Yesterday I beat up on the American Dream, or at least what it has become. Today I want to talk about the nuclear family.
The nuclear family is defined as a man and woman plus their children. Many sources, especially Christian ones, say it is the “traditional form of family”. But is it really?
The problem is the nuclear family has become a target of the culture war raging in our society. It is seen as unfair to make a big deal about a family composed of daddy, mommy, and kids when so many children have only one parent. Or have two mommies. Or two daddies. Because of this many who support the Godly view of life see any attack on the nuclear family as an attack on God and God’s principles.
But here’s the thing, the so-called nuclear family has never been the most common family type in the world. Yes, it was the norm for upper-class British folks for several centuries, but they were very much an exception, not the rule. What’s more, you won’t find the nuclear family in the Bible and I suspect every author of the New Testament would see it as somewhere between odd and an abomination.
In biblical Judaism when a man got married he built a bedroom onto the family house and brought his bride to live there. The couple raised their children with grandpa and grandma in the same house, and as the grandparents aged the couple cared for them. If her parents didn’t have a son to care for them, they too might move in. (Consider the fact that Peter’s mother-in-law lived with them.) You might also have a grown but not yet married sister living in the home. Or if your sister was widowed at a young age she and any children she had might end up with you.
I have an interesting perspective on this because I share ten acres with my son and his wife, and our daughter-in-law’s mother, and her brother, his wife, and their children. I have seen how having grandparents around makes life so much easier for young couples, and for their children, and for their marriages! I have seen how extended family comes together to deal with things no couple could handle on their own. When there’s an emergency, there is someone to help. When things go wrong, there is help. When one family has financial problems, the others make up the difference. It’s an awesome, powerful thing, and I’m convinced it’s God’s first choice for us.
I’m not saying living in a nuclear family is wrong. But having done both, I see the problems and weaknesses of the nuclear family. If you can move to a more extended family situation, I suggest you do. Yes, it comes with its own issues, but most would tell you the benefits outweigh the problems hands down.
I realise this is a difficult suggestion. But as I said yesterday, this might be one of those in-but-not-of situations.
A post worth reading:
Hot, Holy & Humorous | Marriage: I’d Say It Differently Now ◄ There are so many things I’d say differently today!
Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay
Shop Amazon ♦ Shop to give links page
We’re donation supported Thanks for your help!
This post may contain affiliate links, see my disclosure for info.
There’s much wisdom here. For Christians, the family is redefined. It is no longer only those united by blood or marriage or some other legal bond, but those united in Christ. The church community is to be that extended family. The church is full of grandparents and children, and we’re to care for each other as carefully and lovingly as we would our own flesh and blood. Live in Christian community, in close proximity to one another, and enjoy the blessings!
I gotta say, I disagree a little bit… maybe people a long time ago lived with extended family out of necessity or culture, but the Bible also says “for this reason a man shall LEAVE his father and mother, and cleave unto his wife”. Separation from your family of origin, at least to a degree, is healthy for marriages. On a personal note, my mom lives with us for several days during the week to help us with childcare so that we can both work, and … it’s definitely not ideal, for many reasons which I won’t go into here.
@Tory – The necessary leaving is more emotional than physical. I know people who live across the country from their parents and are still tied to mom and/or dad in an unhealthy way. Dan Allender says in the book Intimate Allies that “the failure to shift loyalty from parents to spouse is a central issue in almost all marital conflict.” (I heard Dan teach on this a few years ago, and it shaped my thinking on the issue significantly.)
In both the Greek and the Hebrew the word translated as “leave” means to forsake or to abandon. But given we are commanded to keep caring for our partners this can’t be what it means. I think a better word would be “let go of” in an emotional sense. Dennis Rainey says it means “to forsake dependence upon”.
The other side of “leaving” is not “moving in with”, it’s cleave. So I see letting go of the tight emotional tie to parents so as to be able to form a tight emotional tie with your spouse. For some physically leaving may be necessary, while for others it doesn’t accomplish what should happen.
Bottom line, leaving is about proper boundaries, and physical distance does not guarantee that.
I’ve not studied this as much as I would like, but I folks are respect saying the same thing.
@Paul— 100% agree that the emotional leaving is a greater factor than physical distance. However, physical distance or lack thereof is a major factor. It’s hard for parents who are hundreds of miles away to critique your every parenting decision, comment on your bathroom remodel, ask “are you going to wear that?” as you are leaving for work, interject themselves into every minor marital conflict that has nothing to do with them and isn’t any of your business, and to judge the meal you have planned for dinner…. not that I know from experience or anything 🤦♀️
@Tory – All true.
It’s also hard for them to help out.
Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.
Genesis 2:24 ESV
https://bible.com/bible/59/gen.2.24.ESV
Can we say, then, that the “father/mother/children” model is the *nuclear* family, but the extended multi-generational model is the *molecular* family?
