundertermsagreedwiththeappropriate
reprographicsrightsorganization.Enquiriesconcerningreproduction
outsidethescopeoftheaboveshouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment,
OxfordUniversityPress,attheaddressabove
Youmustnotcirculatethisbookinanyotherbindingorcover
andyoumustimposethesameconditiononanyacquirer
BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData
Dataavailable
LibraryofCongressCataloginginPublicationData
Dataavailable
TypesetbyLaserwordsPrivateLimited,Chennai,India
PrintedinGreatBritain
onacid-freepaperby
BiddlesLtd,King’sLynn,Norfolk
ISBN0–19–926795–2 978–0–19–926795–8
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
For Ella, Toby, Jamie, and Joe
This page intentionally left blank
Contents
Introduction 1
Part I. Understanding family: Philosophy’s
contribution
1. Family 9
2. Permanentrelations?Love,marriage,andphilosophical
lives 22
3. Fromphilosophytolaw 44
4. Feministaims,familyconsequences 58
Part II. Shaping families: Science’s contribution
5. Havingandnothavingchildren 85
6. Newreproductivetechnologies:Whosehumanrights? 98
Part III. New frontiers: Family, law, and politics
7. Familychoices:Whatdochildrenreallywant? 123
8. Law,policy-making,andthecontemporaryfamily 146
Part IV. Preserving identities: A future for the
family?
9. Family,identity,andcommunity 171
10. Findingawaythroughthewood 188
Notes 208
Bibliography 238
Index 255
To forget one’s ancestors is to be a brook without a
source, a tree without a root.
(Chinese proverb)
Introduction
Whatisthefamily?Therearemanywaysofansweringthisquestion,but
I takeas my starting point here G.K. Chesterton’s striking metaphor
offamilyas‘thisfrailcord,flungfromtheforgottenhillsofyesterdayto
theinvisiblemountainsoftomorrow’.¹Inmoreprosaicterms,itisthe
chainofpersonalconnectionsthatgivesmeaningtoourhumannotions
of past, present and future—a mysterious genetic entity that binds us
in our short span of individual existence to our ancestors and to our
successors.Butformany people, thesefamiliar domesticfoundations,
taken for granted by previous generations, have begun to crumble.
The signs are there in personal lives diminished by unstable relation-
ships,brokencommitments,andlossofcontactwithawholerangeof
peripheralbutimportantrelationships,fromgrandparentsandin-laws
to distant cousins and aunts. But, while the family is not indestruct-
ible, it is resilient. The family is, andalways has been, thefoundation
ofcommunitiesinwhichthecherishingofeachindividualpersoncan
flourish,andperhapstheonlyonethatcansurvivesocialchange,pre-
servingtheshapeandstructureofcivilsocietythroughthevicissitudes
ofhistory:warandpeace,theriseanddeclineofnationstates,demo-
graphic fluctuations and economic change. The original architects of
a liberal and individualist social philosophy are often taken to have
propoundedamessageofself-interestandegotism.But,evenforthese
earlierthinkers,the‘atomicindividual’ofmodernpoliticalthoughtwas
an alien concept, unless perhaps as hermit, recluse, or solitary mystic.
Even for them, as for their contemporary successors, the ‘individual’
whose self-determination sometimes needs protection from an over-
zealousstatecanbeseen,notasarivalconcept,butasonethatisitself
deeplyembeddedinthebroaderconceptoffamily.