Topics Ethics

Question Do we have a duty to take care of relatives (who are unable to take care of themselves) or does this duty fall on the state?

Accepted:
September 2, 2008

Comments

Your brief question encompasses a number of different controversial issues. Let me set aside the issue of the state and focus instead on the question of your obligations to your family members. If you do have a duty to take care of your relatives, I don't think that the source of this duty is the mere fact that they are your relatives (except when it comes to your children). In other words, the mere fact that someone is your mother does not make it the case that you have a duty to take care of her. However, from the fact that your biological connection with your mother does not by itself give rise to any obligations on your part it does not follow that you are under no such obligation. After all, your relationship with her is probably not exhausted by your blood tie. Hopefully, you also have a personal and familial relationship with her. And if you do have a relationship with her that is more than genetic--if, in other words, she is a regular part of your life and you are regular part of hers--then I think you probably do have a duty to take at least some care of her, much as you have a duty to care for your close friends.

As I suggested above, matters are different when it comes to your children. I believe that you have an obligation to take care of your children merely in virtue of the fact that they are your children. Although even here I think that the obligation can be overridden.

Question Do we have a duty to take care of relatives (who are unable to take care of themselves) or does this duty fall on the state? Accepted:September 2, 2008

Question Do we have a duty to take care of relatives (who are unable to take care of themselves) or does this duty fall on the state?

Accepted:
September 2, 2008