I think that the debate is good about nuclear vs extended and the roles each is supposed to play. To be fair it wasn’t an option back in biblical days. People couldn’t survive without many people contributing. I wonder how those same families would feel if given the option of not living with extended family. It seems this is an issue of the Bible being more silent and the solutions coming from family tradition and culture expectations.
Today when the church seems to cry out about the attack on the nuclear family I think they are trying to call attention to the fact that a large percentage of children are raised without a father in the home. We have as a society tried to diminish the role that men play in the raising up of children. That to be seems to be more of an abomination than not living with grandparents.
@Active Mom – When I look at the homeless population, and the fact that 80% get out of it if given a chance, I would suggest many still can’t make it without the help of others.
I agree with why so many are all about the nuclear family, but I think it’s misguided and ignores a much better option. Divorce is horrible but when it happens to a family with a parent in the home it’s less disastrous for everyone. Family can also prevent abuse and other problems. The whole “my castle, my rules” is contrary to how God commanded both families and the church to live.
We seem to think we have a right to be independent. God says otherwise. We and we suffer a lot because we don’t do it God’s way.
@Paul said: “The necessary leaving is more emotional than physical.”
Excellent point! We live on the same property as my in-laws. It’s been a tremendous blessing. Farmwork and childcare can both be an “all hands on deck” operation at times. That said, my lovely bride had no trouble with the leaving and cleaving part even though her folks were right there. The marital relationship has always come first.
@Tim – This reminds me of when we were given two cows (still mooing) in exchange for 20% of the meat when we had it butchered. Yeah, it was absolutely all hands on deck. All but one adult was in that kitchen processing meat two weekends running, and the last adult was keeping the kids out of trouble.
Or when I was putting rock over my septic drain field. It was getting late and I was getting tired. Then my son showed up, and shortly after his brother-in-law came up with his own shovel. And it was done before dark. But I guess that is “payment” for the time I spend four hours in the dark and cold (like the teens) helping the B-I-L when his septic went out in the dead of winter. None of that help was requested, we just see a need and step in.
I think it’s fair to say that sharing ten acres with extended family is not the same situation as living under the same small roof as that extended family.
In addition, I am sure that the success (or otherwise) of such an arrangement will be influenced by the nature/character/beliefs of the individual extended family members.
How easy are they to live with? How much do they disagree with how you run your own family affairs, and how vocal might they be about that? I’m sure there are plenty of readers who can relate to having rather difficult extended family. It’s nice when people are reasonable enough to make a co-habitating situation work, but sadly, not everyone is blessed with such a situation.
Just something to keep in mind.
@Wife – Ten acres does help. But my son and DIL live under the same roof as her mother, who is upstairs and used their laundry. But everyone respects reasonable boundaries and we all do what it takes to make it work.
It does take a group of reasonable folks, and plenty of us don’t have such a family. Doing this with my dad would have been great, and with them, as a couple, it would have been okay. But with just my mom it would have been a fight getting her to respect boundaries. So yeah, I get it. I suspect being reasonable was more common when this kind of lifestyle was more common. If your parents and in-laws modelled it well, then you did the same when it was your turn. And if they blew it you may do better because you don’t want to make others suffer as you did. (We took care of my mother in her home several times, once for nine months. I know that made Lori even better to our DIL than she would have already been!)
One of the great things about living this way is none of us will end up in a nursing home. Plans have been made for all three of we older folks. We didn’t initiate that, the kids did ( and we only know about it because on of the grandkids said something). Because we live right here it will be easy and we can stay in our own homes for a very long time with minor modifications and help.
We have had a lot of situations in my family of origin where extended family/multigenerational living was common. I think in order for it to work everyone needs to be on the same page about expected contributions regarding chores, finances etc. Or even having rules about how long the TV is on each day and at what volume. Some people in my family of origin have believed they would be treated more favorably than other siblings in their parents will for caregiving they provided—much family conflict from this issue.
My own family of origin could be quite argumentative–so that didn’t make things easier.
My maternal grandma lived with my parents on and off for many years—starting out when I was a teen. It cost my mom and dad a lot to have her there. I’m not talking about financial costs.
I think it is wonderful you have made this work in your situation. My dad passed away when my first child was young. If he had lived longer he would never have participated in any sort of chores or caregiving. He might have read a book to my kids or played games with them—but actual work would have been shifted to my mom.
@Denise – A certain level of group maturity is certainly needed. But if one or two falls short and the group as a whole is mature, it can work. Peer pressure can be a powerful force for good.
Our family, Lori my son and I have gained things from the others. And they have gained things from us. We are all better for the experience, and I think everyone would agree on that.
We lived here in our RV temporarily for a few months, then travelled for almost a year. Then we came back for what was to be a couple of months before we set off again. But the RV had developed problems and got grounded. So we spent the winter. Come spring we considered getting a place of our own, but several on the property had made it known they wanted us to stay. So we discussed it. We would not have stayed had it made anyone uncomfortable. By this point, they had all come to know us. We had pitched in and done things for the property and for the other families. They had good reason to feel we were a good fit. It was a very unusual circumstance, but it worked out very well.