This chapter argues that mainstream economics cannot provide an adequate theoretical setup to deal with the family conceived as the place (i.e. the home) where nature and culture cohabit and where interpersonal relations are founded upon the principle of reciprocity. To defend such a thesis, the chapter advances a substantive, not formal, definition of the family, focusing on its constitutive elements.

This chapter considers empirical evidence about the effective socialization of the home—that is, a stable marriage—in the lives of adult children. Social scientists have mapped the trajectory of marriage from its status as an institution to its voluntary and tenuous existence today.

Adverse home circumstances can have lifelong effects on children. Poor parenting leads to a series of biological effects which can potentially compromise health and educational attainment, and increase risk of criminal behaviour. Young people who experience adversity in the home can face a difficult future which could lead, in turn, to adverse effects on their own children.

Emmanuel Lévinas builds his philosophy on the thesis that the ‘other’ comes before the ‘self’, representing a shift in Western philosophy traditionally centred on being and committed to the self. This self-centred philosophy has led to the violence of the self-proclaimed sovereignty of the individual.

This chapter deals with the ontology of the home. We propose to define the home as a lighted house. But what is a house? It has a particular structure within the parameters of the spatial, the temporal and the functional. It is within but open, it is always for now and it is care for human beings.

The idea(l) of the home as the place where people “naturally” want to stay or return to, and as a unique source of protection, privacy and self-achievement, has an extended intellectual history and cultural prevalence, with its own socio-economic determinants, at least in Western countries. What the home means in practice besides brick and mortar, under what conditions it is indeed a source of home-like feelings, and to the benefit of whom, are all – however – more complex and elusive questions.

For the parents, a child with autism produces confusion, perplexity, anguish and uneasiness. Autism sets the family in a chaos that is a never-ending process of adjustment in their lives. The process starts from the acceptance and then getting the information in search of solutions. The situation causes exhaustion and pain and a marriage as well as the whole family could be destroyed. The family and close relationships of the person with ASD must be aided urgently and on time.

In 2011 in Singapore, a photograph went viral. It was of a young man in army fatigues, striding ahead and focused on his smart phone while his much smaller domestic helper struggled after him, carrying his heavy army pack. The largely negative public response centred around the theme of young people being pampered, self-absorbed and entitled.

I would like to elaborate on the subject of family caregivers providing for both mentally and physically disabled children at home. The families carrying for these particular group of patients are in a specially difficult circumstances because from an economical point of view they are doing work which will not have any profitable effects in the future.

The rise in life expectancy over the past twenty years has led to an increase of number of older people in high-income countries (WHO, 2016). Age brings changes in lifestyle, social relationships, and health. Older people has specific social, relational and health complex needs. The elderly and their families often realize that their homes and competences are no longer sufficient to support the high complexity of their needs.