Forgive the legalese:

“Family” means a number of individuals related to the nominal head of the household or to the spouse of the nominal head of the household living as a single housekeeping unit in a single dwelling unit, but limited to the following:

(a) Husband or wife of the nominal head of the household.

(b) Unmarried children of the nominal head of the household or of the spouse of the nominal head of the household, provided, however, that such unmarried children have no children residing with them.

(c) Father or mother of the nominal head of the household or of the spouse of the nominal head of the household.

(d) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (b) hereof, a family may include not more than one dependent married or unmarried child of the nominal head of the household or of the spouse of the nominal head of the household and the spouse and dependent children of such dependent child. For the purpose of this subsection, a dependent person is one who has more than fifty percent of his total support furnished for him by the nominal head of the household and the spouse of the nominal head of the household.

(e) A family may consist of one individual.

-Definition overturned in Moore v. City of East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494 (1977)

The above definition was too intrusive. For those keeping track, it has something to do with substantive due process (14th Amendment).

This Supreme Court decision still stands, allowing this definition:

One or more persons related by blood, adoption, or marriage, living and cooking together as a single housekeeping unit, exclusive of household servants. A number of persons but not exceeding two (2) living and cooking together as a single housekeeping unit though not related by blood, adoption, or marriage shall be deemed to constitute a family.

-Definition upheld in Village of Belle Terre v. Boraas, 416 U.S. 1 (1974)

The census counts both families and households, though the above definitions are attempting to force a narrow definition to restrict how many individuals can live at a given address in a single-family zoning district. Anything else would be considered non-family, despite possibly remaining a household, forcing such units to either: A) break the law, or B) find a district that allows “group living.” Typical group living uses: fraternities and sororities, halfway homes, assisted living facilities, and prisons.

History would not recognize these definitions. We’ve forgotten the role of the extended family while also losing our community backup.

The East Cleveland definition attempted to define, narrowly, a nuclear family. Culture has enshrined this unit above all others.

Two parents, to say nothing of one, cannot possibly satisfy all the needs of a family-household. “Families rigged to fail” Dark Age Ahead (p34)

Last week, I’d laid into planning’s intrusive moralizing RE: sidewalks. Jacobs has not forgotten this point between 1961 and 2004.

Think of all the responsibilities parents hold:

• first aid
• tutoring
• coach
• mentoring
• budgeting
• purchasing
• cooking
• home repair and maintenance
• banking
• acculturation of children
• much, much more

Who are the paragons that, unaided and unadvised, can earn a living and also provide all this and more? “Families rigged to fail” Dark Age Ahead (p34)

Certainly the unit defined by East Cleveland would not alone suffice.