Duties of near relatives

What has been said concerning the mutual obligations of parent and child applies proportionately to those of other near relations. These are also bound to love each other, not only out of charity, but out of piety, and they are under a grave obligation of rendering each other assistance not only in extreme but also in grave necessity. English law only enforces on relatives the obligation of maintaining a poor relation who is unable to support himself when he would otherwise be chargeable to the parish where he happens to be. Those who are so compellable are the wife and husband, the father and grandfather, the mother and grandmother or the children of the pauper. The law of charity and piety obliges more frequently and extends further.

133. What are the obligations of other blood-relations? - As regards other blood-relations, ascendants and descendants, the obligations are generally the same, with due proportion, as those of parents with respect to children, and vice versa; for all these, by reason of generation, one from another, are mutually bound by the strict bond of piety, especially if, when parents are lacking, ascendants undertake the care of grandchildren. Theologians commonly teach that they ought to undertake this care in defect of parents and tutors, so long as the latter are minors, and as far as the former conveniently can. Other things being equal, the paternal grandfather is bound to undertake that care before the maternal grandfather, as the doctors commonly teach.

As regards brothers and sisters, they ought to pursue one another with mutual love, not only with a common affection, as other men, but with a special affection on account of the close bond of blood. They ought also to succor one another as regards the necessities of life, not only in extreme, but also in grave necessity. L. 340.

The remaining consanguineal and collateral relatives are likewise bound to furnish one another love and help in necessity, according to the order of degrees of consanguinity. The reason is that the conjunction of blood and descent from the same stock and principle of life introduces this special obligation of piety. Whence, in defect of parents, or quasi-parents, and of ascendants, collateral consanguineals also succeed to the obligation of furnishing support to one in need, in ordinary necessity and beggary, if they can, or unless others are present who wish liberally to relieve a similar necessity. Struggl. 20.

"It must be said that from that which is proper to himself someone ought more to satisfy his parents, or those from whom he has received greater benefits." St. Thomas, 2.2, q. 62, a. 5, ad 4.

Because conjunction with other consanguineals is not so great as with parents and children, so that piety is gravely injured against them, a certain greater damage inflicted upon them is required, but less against brothers and sisters than as regards others less closely joined. But against more remote relatives there is absent a special grave malice against piety.

134. What of support to be furnished as regards various consanguineals and affines? - By the law of piety some ought to provide for, or nourish, others if they are in necessity. To furnishing support there is obligated in the first place the spouse; secondly descendants; thirdly ascendants; fourthly the son-in-law and daughter-in-law; fifthly the father-in-law and mother-in-law; finally brothers and sisters; and indeed this obligation is reciprocal. C. I. 132, 138-142; C. G. 203, 205-207, 212; C. L. 172; C. H. 143 seqq.; C. B. 1601 seqq.

Ascendants are bound in the order of proximity, C. I. 138; C. H. 144; C. L. 173. But descendants are bound in that order in which they would be called to the legitimate succession of the needy person, C. I. 142; C. H. 144. - Support is owed to brothers and sisters if they are in very grave necessity, C. I. 141; C. H. 143. Cf. C. L. 174. In those places in which the civil law does not oblige brothers and sisters to furnish support to brothers and sisters, nevertheless natural charity and piety gravely urge, if brothers or sisters are constituted in grave necessity. - But as regards other more remote consanguineals, besides brothers, if they are in grave necessity, the obligation is still present, although light, "since toward them also there is some obligation of piety, although not so strict." L. 339, l. 3, n. 946; Lugo, de Iust. et Iur., d. 24, n. 176. Yet the obligation of piety is present more strictly toward other consanguineals of the direct line. - The mother-in-law and daughter-in-law lose support if they pass to other nuptials, or if the spouse from whom the affinity arose has died, leaving no descendants. C. I. 140; C. G. 206.

