in this case even then by no means is Jesus was free to pick out whomever he wanted to take care of his mother. -- that was not done. And that is not done today in a conservative society in say the Arab world or India.
In a modern Western society you may do that, but you wouldn't do it in a pre-Industrial west either...
No, we should not view the past through our own moral code but through their own code.
Jesus did a lot of things that “just weren’t done” back in that day. Things that got Him into a world of trouble, which He knew would happen (of course).
We just have to agree to disagree. The Bible gives specific names of people throughout the New Testament,but for the “disciple whom Jesus loved” the Bible chooses not to reveal who that person is— by what right do we name that person when the Bible choses to keep him/her anonymous? Or that the person chosen by Jesus to take care of his mother was John? From what the Gospels said, none of the original 11 were around at the crucifixion, having gone into hiding. Curiouser and Curiouser.