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.

Interesting fact:

First-cousin marriage was banned in England for nearly 1000 years under Roman Catholic canon law (from the 5th century up to the 16th century).

However, this restriction was lifted in 1540 under King Henry VIII, allowing first-cousin marriage once again, a legal status that continues until the present day...

Definitely a role for the royals to play here - King Charles could lead the campaign to ban it once again, righting the wrong of his 14th great-granduncle.

This. I’m surprised at how much RW astroturfing is let slide on here. Their are so many very obvious plant “chats”

this place is the most RW normalish place online bar Reddit and twitter

And where are you putting all of these children who have been taken away from their loving parents?

Noone wants to adopt older children or groups of siblings or children with disabilities so let's leave them to rot in children's homes.

Most children from first cousin marriages are perfectly healthy. But being taken from their parents and abandoned to institutional care will definitely cause all sorts of lifelong trauma. Marvellous idea.

A very civilised debate in the Lords about it last January. First-cousin Marriage - Hansard - UK Parliament. The data from the Born in Bradford study shows first cousin marriages declining from 39% to 27% by 2019. As cultures interact with other communities, and women become more educated, these things do start to die out.

https://share.google/GtXkHYQ19G99aqHJm

I agree. The high risk of truly appalling damage to the children should make a ban unquestionable.

It’s illegal to beat or sexually abuse children. And yet if you want to risk giving them a life no one would want to live, sure, go right ahead.

They are paid for of course they should be tested would you buy rotten fruit? No you expect it to be perfect the sperm banks etc are providing a service

they're being so disingenuous as if reducing the risks to these children is a bad thing.

these are children who are often not living to adulthood due to severity.

Where did i say they should be banned from receiving treatment?

I said the parents should be liable for the medical costs of any inbreeding related medical issues.

If they knowingly reproduce with first and second cousins with all the known risks, why should the taxpayers foot the medical bills?

They ignored the facts and made the choice to reproduce. If their children are disabled as a result of their poor choices, they should be made to pay any medical bills. This might make them think twice.

Look at the previous example of the 6 disabled children all needing transplants. Why is this the responsibility of the tax payers? Why did they go on to have SIX disabled children? How is that fair on those poor children and the system thats forced to help them?

First and second cousin marriage were banned by canon law from the 6th century onwards, unless a papal dispensation was granted. By the time it ceased to be enforced. (either due to the Reformation or other factors), the culture of marrying close kin was long gone and never returned.

The genetic overlap of third cousins is so weak that it is irrelevant. Thus, the fact that Elizabeth II and Prince Philip were third cousins is not of consequence to any discussion about disabilities in children who are the result of successive generations of first and second cousin marriage.

Loving parents do not put their children at risk !! And obviously this needs to be done properly and in time but inbreeding needs to stop or do you think it’s fair for the kids ? The law needs to be updated and anyone not respecting it after it passes should be made a example !

As a South Asian person I completely agree with your sentiment OP. Cousin marriages/ co-habitation should be made illegal.

Good question. Why would people with views typical of those who claim to be left appear to reflexively defend such a harmful practice?

Same reasons they defend men in women’s spaces or proscribed terrorist organisations I guess.

Genuinely shocked .. I’m 50 and thought it was illegal to marry your first cousin! How on earth can anyone think this is okay??? 🤯

I simply outlined the transition from the last first cousin marriage within the royal family to the present day showing the gradual move away from consanguineous marriages.

Banning first cousin marriages is probably not realistic as people generally marry according to their religion anyway. However, I think the royals provide an easy to understand template of what to do over several generations and without stigmatizing vulnerable women and children.

I've put YABU because the issue isn't just cousins marrying.. its that its happening repeatedly over generations.
The statistics regarding just cousin marriage are not strong enough to require a law imo.. because the statistics are the same for people with lots of inheritable genetic conditions yet we would acknowledge that it would be morally wrong to prevent these people from legally marrying due to concerns the offspring would inherit the issue.
Things such as deafness, sight problems, CF, sometimes MS.. the list goes on. Yet we would think it deeply wrong to prevent two people who have genetic hearing issues from marrying wouldn't we?
So there's an element of cultural judgement here at play when it comes to cousin marriage.
Cousin marriage has been legal in the UK for a very long time.
In itself its not a big issue.
The issue is that in some ethnic minority cultures here this constantly happens throughout a family line causing issues.
This obviously needs to be addressed. But imo making cousin marriage illegal is the wrong way to go about that.
Just as banning abortion would be the wrong way to go about addressing sex selective abortions.
Because you are then stripping innocent peoples rights away to try and prevent a certain issue. This is wrong imo.
I also have my doubts whether just changing the law will achieve anything as this is something deeply culturally ingrained.
It's an issue with 'arranged' marriages and the ways of courtship in some cultures.
This is something that is addressed with education. Ideally coming from and lead by members of that ethnic group.
Otherwise the law will be irrelevant because these marriages will still be viewed as legitimate in that culture because the culture will not have changed.
The women need to be educated on the dangers to their children if they enter into cousin marriages when that has been a custom in their family.

