Friendships are important. Could (or should) they be legally recognised?

We often hear about the importance of meaningful friendship to our lives – and the sense of belonging, recognition and care they provide. Yet, for the vast majority, friendships remain secondary to family and romantic relationships. The latter receive legal recognition, and have a higher social ranking than the former.

Why is this the case, if friendship is indeed so important? And is it something that could – or should – come with legally binding rights and recognition?

The fluidity of friendship

Friendship can vary in intimacy, closeness and the kinds of support it provides. It can therefore be difficult to define.

Sociologist Harry Blatterer cautions that defining it too broadly risks emptying the concept of its distinct meaning.

He argues friendship is characterised by a unique “relational freedom”, and marked by a lack of institutionalisation. It is built on choice and flexibility – unlike romantic love, which is linked to the legal institution of marriage (and has historically been structured by heterosexuality).

The importance of friendship

Research has consistently linked strong friendships with greater wellbeing and health.

One 2023 systematic review of studies found that adult friendship is positively correlated with wellbeing. Longitudinal research conducted in Australia has also shown how positive relationships, including with friends, are a major predictor of life satisfaction.

Despite this, friendship continues to be decentred in favour of romantic and family ties. Sociologists Sasha Roseneil and Shelley Budgeon argue this is because our relationships were historically defined by heterosexuality and the nuclear family.

Diverse relationship models are now challenging this, with more queer couples, more people choosing to remain single, and couples choosing to live apart or remain childless.

Queer scholars have demonstrated time and again that care, commitment and intimacy can be organised beyond biological or legal kinship.

Queer French philosopher and sociologist Geoffroy de Lagasnerie wrote a friendship manifesto, in which he challenges:

the idea that life should happen in cycles: youth, studies, form a relationship, move in together, sleep in the same bed, have children […] Those are institutional roles but a lot of people feel at odds with that type of life and have other aspirations. My idea was to instead write an account of a life organised around friendship […] to make friendship a space of counterculture against the institutional norms dominating our society.

Recognising friendship

Recently, Clémence Guetté, a French member of parliament, introduced a legislative proposal to enshrine friendship in law – akin to marriage, civil partnership and family ties.

This would give friendships legal recognition, and extend certain rights relating to care-giving and bereavement leave, housing and inheritance. While the proposal faces a difficult path to becoming law, it highlights the need for laws to keep up with our changing society.

And things are slowly starting to change.

Since 2000, individuals in Belgium who live together – whether as a couple, friends or family – have been able to apply for “legal cohabitation”, which establishes mutual rights around housing, household expenses and inheritance.

Similarly, in Australia, if you live with a friend as a housemate you are entitled to unpaid carer’s leave if they fall ill. However, you cannot take carer’s leave for a friend who lives apart from you.

The challenges

Legal scholars have questioned how friendship could be defined in law, without undermining its freedom.

They identify how this freedom becomes a source of tension when considering where legal rights around friendships should begin or end, as they often don’t have clear beginnings or endings.

They also acknowledge friendships are not exclusive between two people. This raises questions about how legal rights might operate when someone has several significant friendships with competing claims.

Most importantly, trying to standardise a definition of friendship might exploit its very essence.

Challenges aside

There may be several benefits to legally recognising friendship.

First, this could be helpful for people living without traditional family ties. Recent Australian research drawing on HILDA data found about 5.7% of Australians aged 65 and over were kinless – meaning they had neither a partner nor living children.

It could also legitimise relationships that challenge the boundary between friendship and partnership, such as “platonic life partners”, who may choose to live together, buy property, or even raise children together.

Finally, beyond practical entitlements, legal recognition might help to boost the importance we collectively give to friendship. This seems beneficial, considering how important it is to wellbeing.

As demonstrated in Belgium, laws could focus less on predetermined relationship categories and more on giving individuals the power to designate which relationships matter most to them.

The challenge for institutions will be in recognising the importance of friendship, without having to put rigid boundaries on what it is.