The Family as Basic Social Unit makes a valuable contribution to the field with its insightful and experientially grounded argument for extending social ethics through family ethics. Schemenauer proposes “that the real dichotomy is between a life of isolated comfort and a life of service, both within and beyond the family, not between private family life and public social ministry” (35). The book offers a framework for overcoming conceptually limiting barriers to applying social ethical principles across both public and familial forms of social life.

Schemenauer’s argument richly engages Popes John Paul II and Francis as it explores the implications of recognizing the family as both “internally social” and “socially interdependent” (2). The book’s first part offers a balanced account of how idealization can burden families while still appreciating the family as potential witness to the triune God (40). In the second chapter, Catholic Social Teaching (CST) inspires an insightful analysis of family life, particularly as related to household labor. The latter portion of this chapter unexpectedly but admirably considers peacemaking in family contexts. Chapter 3 closes the first part by presenting training in mercy as central to social and familial life. The second part opens with a chapter on the social interdependence of families, and chapters 5, 6, and 7 address consumerism, simplicity, and responsibility. Each yields significant insights for the viability of CST enhancing family ethics.

Despite its many positive contributions, some methodological decisions may impact the book’s value for active scholars in family ethics. The book cites relatively few sources after Amoris Laetitia (2016) and its initial survey of scholarship is similarly dated (primary resources include Cahill 2000; Matzko McCarthy 2004; Bourg 2004; Hanlon Rubio 2010, 2016). The book’s explicit framing as “creative and constructive rather than historical and argumentative” (5) creates additional challenges. The argument is neither concerned with the warnings the twentieth century may hold for too enthusiastically collapsing familial labor into service for society, particularly within highly nationalist contexts nor is it attentive to the risk of overcoming the familial/social dichotomy by redefinition rather than resolution. Most significantly, eschewing the critical and historical encourages a one-sided presentation of cultural ideals (e.g., individualism, consumerism, materialism, and reductivist contract theory) as emerging from social history while Catholic teaching appears largely contextless. For example, he notes John Paul II and Francis’s concern for “social and cultural tendencies” that have limited women’s social participation without mention of Catholicism’s own development or influence (44).

In chapters 1 and 5, where social analysis is central to the argument, the project’s uncritical indebtedness to John Paul II’s high-contrast social analysis becomes apparent. Consistent with this, a church-versus-world dichotomy tends to shape the arguments, which are prone to rhetorical leaps based in either-or thinking with little complicating evidence from the social sciences or systemic analysis offered. Likewise, this dichotomy tends to present ideas alone as dominating moral realities distanced from their sociohistorical contexts. For example, despite engaging feminist authors, the book casually asserts that selfishness and social contract theory have driven down birth rates in some nations without mention of developments in women’s legal or social rights (30).

Readers should keep in mind that Schemenauer is consciously working outside his primary field while offering a new perspective on a notable issue in family ethics. In doing so, he brings to bear his expertise in social ethics and firsthand experiences of family life as he constructs several novel and compelling arguments. The written style is accessible enough for undergraduates and offers many relatable examples, though graduate students able to analyze methodology may benefit most in understanding its contributions and position within the larger field. Scholars in family ethics who still have hair left to pull may be frustrated by the lack of engagement with critical commentary on John Paul II’s methodology and with recent work in the field. However, The Family as a Basic Social Unit still offers more to value than these limitations obscure.