This  level-4 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Family and relationships (defunct) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Family and relationships, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Family and relationshipsWikipedia:WikiProject Family and relationshipsTemplate:WikiProject Family and relationshipsFamily and relationships articles Sociology This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. United States Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. India Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hello i would like to know what other different types of family forms there are. Especially the term for when a person lives in the same house as a partner and live as man and wife but do not feel the need to get married. Also the term used for when friends live together, thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.93.21.71 (talk • contribs) 11:44, 4 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See common-law marriage and cohabitation. —Viriditas | Talk 11:17, 8 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think the following paragraph is interested, but unsupported. Please add citations if it is to be included with the article.

In some of these cultures, the nuclear family model is often regarded as anti-traditional family, or as a lever against economic advancement of people who live within the older, broader family model.^{[citation needed]} This social conflict has been particularly apparent during periods of American history among various ethno-cultural groups that have avoided using the prevailing Anglo-Dutch nuclear family model.^{[citation needed]}

Thanks. DavidBailey 17:10, 19 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You can't define a term based on its synonym if its synonym isn't defined. consanguineous family does not have an article, and is not defined anywhere. I'm redlinking consanguineous family in the article. Please someone define consanguineous family, or maybe i will. 67.161.46.169 01:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Phrases like "Extended type of family feels a greater security and belongingness" are clearly not neutral, in addition to being poorly worded. This article needs a lot of clean-up.206.180.38.20 (talk) 23:00, 19 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There are studies confirming the advantages of extended family organization, including greater sense of security and belonging. I'm therefore reinstating this paragraph.

Asia is a big, diverse place and its families vary tremendously. Muslim (and sometimes Hindu) families can be polygamous. Tibetan families are sometimes polyandrous. There are also multi-generational families of sons and their wives living with older parents in India, Nepal and historically in China (although probably less since Communism took over). Yet in many parts of Asia, and many cultures, nuclear families seem to have become the norm.

Perhaps the fundamental organization of this article needs to be by family type, not geography. The dynamics of a particular kind of family must tend to hold constant regardless of where they occur. To paraphrase Tolstoy, all polygamous families may be pretty much the same.

I also think the sexual and reproductive economies of different family types deserve to be written about. There seems to be a lot of reticence and coyness on this, but perhaps it's time to lift that veil. If the sex lives of gay men and lesbian women can be written about, why not the sexual dynamics of extended families living under the same roof? They are assuredly different from nuclear families. LADave (talk) 23:03, 25 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is no such legislation titled "Hindu Undivided family Act". Hence the sentence "Businesses carried out by Hindu joint families in India are governed by the Hindu undivided family act" needs to be deleted. However, there are many legislations viz.,

Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (78 of 1956)

Hindu Disposition of Property Act, 1916 (15 of 1916)

Hindu Gains of Learning Act, 1930 (30 of 1930)

Hindu Inheritance (Removal of Disabilities) Act, 1928 (12 of 1928)

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (25 of 1955)

Hindu Marriages (Validation of Proceedings) Act, 1960 (19 of 1960)

Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 (32 of 1956)

Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (30 of 1956) which govern the Hindu Undivided family. Please note that the list of these legislations are only illustrative and not exhaustive.

Tamilmani.R, Bangalore

This article needs to be cleaned-up.

Hindu Undivided Family [HUF] should be taken to a seperate article. Alternatively if the search command for Complex Family is given HUF also figure in the search results.

There are more than the social aspects of HUF, like the legal aspects. These needs to be covered. Even the social aspects may be elaborated. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.200.12.4 (talk) 06:04, 13 March 2007 (UTC).Reply[reply]

I have no idea how to fix this, or how a non expert would (though I am new to WP). Maybe flag it as in need of expert attention? Thinboy00 21:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• What's the problem? ʎɐʍɥbıɥɹɯ (ʞןɐʇ) (sqıɹʇuoɔ) 23:21, 19 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello all. I recently nominated extended family to be merged into this article. Please respond with either a merge or keep decision. Thank you. ʎɐʍɥbıɥɹɯ (ʞןɐʇ) 21:02, 19 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• merge - the article has original research tags and I think at one point had a refimprove on it too. Its too similar to complex family anyways. 99.130.145.121 (talk) 21:05, 19 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• merge - the content of the two pages is similar enough to justify a merge. 89.203.82.195 (talk) 15:43, 5 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• merge - but which of the two would be the preferred title? Wiki-uk (talk) 04:34, 1 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article Complex family has been merged to Extended family now. Wiki-uk (talk) 13:49, 5 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Extended family. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110730125635/http://www.factsaboutindia.org/indian-families.html to http://www.factsaboutindia.org/indian-families.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check)) (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:43, 26 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I added "Globalize" tag under "Economic background" section. The section uses racial and organizational names that only exist in United States. Words like "AARP", "black" or "latino" don't exist or have very different meanings in different parts of the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.248.139.118 (talk) 16:18, 15 April 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The term extended family is by no means new. To a great many people, it simply means relatives of a certain kind; where those relatives live is immaterial. People who use this sense of the term may live with or nearby their extended family, or nowhere near them. An encyclopedic article should not attempt to narrow the definition of extended family to a form that the author favors or is more interested in. Aboctok (talk) 19:53, 16 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Totally correct. It doesn't even define it correctly, then goes into paragraphs about "lots of people live with their grandparents!" Mercster (talk) 11:16, 25 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gtvtsjxldkdjvhyv 103.159.166.74 (talk) 16:05, 23 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]