I don't think there is any ignorance involved, the risks are widely known in the communities this happens, I have had (with respect and not instigated by me) conversations where younger people from these communities don't agree with the traditions of cousins marrying and do not want to risk their children having avoidable medical problems. According to them ,older people are less on board and see children with medical issues a gift.
I think fairly recently the government was debating the issue but I think it was dropped.

Playing devil’s advocate here, if first cousins were banned from marrying, then why should sperm and egg donation be legal? There is always a tiny chance of someone marrying their sibling/half sibling. Wasn’t there recently a story about a man who has possibly has 197 children from his sperm donations?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckgmy90z991o

Luckily the uk has a massive population so chances of this happening is small but imagine in smaller societies, this would be as bad as first cousin marriages.

I thought there was a general pre-disposition in the genetics of certain asian countries (Philippines comes to mind) to kidney issues.

I'm lefty and haven't defended the practice. I just don't believe that banning cousin marriage will actually help the issue. The issue isn't the marriage itself, it's the higher chance of offspring having genetic disorders when parents are closely related. Not to state the obvious but this doesn't require a legal marriage.

Someone posted stats earlier in the thread about rates going down in Bradford due to education. It can be done. It's a matter of finding the right way to introduce this education to the different communities effected, making sure that people know about it and that genetic testing is available.

Going all gung-ho and banning it, adding a layer of shame to peoples culture, will only increase secrecy and increase hesitancy to look for help. It just won't work and will drive communities into further withdrawing from wider society.

I don’t disagree it’s a significant problem amongst some groups but I think making it illegal won’t have much weight, many couples whom have consanguineous marriages have Islamic weddings so not legally registered in the same way. Extensive research shows education on any cultural issue before legal changes is key just look at FGM legislation. Working with communities to create generational change is more productive over time when it’s based on a relationship of trust, understanding and kindness.
In answer to your question, yes something is being done. ‘Hot spot areas’ have been issued funding for example for a close relative midwife or health visitor who works closely with families affected by genetic conditions educating not only them but the wider community. They also work with local Iman’s and mosques on educational programmes.

Well this is the main point against. Not the specific issue you posted but the fact its not just the issue its trying to tackle that a ban on cousin marriage would effect.
There's obviously no issue with two cousins in a family marrying if that's once in a blue moon. And in this day and age a married couple are not necessarily going to have children are they?
So morally you would be making something illegal that in quite a lot of cases doesn't need to be illegal at all. This is stripping peoples rights to address an issue that this probably wouldn't even address.. because the issue is culturally ingrained and the people doing this repeatedly will ignore the law anyway.
It would be equivalent of making all surgery on vaginas illegal in an effort to stop FGM. That's going to really effect a lot of other people who its not intended to effect iyswim.
I dont see why people dont understand this?
The SPECIFIC ISSUE needs to be targeted. And the specific issue is not just cousin marriage is it?
If i married my cousin it wouldn't be an issue would it. It would very slightly raise the chances of my child having a genetic issue but no more than billions of other factors that I may not even be aware of (BRCA gene anyone?) So it would clearly be deeply wrong to act like that should be illegal.

So a quick google confirms that yes kidney disease is highly prevalent in South East Asia, for various reasons, one of which is genetic pre-disposition - not cousins getting married (although I'm not saying that's a good idea) but its too simplistic to be the cause.

I had a son with my cousin. We were in a long term relationship. We had genetic counselling prior to conceiving. Son is fine. As it was a one off within the family our risk of issues was very low.

Exactly this. This is NOT the issue and blanket making cousin marriage illegal would target people like you for absolutely no reason. I can't agree with it because it removes some peoples freedoms and rights and to what end? It wont really target the communities where this is happening. And it will be extremely sad for people who just happen to fall in love with their cousin. Why should we throw those people under a bus just to feel like we are tackling a problem we wont really be tackling anyway??