Gheaus, Anca2018-04-032018Gheaus A. What abolishing the family would not do. Crit Rev Int Soc Polit Philos. 2018;21(3): 284-300. DOI: 10.1080/13698230.2017.13984491369-8230http://hdl.handle.net/10230/34279Because families disrupt fair patterns of distribution and, in particular, equality of opportunity, egalitarians believe that the institution of the family needs to be defended at the bar of justice. In their recent book, Harry Brighouse and Adam Swift have argued that the moral gains of preserving the family outweigh its moral costs. Yet, I claim that the egalitarian case for abolishing the family has been over-stated due to a failure to consider how alternatives to the family would also disturb fair distributions and, in particular, equality of opportunity. Absent the family, children would continue to be exposed to care-givers of different levels of ability, investment in childrearing and beneficial partiality. In addition, social mechanisms other than the family would lead to the accumulation of economic inequalities. Any kind of upbringing will fail to realise equality for reasons that go deeper than the family: our partiality and unequal abilities to nurture.application/pdfeng© Taylor & Francis. This is an electronic version of an article published in "Gheaus A. What abolishing the family would not do. Crit Rev Int Soc Polit Philos. 2018;21(3):284-300". Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy is available online at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13698230.2017.1398449info:eu-repo/semantics/articlehttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13698230.2017.1398449FamilyEquality of opportunityUpbringingPartialityCareinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess