<![CDATA[Contemporary families can no longer be understood through a static institutional lens. Digitalization and the acceleration of cross-border mobility have fundamentally altered how kinship is reproduced, care is managed, and authority is distributed. This article challenges the prevailing narrative of technological determinism which treats digital platforms as external forces eroding the family unit. Instead, it argues that technology and globalization act as co-constructive mediums that unevenly redistribute household functions, hierarchies, and vulnerabilities. Employing a qualitative approach with library research as the primary method, this study utilizes secondary data sourced from legal regulations, interdisciplinary academic literature, civil society reports on digital inequality, and policy documents. Data were analyzed through critical thematic analysis intertwined with infrastructural critique. Employing a critical legal sociology approach intertwined with digital infrastructure studies, the research bypasses traditional quantitative impact assessments to trace the micro-politics of domestic digital design and macro-level regulatory voids. The analysis explores three primary arenas: (1) the algorithmic mediation of intimacy and intra-family surveillance, where parental control software internalizes corporate disciplinary logic; (2) transnational care chains sustained by digital communication infrastructure, which alleviate economic burdens but exacerbate emotional asymmetries and the "left-behind" syndrome; and (3) the regulatory gap where state policies and platform terms of service compete to fill the governance void of the digital family. Ultimately, the study demonstrates that digitalization does not erase family authority but shifts it into the logic of data extraction, asynchronous connectivity, and commodified attention economies. The article concludes by proposing a forward-looking research agenda, urging scholars to investigate how platforms establish new family norms, how digital divides reinforce class asymmetries, and how national jurisdictions must redefine the concept of "private space" amidst global connectivity architectures.]]>