Parents cannot deny support to children because, with the parents unwilling, they contracted nuptials with unworthy persons. L. l. 3, n. 337, 949. "Sanchez, etc., say that the father is bound to furnish support not only to the son, but also to that son's wife, although he married her without a dowry and against the will of that son's father. Besides, Azor, etc., hold that the father ought to nourish the son even if the son had wickedly consumed the portion already previously handed over to him." L. 336, 337. "But it is certain that parents are bound to furnish support to children, even spurious children, and even those born from condemned intercourse, if they cannot be sustained from elsewhere." L. 951. - Nor indeed generally is it lawful to deny support because he who seeks it has come to want through his own fault, except to brothers and sisters from C. I. 141; and from C. B. 1611 only strict sustenance is owed. - From the same C. B. 1963, 1969, if, when the inheritance has devolved, an heir yet to be born must be awaited, the mother, who cannot provide for her own sustenance, can demand from the inheritance itself support suitable to her social condition until the birth. Likewise the heir is bound to furnish support to the members of the deceased's family for a month from the devolution of the inheritance.

How much must be furnished is to be estimated from the necessity of the petitioner and from the faculties of the giver. C. I. 143; C. G. 208; C. H. 146; C. L. 178, 179. Support comprises food, clothing, dwelling, and other things necessary for life, and, according to circumstances, instruction suitable to the person. C. I. 846; C. H. 142; C. B. 1610; C. L. 171. The option is given either of receiving the needy person at home, or of supplying him a pension, unless the judge has established something else. C. I. 145; C. G. 210; C. H. 149. - But because this obligation of furnishing support is from charity and piety, not from justice, he who does not furnish it is not bound to restitution; nor is he obligated toward the heirs of the dead man who had a right to it. C. I. 144, 146; C. G. 209; C. H. 148-150, 151. It is otherwise from C. A. 171; C. L. 176. - L. 339, 356, 946, 949, 951.

The obligation of furnishing support can vary, according as the conditions of him who furnishes it, or of him who needs it, have varied. C. I. 144; C. G. 209. It wholly ceases when he who needed support has died, although it was owed to him by sentence of a judge, C. I. 146, or by donation or legacy, because support is personal. Therefore if by legacy it was owed for ten years, and before that he to whom the support had been left died, the right of support does not pass to his heirs. - La-Croix, l. 3, p. 1, n. 709 seqq.

What are the obligations of other relatives? - As to other relatives, ascendants and descendants, the obligations are generally the same, with due proportion, as those of parents with respect to children, and vice versa. For all these, by reason of generation, of some from others, are mutually bound by a strict bond of piety, especially if, when parents are lacking, ascendants take up the care of grandchildren. But theologians commonly teach that they ought to take up this care, in defect of parents and tutors, as long as they are minors, and as much as they conveniently can. Other things being equal, the paternal grandfather is bound to take up that care before the maternal grandfather, as the doctors commonly teach.

As to brothers and sisters, these ought to pursue one another with mutual love, not only by common affection, as other men, but by particular affection on account of the close bond of blood. They also ought to help each other mutually as to the necessities of life, not only in extreme necessity, but also in grave necessity. L. 340.

The remaining blood-relatives and collaterals are likewise bound mutually to furnish love and help in necessity, according to the order of the degrees of consanguinity. The reason is that conjunction of blood and descent from the same stock and principle of life induces this special obligation of piety. Hence, in defect of parents, or quasi-parents, and ascendants, collateral blood-relatives also succeed to the obligation of furnishing support to one in need in ordinary necessity and beggary, if they can, or unless others are present who wish liberally to relieve a similar necessity. Struggl 20. "It must be said that someone from what is proper to him must satisfy parents more, or those from whom he has received greater benefits." S. Th. 2. 2, q. 62, a. 5 ad 4.

Since conjunction with other blood-relatives is not so great as with parents and children, in order that piety be gravely injured against them, a certain greater harm inflicted upon them is required, though less against brothers and sisters than as to others less closely joined. But against more remote relatives a special grave malice against piety is absent.

What about support to be furnished, as to various blood-relatives and in-laws? - By the right of piety some ought to exhibit or feed others if they are in necessity. But to furnish support, in the first place a spouse is obligated; second, descendants; third, ascendants; fourth, son-in-law and daughter-in-law; fifth, father-in-law and mother-in-law; finally, brothers and sisters, which obligation indeed is reciprocal. C. I. 132, 138-142; C. G. 203, 205, 207, 212; C. L. 172; C. H. 143 seqq.; C. B. 1601 seqq.; C. He. 228 seqq. Ascendants are bound in the order of proximity. C. I. 138; C. H. 144; C. L. 173. But descendants are bound in that order by which they would be called to the legitimate succession of the person in need. C. I. 142; C. H. 144. Support is owed to brothers and sisters if they are in very grave necessity. C. I. 141; C. H. 143; and C. L. 174, in defect of parents and other ascendants; from C. He. 329, when they are sufficiently rich. In those places in which civil law does not obligate brothers and sisters to furnish support to brothers and sisters, nevertheless natural charity and piety press gravely if brothers or sisters have been constituted in grave necessity.

