“That’s What Family Does”: Why Calling on Kin Isn’t Always Kind

 

Because that’s what family does.” I hear it every few weeks—right before some emotional, physical, or logistical task is (re)assigned. Last Saturday, I was halfway out the door, market bag in hand, when my cousin swooped in—fresh from a 10‑day beach holiday—and assumed the role of our centenarian grandmother’s self‑appointed project manager.

Pulling out her metaphorical clipboard, she said: “Quick update?”

I paused. “Two persistent issues: the nurses’ schedule and Grandma’s meals.”
Her forehead scrunched. “Why fuss? She’s nearly one hundred—let her eat what she wants, when she wants. And anyway,” she added with moral authority, “the rest is what family is for.” Three seconds later, my concerns felt like moral failures. That phrase meant guilt, not gratitude.

1. A Word Built on Work

The term family comes from Latin familia, originally referring to a household of servants and slaves—long before love became central to the idea.¹ Today’s dictionaries stretch “any group connected by common features,”² a flexibility that allows people to deploy the word strategically. In my cousin’s case, “family” became a shield for guilt-tripping—and for refusing to negotiate.

2. The Functional Myth of Family

Mid‑20th-century sociologists like George Murdock and Talcott Parsons described the nuclear family as a social institution—a tiny factory producing citizens and emotional stability.³ Contemporary conservatives often cling to this romantic ideal. My cousin, though she’d bristle at the label, embodies that model: heroic caretaker by moral fiat, with no flexibility or reciprocity.

She works unpaid leave to help another grandmother, raises three kids, holds down a part‑time job, and still finds time for daily—I repeat, daily—visits to our grandmother’s flat. Thirty minutes of oversight, gossip-sharing, toast. That’s responsibility—but only so long as it meets her standards.

Stephanie Coontz reminds us the so-called timeless nuclear family was actually a post‑war anomaly—supported by rare economic stability.⁴ My cousin’s insistence that “this is how it’s always been” depends on that brittle myth.

3. The Moral Credit Card of “Family”

Jacques Derrida teaches that naming can prescribe behavior: words like family unlock obligations without consent. And yes, family can wound as much as it nurtures. Philip Larkin’s line cuts deep:

“They fuck you up, your mum and dad.”⁵

When “family” is invoked, it follows the same pattern:

1. Authority – “Because it’s family.”

2. Sanctity – Resisting is sacrilege.

3. Task Assignment – The nearest, youngest, or female person absorbs unpaid labor.

Over six months, I’ve juggled a full‑time job, part‑time university, shopping, laundry, and medical logistics—while my cousin took a beach break, supervised, and declared herself the family’s manager. That’s not heroism—it’s shirking, and then assigning me her work.

4. A Personal Reckoning

In Grandma’s hallway, I said:

“I need the system to work. We’ve discussed this. I can’t cover every missing nurse shift and handle shopping, laundry, full‑time work, and uni.”

She replied, voice clipped:

“But Grandma cared for you so your mother could work. Complaining like this? You don’t need family at all.”

That line reveals the truth: “Family” is a one‑way labor contract—expected for some, revoked for others. You honor grandmother’s work by doing a little more, but never by giving less. That’s not kinship. That’s an informal labor market with no written terms.

---

5. How to Unmask the Magic Trick

When someone insists “that’s what family does,” treat it like a contract:

• Scope of Labor – What tasks? When? How often?

• Voluntary Consent – No guilt for saying no.

• Reciprocity – Caring goes both ways, across generations.

Without this, “family” becomes a magic trick—a word that justifies any demand with no accountability, no negotiation, and no relief.

Conclusion: When “That’s What Family Does” Is Actually a Trap

Let’s be clear: family can be about love, care, and connection. But when it becomes shorthand for unspoken obligations—especially loaded on those with less time, less flexibility, or less power—it stops being kinship and becomes exploitation.

Next time you hear “that’s what family does,” ask to see the contract—and read the fine print. Because real love doesn’t need moral threat—it needs reciprocity, clarity, and respect.

Up next: “Workhouses of Love”—when demands harden into daily routines.

---

Notes

1. Etymonline, “family” (accessed June 2025).

2. OED, “family,” senses 1–30.

3. George P. Murdock, Social Structure (1949); Talcott Parsons, “The Social Structure of the Family” (1959).

4. Stephanie Coontz, The Way We Never Were (1992).

5. Philip Larkin, “This Be the Verse,” High Windows (1974).