• Blog
  • About
  • Books
  • Podcast
  • Contact
Menu

Jake Desyllas

Author
  • Blog
  • About
  • Books
  • Podcast
  • Contact

What Does It Mean to Be "Pro-Family"?

September 17, 2025

What does it mean to be "pro-family"? The term is vague and contested. I suggest a philosophical definition: being pro-family means acknowledging the legitimacy of enforceable parental obligations. This means accepting that both biological parents have a positive obligation to raise their child to the self-sufficiency of adulthood.

The obligation of parents arises from the voluntary act of making their gametes available for fusion, either through sex or through assisted reproductive technology. This generates an obligation because one is responsible for the reasonably foreseeable consequences of one's actions (even if those consequences were not desired). A foreseeable consequence of making your gametes available for fusion is that you bring about the circumstance that a child is in a state of peril. Parents are obliged to get the child out of peril as a matter of justice, not just personal virtue.

Here are some logical consequences that follow from this principle:

  1. Both the mother and father are jointly and severally liable for their obligation.
  2. Both parents have obligations to every embryo that they allow to be created from their gametes.
  3. Neither parent can legitimately deprive the child of the protection of the other parent, since it is the child that has the claim on both.
  4. Neither parent can legitimately give up their parental obligation (although they may be able to delegate it in some circumstances).

Given these logical consequences, meeting their parental obligations requires the biological mother and father to raise the child together. So being "pro-family" means supporting the idea that both a mother and a father raise their children. Practically, this almost always requires them doing so together in one household, in a so-called "traditional" family.

Pronatalism is not the same as pro-family

On this definition, being pro-family is not the same as being pronatalist. A deadbeat dad with 10 kids by different women all over the place could qualify as a pronatalist, but not pro-family. A sperm donor whose gametes are used to create 100 babies would also qualify as a pronatalist, but his actions are not pro-family since he is not fulfilling his parental obligations.

Given the distinction between being pronatalist and pro-family as defined here, one can be pro-family without choosing to have children oneself. To be pro-family means to affirm that those who create children must fulfil their obligations. It does not mean that one must choose to have children in the first place in order to be pro-family.

The Boomer Contradiction on Children's Rights →
Featured
family.jpg
Sep 17, 2025
What Does It Mean to Be "Pro-Family"?
Sep 17, 2025
Sep 17, 2025
Ms1972.jpg
Sep 15, 2025
The Boomer Contradiction on Children's Rights
Sep 15, 2025
Sep 15, 2025
scalpels.png
Sep 10, 2025
A Critique of Roderick Long's Comments on Circumcision
Sep 10, 2025
Sep 10, 2025
Lesjeuxenfants.jpg
Sep 5, 2025
The Objection That Parental Obligations Are Too Onerous to Result From Sex
Sep 5, 2025
Sep 5, 2025
George.jpg
Sep 3, 2025
A Critique of George H. Smith's Theory of Parental Obligations
Sep 3, 2025
Sep 3, 2025
IVF.png
Aug 8, 2025
IVF Is Incompatible with Parental Obligations in Almost All Cases
Aug 8, 2025
Aug 8, 2025
JLS.jpg
Aug 7, 2025
My Article on Parental Obligations Now Published in the Journal of Libertarian Studies
Aug 7, 2025
Aug 7, 2025
Aug 6, 2025
A Critique of Stephan Kinsella's Approach To Rights Theory
Aug 6, 2025
Aug 6, 2025
WendyMcElroy.jpg
May 31, 2025
A Response to Wendy McElroy on Abortion and Retroactive Justice
May 31, 2025
May 31, 2025
Pregnant.jpg
May 30, 2025
Matriarchal Libertarians Believe in Gestationalism
May 30, 2025
May 30, 2025