But as to other more remote blood-relatives, besides brothers, if they are in grave necessity, the obligation is still present, although light, "since toward them also there is some obligation of piety, although not so strict." L. 339, l. 3, n. 946; Lugo, de Iust. et Iur., d. 24, n. 176. Yet the obligation of piety is present more strictly toward other blood-relatives of the direct line. Mother-in-law and daughter-in-law lose support if they pass to other nuptials, or if the spouse from whom the affinity arose has died leaving no descendants. C. I. 140; C. G. 206.

Parents cannot deny support to children because, against their will, they contracted nuptials with unworthy persons. L. l. 3, nn. 337, 949. "Sanchez, etc., say that a father is bound to furnish support not only to the son, but also to his wife, although he married her without dowry and against the will of the father himself. Besides, Azor, etc., hold that a father must feed the son even if the son has viciously consumed the portion already previously handed over to him." L. 336, 337. "But it is certain that parents are bound to furnish support to children, even spurious children, and even those born from condemned intercourse, if they cannot be sustained from elsewhere." L. 951.

Nor indeed generally is it licit to deny support because he who asks it came to poverty by his own fault, except to brothers and sisters from C. I. 141; and from C. B. 1611 only strict sustenance is owed. From the same C. B. 1963, 1969, if, an inheritance having devolved, an heir to be born must be awaited, the mother who cannot provide for her own sustenance can demand support fitting to her social condition from the inheritance itself up to the birth. Likewise the heir is bound to furnish support to the members of the family of the deceased for a month from the inheritance devolved.

But how much must be furnished is to be estimated from the necessity of the one asking and from the resources of the one giving. C. I. 143; C. G. 208; C. H. 146; C. L. 178, 179. Support comprehends food, clothing, habitation, and other things necessary for life, and, according to circumstances, instruction fitting for the person. C. I. 846; C. H. 142; C. B. 1610; C. L. 171. But an option is given either of receiving the needy person at home, or of furnishing him a pension, unless the judge has established otherwise. C. I. 145; C. G. 210; C. H. 149. But because this obligation of furnishing support is from charity and piety, not from justice, he who does not furnish it is not bound to restitution, nor is he obligated toward the heirs of the deceased who had the right to it. C. I. 144, 146; C. G. 209; C. H. 148, 150, 151. Cf. C. A. 171; C. L. 176; L. 339, 356, 946, 949, 951.

The obligation of furnishing support can vary according as the conditions of him who furnishes it, or who needs it, have varied. C. I. 144; C. G. 209. It ceases altogether when he who needed support has died, although it was owed to him from sentence of the judge, C. I. 146, or from donation or legacy, because these things are personal. Therefore if by legacy it was owed for ten years, if the one to whom support was left dies before that, the right of support does not pass to his heirs.

What about repairing harms? - The question is generally raised: Is a superior bound to repair harm inflicted by his subjects?

R. Affirmatively in the external forum, according to the various laws in force in various regions. Generally this obligation of repairing harm on account of the deed of another is either from negligence in custody and vigilance to be used, or from the choice of persons whom we deputize to do something. Cf. C. I. 1153; C. G. 1384; C. H. 1903, in which express mention is made: 1. Of the father, and, when he has died, from C. G., or is lacking from C. I., of the mother in relation to minor children dwelling with them; and in C. I. and in C. H. of tutors in relation to those whose administrators they are, likewise dwelling with them. 2. Of the master and of the one commanding in relation to servants and mandatary persons in the exercise of functions to which they themselves destined them. 3. Of the teacher and craftsman in relation to students during the time in which they are under their vigilance. But nothing is established about the husband in relation to the wife.

