To be disturbed by wilfull ignorance around genetic inbreeding?

[M9009]

I've come from a country were cousin marriage and indeed marriage to any close relative if illegal.
I've recently started working in a dialysis unit and I'm so disturbed by how many parents are young children born of first cousin marriage. Usually from South Asian backgrounds.
Today I was speaking to one parents who has 9 children, all in need of kidney transplants. The eldest 2 have already had theirs. Parents are first degree cousins and each have various medical problems of their own.
Why, as a society, do we allow these marriages? It seems so cruel to the children who are born with medical and genetic problems.
Maybe I'm easily shocked, I don't know.

That's because it was banned in the sixth century by Pope Gregory I.
Most christian countries view it as taboo since then with a few exceptions such as Irish Travellers, Romany, some Mormon communities, etc. and of course aristocrats.

The details of NHS ‘support’:

The NHS does not officially "support" or encourage cousin marriage, but it does recognize that such unions are legal in the UK and provides medical guidance to manage the associated genetic risks
.
While some training materials and online articles for healthcare staff have previously highlighted potential "benefits" like stronger family support systems, these were removed after severe backlash and accusations of ignoring the serious health risks.
Key points regarding the NHS and cousin marriage:

• Risk Recognition: The NHS acknowledges that children of first-cousin couples are at an increased risk of inherited genetic conditions, with the risk of birth defects rising from about 2–3% in the general population to 4–6% for first-cousin couples.
• Genetic Counselling: The NHS focuses on providing genetic counselling, education, and screenings for consanguineous couples (those related by blood) to help them make informed reproductive choices.
• Controversy and Removal of Material: In September 2025, NHS England's Genomics Education Programme was heavily criticized for a blog post that suggested potential social and economic "benefits" to first-cousin marriage, including stronger family support.
• NHS Response: The NHS subsequently removed the, calling the publication a "mistake" that was "not intended as policy or advice to clinicians".
• Official Stance: A spokesperson clarified that "The NHS absolutely recognises the genetic risks of consanguineous relationships... We are investigating if this inappropriate wording is in any guidance or training, and if so, we will take steps to remove it".

In summary, the NHS views cousin marriage as a matter of individual, cultural, or religious choice that is legal, but officially advises couples on the higher, proven medical risks involved.

Where communities are targets of racism and prejudice is there any wonder they hold closely together ? This is a wider total UK community problem - no more hostile environments or asking people to”where do you come from?”

You can’t live in Kentucky then?

Why do you keep talking in riddles? Just say what you want to say, it’s okay, it’s an anonymous forum.

Part of the reason for such high rates of affected children is the time taken to diagnosis.

I have lost count of the number of times in my career the diagnosis of an autosomal recessive condition for child A has come through when the mother is already pregnant with child B.

Autosomal recessive conditions are massively over represented when there is consanguinity.

Or even if you get a diagnosis there are differing attitudes about whether or not to take up pre-birth genetic testing. A lot of which is due to personal, social and religious views. Families facing this choice are a bit between the devil and the deep blue sea - you can either have post conception testing which leaves the dilemma about whether or not to have a termination if the fetus is affected. Or pre-implantation genetic diagnosis which requires IVF and used to only be funded for one live birth.

It's been a while since I worked in an area where this was discussed so I don't know what the current policies are around access to pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (and it might vary area to area). Regardless I see a lot of children in families with multiple affected siblings.

I have never claimed to live in Kentucky, but first cousin marriage is not legal in Kentucky, anyway.

I think it’s racism not to ban cousin marriage. If there was something causing mainly white children so much suffering there would be an outcry. Because the affected babies are mostly brown politicians don’t care.

If you think that’s a riddle you must be slightly lacking in brain cells. It’s pretty straightforward!

I think the Royal Family should lead a campaign on this - they have a long documented history of marrying close relatives (Mad King George is one obvious example of where it can lead).

I'm confused; how can a fetus (or indeed someone who hasn't yet been conceived), waive their right to medical access? They'd be unable to hold the pen for a start!

Or do you mean a child, who has had no say over their conception or existence, should be denied access to medical treatment, because of a waiver their parents signed?

Either way, a very odd and dystopian set up...

Do you also disagree with sperm/egg donors with disabilities or who are carriers not being able to donate? Or people with certain mental and physical health conditions not being able to be blood or organ donors? That is also done to prevent or reduce risk of disability

Just a little joke steff13

I’ve seen Deliverance…

This is all true, but the strict cousin marriage laws across the whole of Europe that effectively banned both first and second cousin marriages means you don't see this problem of a defective gene being endemic in a community. Pope Gregory forced people to marriage outside their clan in the 6th century AD, with the result that consanguinity has not been a problem apart from in the Hapsburg family, who were given papal dispensations in part because they were related to the Holy Roman Emperor. And if you look at what happened to them, you can see it didn't end well. There is a strong case for being similarly radical today. It could be a requirement that people who are first or second cousins have genetic screening before being permitted to marry and have children together, rather than a blanket rule, but it is not fair on the children to continue as we are.

Then why did you put “hmmm funny that” in reference to Iqbal Mohamed? Is it the inference that a brown person would of course want first-cousin relationships to be lawful? Because all brown people think the same?

Do you know I’ve enjoyed our little match, I think ending with you calling me an idiot is quite fitting. Have a good night.

Aww come on now, I didn’t use the word idiot!

Sweet dreams KatsPJs 😘

I had literally never considered any of this, until seeing this thread tonight...

Having worked in a school, which had a unit for children with severe disabilities, many of which were the result of genetic issues from cousin marriages, I would never ever wish that on any human being and truly have no idea why those that care for others would not ban it.

Queen Victoria married her first cousin and had nine children with him...

Queen Elizabeth married her third cousin, Prince Philip and had four children with him.

Prince now King Charles married Lady Diana who was his 16th cousin once removed.

Prince William and Prince Harry are the first generation of royals to marry women with no connection to the royal family and we all know why.

I agree op .

It's funny how they're more respectful of breeding with your cousin than having a cig.

What I've learnt from this thread and the BBC article is that the risk of first cousins having kids together doesn't just consist of higher rates of known recessive disorders like cystic fibrosis... it also makes it much more likely for the kids to have other physical and mental disabilities, which presumably have a genetic connection that isn't yet understood. So pre-screening would only have a limited effect.

Thanks, yes this was my point on the Jewish community, it's not cousin marriage but endogamy within a limited population. Clearly not something which should be banned, but genetic testing as happens for Tay Sachs is a good idea. It would save a lot of heartache for parents, hurt for children and of course money for everyone.

I'm Jewish and although my ancestors are from various different places in Eastern Europe there are certainly patterns of disease and disorders more common in the community than in the wider population.

I have had kids with someone from another part of the world and hopefully they will have some 'hybrid vigour', a phrase a seem to recall from lectures a long time ago!

not so much. Housing is much cheaper there than on the mainland so people move there, and the travel links are massively easy and quick. There may have been a historical issue but no longer. Children can easily travel to college/uni on the mainland.

It should be illegal , if found out people should be arrested and children taken away ! No culture should be above children welfare !!