Let's solve this by taking the second son's age as the base variable and building every other age from it, instead of starting from the daughter as before.
We know the daughter's age directly: \(D = 5\) years.
The problem says the second son's age is two thirds of the first son's age, so if we call the second son's age \(x\), then:
\[ x = \frac{2}{3}S_1 \implies S_1 = \frac{3x}{2} \]We are also told the first son and his sister are in the ratio 3:1, meaning \(S_1 = 3D = 15\). Since \(S_1 = \frac{3x}{2}\), we get:
\[ \frac{3x}{2} = 15 \implies x = 10 \]So the second son's age is \(x = 10\) years, which fixes the first son at \(S_1 = 15\) years.
The father is four times the second son's age: \(F = 4x = 4 \times 10 = 40\) years.
The mother is 3.5 times the second son's age: \(M = 3.5x = 35\) years.
Adding every member's age, father (40) plus mother (35) plus first son (15) plus second son (10) plus daughter (5):
\[ 40+35+15+10+5 = 105 \]This matches only option (2). The other totals, 115, 205 and 210, do not correspond to any consistent set of ages built from the given ratios, so they can be ruled out.
\[ \boxed{105 \text{ years}} \]