Moreover, an obligation of this sort, whether in parents or in tutors, whether in masters and those commanding, whether in teachers and craftsmen, ceases, from each Law, Italian and French, whenever they prove that they could not have impeded the deed concerning which otherwise they would have to respond; or, from C. H., that they used due diligence. C. G. 1424. From C. B. 828 seqq., children before the completed seventh year by no means answer for harm inflicted. After the seventh year and before the eighteenth year, they answer for it if necessary discretion was not lacking. But those who ought to watch over them must repair the harm if they omitted to use due diligence. The same is established about one commanding another some business, if this other inflicts harm on another in the execution of that business, unless the one commanding used ordinary diligence. From C. He. 333, the head of the family, or of domestic communion, answers for harm inflicted by a member of it who is a minor, interdicted, or of infirm mind, unless he demonstrates that ordinary diligence required by the circumstances was used.

R. Negatively, speaking generally, in the internal forum. The reason is that the quality of superior brings only the burden of governing subjects rightly, but by no means the obligation from a debt of justice of impeding harms of his own subjects, and much less of others who are not subjects, unless he ought to impede them either from a special contract or from a special office. Hence a private schoolmaster who does not correct students stealing or detracting from others, although he ought to imbue them with good morals and receives payment for this, nevertheless is by no means bound to restitution to those from whom the students steal or whom they detract, since nothing was done with them.

Speaking generally; for they who preside over others are bound concerning harm if they do not prohibit it in that thing or office in which they ought to be over them, for example, if the apprentice of a pharmacist gave poison instead of medicine, provided they do not lack grave fault. The same altogether holds if from your animal, or from your thing, with your fault harm happened to another, if, for example, your dog, untied, bit one entering, or your house, collapsed from age, killed several. Inst. 1, l. 1, t. 7; l. 4, tt. 5, 8; Dig. 1. 47, t. 5; C. A. 1308, 1309, 1314-1316; C. L. 2394 seqq.; Gousset 963 seqq.

590. Scholion. On the obligations of piety among other relatives. From the virtue of piety there arise similar, though unequal, obligations also among other relatives in the nearer degrees, namely, toward a grandfather, grandmother, grandson, granddaughter, brother, and sister. But the obligations toward more remote relatives are the same as those dictated by common charity toward one's neighbor.

First I say, that these owe one another support out of justice in extreme indigence.

So Azor. Tom. 2. lib. 11. cap. 40. question 1. Fagund. lib. 4. cap. 16. For if they are bound to outsiders, much more to brothers and sisters.

In grave necessity also, when they have not wherewith to live according to their state, rich brothers are bound in either forum to provide support, and the Judge, when appealed to, is bound to bind them to it.

A poor sister by both parents a brother is bound in either forum to support and dower. It is the common opinion, as cited by Fagundez cap. 16.

Say the same of a sister by the same father, but a different mother; we have leg. cum plures, §. Cum tutor ff. de administr. tutorum, which excludes only uterine sisters, as Bartholomew notes there in the final §. It excludes, however, as to dowering according to her opulent state, unless she is heir of the mother's goods; they are bound, nevertheless, always to support her. So Barthol. loc. cit. and others, as cited by Fagundez num. 4. He is bound, however, always to dower her to the measure of support, namely, in place of a dowry, by setting aside what would have been expended on support.

So conversely rich sisters are bound to dower poor sisters, and brothers to support them together with them. It is clear from the rule of correlatives. So Barbosa Tom. 1. part. 4. leg. 1. ff. soluto matrim. Fagundez cap. 16. num. 14.

Clerics are bound also to support their parents, brothers, and sisters that are poor from the revenues of the Church. So many, as cited by Fagundez cap. 17. num. 1.

The reason is that the fruit of a benefice is for the uses of the poor, much more of one's own household. If in cap. Pervenit. the contrary seems to be said, understand it of rich kinsmen, to whom the fruits of the benefice are not to be communicated, but rather to outside paupers.

I say also that one may dower needy daughters or sisters from the fruits of a benefice, but is not bound to. See Fagundez num. 2.

The question here demands: whether sons who gravely squander their goods beyond the others are bound to bring them to the collation with their brothers, and to recall their own legitimate portion.

Indeed I have seen very many holding such to be at fault, and I judge them bound. So Navarr. summa, cap. 17. Sylvester under the word peculium, 2. question 9. Antonius Gomez ad leg. 29. Tauri; nevertheless Navarrus, with St. Antoninus 2. part. tit. 1. cap. 15. excepts unless the father while living forgave it; but this does not please me, because he is bound to bring to partition even those things which the father gave.