Parents often feel morally and emotionally compelled to guide their children’s behavior, especially when such behaviors carry long-term risks. This study examines how parents emotionally and morally respond differently when evaluating non-clinical risky behaviors—such as poor diet, insufficient sleep, and excessive screen time—when described in relation to their own child versus an unrelated child. Grounded in theories of paternalism, moral obligation, and love, 78 parents evaluated a series of hypothetical scenarios and rated their emotional reactions, behavioral intentions, moral judgments, and feelings of love using a between-subjects design. Parents who were assigned to the own-child group reported stronger emotional reactions, greater willingness to intervene, and a heightened sense of responsibility compared to those in the unrelated-child condition. While moral judgments were consistently high across groups, parental love was positively associated with emotional and behavioral responses. Notably, greater feelings of love predicted stronger emotional responses and greater willingness to intervene even toward unrelated children. These findings suggest that while moral evaluations may operate independently of relational closeness, parental love plays a distinct role in motivating caregiving behavior. The results offer insight into how affective bonds and perceived obligation interact in shaping parental responses, with implications for parenting interventions and shared caregiving environments.