This paper explores the deconstruction of binary family ideals in Celeste Ng’s Little Fires Everywhere, with a particular focus on how control and collapse function as central oppositions within the narrative. Through an exploration of the Richardson and Warren families, the study examines how rigid adherence to social norms, especially those shaped by class, race, and gender, exposes the fragility and contradictions of the so-called ideal family. Drawing on Jacques Derrida’s theory of binary opposition and feminist literary criticism, the paper analyzes dichotomies such as order versus chaos, stability versus freedom, and biological versus adoptive motherhood. It argues that Ng deliberately destabilizes these binaries to reveal their ideological foundations and the limitations they impose on personal identity and emotional expression. By contrasting Elena Richardson’s obsession with order and social propriety with Mia Warren’s unconventional, emotionally attuned lifestyle, the novel illustrates how alternative family structures can offer deeper forms of connection and authenticity. The study concludes that Little Fires Everywhere not only critiques traditional domestic ideals but also redefines concepts of motherhood, identity, and familial legitimacy, thus contributing to contemporary conversations on race, gender, and the evolving definition of family in the American fiction.