Apple Needs to Fix Family Sharing: The 6-Member Cap Discriminates Against Large Families

I understand your point that Family Sharing is currently operating according to Apple’s design, and I agree that formal requests for Apple to change that design should also be submitted through Apple’s feedback channel.

However, I don’t think that makes this discussion “moot.” The original poster specifically asked how other large families are dealing with this limitation. That’s a perfectly legitimate topic for a community of Apple users, even if the underlying limitation isn’t a technical malfunction.

I also don’t think creating two separate Family Sharing groups can reasonably be described as “easily accommodating” a larger family. That workaround actually highlights the problem.

Apple designed Family Sharing around the concept of one family organizer, with another adult capable of being designated as a parent/guardian, while providing centralized access to parental controls, Screen Time, location sharing, purchases, subscriptions, and other family features. A person can also belong to only one Family Sharing group at a time.

So if two parents with five children have to divide their household into two separate Apple “families,” which children go with which parent? One parent can no longer be in the same Family Sharing group as some of their own children. The children aren’t all part of the same Apple family either. Shared purchases, subscriptions, location features, parental management, and other Family Sharing functionality are now fragmented across two groups.

That doesn’t really solve the problem; it works around the numerical limit by breaking up the very family structure the feature is supposed to represent.

And that’s precisely why “working as intended” isn’t the end of the discussion. Nobody is arguing that Apple’s software accidentally stops at six members. We’re questioning whether six should continue to be the maximum and whether Apple’s intended design adequately accommodates real households that exceed that number.

If licensing restrictions prevent Apple from simply extending every shared subscription beyond six people, that’s understandable. But Family Sharing encompasses considerably more than content licensing. Apple could separate the family management limit from certain subscription limits, offer additional paid member slots, create a larger family tier, or develop another solution. There are multiple ways to address the issue without expecting additional licensed content to be provided for free.

There’s also an interesting contradiction in suggesting that a seven-person household should create two artificial families to comply with the system. If the purpose of the six person restriction is to preserve the integrity of “Family Sharing,” intentionally dividing one actual family into two fictional family units hardly seems closer to the intended concept.

So yes, submitting feedback directly to Apple is appropriate, and I have done that. But discussing the limitation here, asking how other large families handle it, and questioning whether the current design makes sense are also entirely reasonable uses of a community forum.

A product can be working exactly as designed and still have a design limitation worth discussing.

Yea, opinions are pointless on this Support site, it is not a Social Media site and discussions of Apple policies is not even allowed as it violates the Terms of Use and may result in a post being deleted.

Unless otherwise noted, do not post Submissions about non-technical topics, including:

1. Speculation or rumors about unannounced products.
2. Discussion of Apple policies or procedures or Apple’s moderation of the Site.

Apple Support Communities Use Agreement - Apple Community

Feedback is what needs to be used to let Apple know how you feel. It is the same on Android phones as well with the 6 member limit on a Family Sharing account.

Suggestions on how other large families deal with this limit is perfectly acceptable and that usually involves creating 2 different Family Accounts managed however you want. Depending on the age of the child you can also manage Screen Time Restriction on an individual device and set a Screen Time Passcode there. You have all the same features of using Family Sharing minus the shared purchases/subscriptions, but certainly the locations sharing and parental management of their device. Each family may use a combination of options that work best for them, that may not be the same for others.

There is nothing to fix as family sharing is working as intended. The limit is likely a result of content licensing and restrictions. You could, of course, create two “families” each centered around one parent

This is a frequently posted comment on this forum.

First, you have posted in a voluntary, user-to-user technical support community. Responses are exclusively from other users like yourself, not Apple. Click on this link for Apple products feedback links --> Product Feedback - Apple

Apple may not respond but your comment will be read.

Large families are still unusual. Using a web search indicates only 5% of families in the USA have at least 5 or more children.

Also remember that it is very likely Apple alone is not going to be deciding here. The content owners (the ones who get to say if Apple can sell their material) will have an interest in this. They have probably already reached a compromise with a single purchase being shared between 6 people. I remember that it was only maybe 10 years ago that Family Sharing existed and before then everybody had to buy their own copies, so you've already come a long way.

I disagree with your response.

I agree with Azzam10. As someone with a larger family, I think Apple should make an effort to accommodate families that exceed the current limit. It’s not an unreasonable request, and if licensing costs are the concern, that could easily be addressed through an additional fee for extra family members.

Apple already allows multiple devices to be associated with one person, so technically accommodating a larger family shouldn’t be an insurmountable issue. More importantly, people who aren’t actually related can currently share a family plan, while legitimate larger families are restricted simply because they exceed an arbitrary number of members.

If Apple is going to market this as Family Sharing, larger families shouldn’t be penalized for actually having a larger family. Either offer an option to add additional members for a reasonable fee, or reconsider how the limit is structured. The current policy unnecessarily disadvantages larger households.

Whether you agree or disagree is moot as the family share is still working as intended. You are easily accommodated by creating two families or not creating a family share at all. If you have feedback for Apple, visit Apple.com/feedback.