Bride dies during wedding - so groom marries bride's sister same ceremony

I saw that! Horrible 😢

I'll say it one more time and then I'm off because I'm starting to bore myself: My only concern is whether she (and yes, the groom too) gave informed consent.

No you didn't say that, apologies if it looks like I think you did - I was replying to more than one post.

I haven't said that?

What I've suggested is that while it does seem like such a quick decision has downsides, there are reasons apart from some sort of coercion or some sort of deep seated sexism and the parents just wanting the dowry that a family or individual might feel the need to make a decision relatively quickly.

If we think of similar levels of financial outlay in our economic situation, a mortgage say, we might feel we had to make a rather quicker decision than was ideal over something important when it could mean paying the cost a second time. It doesn't mean we wouldn't really try to make the best decision for the right reasons.

I believe there's a huge difference between an arranged marriage and a forced marriage.
I believe in consent and I would apply that to any culture.
If that makes me culturally insensitive or even a frother then guilty as charged.

To expand on that a bit - we tend to delay a lot of things now, till a better time. Even funerals. I don't think that's so common in many other places fora variety of reasons.

Also, weddings in India are extraordinarily expensive affairs, they can put people into bankruptcy. I don't think that's a very good thing but it would make sense that canceling at the last minute and replanning for later could be a serious financial loss. Of course that also could put pressure on around making a decision quickly but I don't think that means that the women are being treated as property by the family or no one is considering what they want or their welfare. They are subject to the economic pressures of around them just like everyone else.

The DM story contains quotes from two of the dead woman's brothers and an uncle. No word from any of the female members of the family. So who knows how they feel about it.

I find the way the DM spins such stories incredibly distasteful. They are deliberately trying to foment outrage and spread cultural intolerance. I wish Mumsnetters wouldn't start frothing at stories like these. As several PPs have pointed out, the 'facts' are probably completely different, and this story will be fifth hand at best. Let's keep our outrage for matters that we know more about.

My reading is that it was the groom who proposed marrying the sister instead. If not then yes, I'd have the same concerns about him.

As I've said, I understand marriage can be a business transaction and, as long as both parties consent, I don't have a problem with it. I do have a problem if there isn't consent. It's the difference between an arranged marriage and a forced one - and it can happen in many cultures.

Whilst I realise we probably don't know all the facts, I find it hard to imagine that any woman who had just seen her sister die would be in a position to give her informed consent to marrying the groom."

Agree. But the groom was also forced into marriage. I think people have to understand the culture here, marriage is a business transaction between families. Arranged marriages, even ones where you meet the Bride on the day are not uncommon.

This was two families continuing with an agreement. Neither the bride nor groom were really the priority.

Also I’d like to add, arranged marriage is not the same as a forced marriage. I find the lack of distinction unfair because in the latter, the groom and more often bride, do not have a choice in the matter. Whereas in an arranged marriage, you are able to turn down the proposal. There are many cultures that have forced marriages and there are other cultures who look down on that, but are ok with arranged marriages. There are many cultural differences, but I do think there should be a greater awareness that forced marriages and arranged marriages are not the same thing.

If it turns out that the marriage had been delayed to give this young woman time to process her sister's death and give her consent then Id view it differently. But, from the way it's been reported, that didn't happen - her sister's body was still in the house according to all those articles. That does not sound ok to me.

Likewise, if Diana had known about Charles's relationship with Camilla when she first agreed to marry him then no problem as far as I'm concerned. But according to all reports I've seen, by the time she found out, the marriage plans were in full swing and she felt unable to back out.

Many a tale of the groom shagging the bridesmaid(s) before the wedding. Why even Charles had a mistress on his wedding day to Diana.

It's epidemic that women are seen as fair game and men are expected to hunt them down and conquer them.

There are families which don't care about their children's happiness and only money, but lots do, and that is not incompatible with arranged marriages. If both families felt that the match was with a family which they'd be compatible with, that the young people involved were likely to be good spouses, that's still the situation.

There are any number of people most of us could have good marriages with, and in every case it would take work for them to be good marriages. That's a more realistic approach than this view that there is some special person you are uniquely compatible with. Similarity in background and values predict happy unions as much as any other set of characteristics, snobbish as that may seem. That's not the same as seeing people as interchangeable.

I claim no expertise and I have no issue with the idea of arranged marriages as long as both parties fully understand what's happening and have given their consent. I would apply this principle in any culture.

Whilst I realise we probably don't know all the facts, I find it hard to imagine that any woman who had just seen her sister die would be in a position to give her informed consent to marrying the groom.

I would add that despite being widowed aged just 19 she never remarried!

Something similar to this happened to my great grandmother. Her older sister died in childbirth with her second son. It was just expected in her travelling community that my great grandmother would marry her brother in law although she recalls she was just 15 at the time.

Having seen her sister die a very painful death, my gran was not keen to get married or have sex, but she was given no choice in the matter.

Her brother in law/ husband was a violent man. Fortunately for my gran, he died a few years later, and she courageously broke away from her community and started a new life with her two daughters and two nephews.

Obviously I'm not suggesting this tradition is still commonplace in travelling communities. However rates of domestic abuse are still frighteningly high and I'm grateful my gran was able to get her family away from such a toxic environment. Her nephews grew up to be lovely, kind men.

Arranged weddings have nothing to do with love etc though, it's an agreement between families. In this case it appears ( if accurate) that they carried on the agreement rather than cancel despite the tragedy. The report says it was a difficult decision and talks of the paradox of celebrating a wedding whilst mourning. I feel for all involved but think saying it proves women are a commodity and blaming the bride's family or grooms family is not understanding the culture.

Not necessarily - the DM is renowned for adding its own spin.

Maybe. I agree the dowry detail is odd. I just checked on the byline and the reporter is a freelance journalist based in New Delhi. He has managed to obtain a quote from a family member: "One of Surbhi's uncles, Ajab Singh, told MailOnline it was a 'tough call' for the family to carry on with the wedding."

The bulk of the story appears to be taken from agency copy, however.

Not necessarily - the DM is renowned for adding its own spin. They certainly didn’t witness the event I was involved in that they reported but clearly did a sensationalist take on the reporting of the journos who were there.