Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

1st cousin marriage

604 replies

Wiseplumnet · Yesterday 16:00

AIBU to ask your opinion on 1st cousin marriage?.I have read that the government is looking to ban it. I know it is more prevelent ( but declining) in the UK among people of Asian origin. I am not coming from a judgemental or racist angle. I am just interested to know how mum'snetters of all ethnicities feel about marriage between 1st cousin's. I know it used to be more common in the west at one time, apart from keeping money/property in families, people travelled less widely, so there was less choice of marriage partners.I worked with a girl ( White British) who was in a secret relationship with her 1st cousin and they are very reluctant to tell their family, so there seems to be a cultural taboo in 1st cousins being romantically involved.Genetic factors resulting in disabilities (statistically twice as many as in unrelated parents) is sometimes given as a reason for banning cousin marriage, however we have genetic screening now, and disabilities aren't always serious.As so many babies died in infancy before we had vaccines, better health care etc , it was probably difficult to differentiate whether the close relationship between parents was the cause of any disabilities their children . Speaking for myself,I can't imagine wanting to marry any of the cousins I was brought up with as they seem more like brothers to me, but I could understand why someone may be attracted to a 1st cousin who they first met as adults. Or does it give you the instant 'Yuk' ? Also is banning 1st cousin marriage the same as banning 1st cousin sexual relationships and children, or would that become illegal? Maybe there's no need for a legal ban as the tradition will just die out over time

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
IsAStart · Yesterday 18:39

Grizzlylemming · Yesterday 18:22

Name change for this as it is quite outing . But I worked for a while in a clinic for people with rare inherited diseases . A significant majority of the people attending had parents who were first cousins . The disorders the children had were very significant and ranged from people who had special diets their whole lives and could die of a simple infection , to kids who died within a few months of birth due to disorders incompatible with life . One family had 3 children who died one after the other . A lot of us are carriers for rare diseases and we are not aware of it and it never affects us. The problem is when you marry within your own family there is a much more significant risk you will marry another carrier and end up with a fully affected child. So I can understand why it would be banned . People need to be aware of the risks .

Your role must be really interesting.

Would the genetic risk of disorders also increase where two brothers have married two sisters, or twins have married twins?

Isthismykarma · Yesterday 18:40

My family member is a social worker in Bradford and doesn’t think it should be banned as it will still happen but under the radar, so be much worse for the women.

Wiseplumnet · Yesterday 18:40

TerracottaWorrier · Yesterday 17:13

I'm not sure I'd characterise anyone in Mansfield Park as happy, and he didn't seem to be wildly excited to marry Fanny in my reading.

I shouldn't think anyone would have been 'wildly excited' to marry Fanny Price!

OP posts:
Bringemout · Yesterday 18:42

ohdelay · Yesterday 18:30

Encouraging family to look at each other sexually never ends well for women in particular. If the cousins are sniffing about so are the uncles.

There was an article by matthew syed in the times about reseacrh from biobank uk pointing to a much higher rate of incest births (thats brothers and fathers) in the pakistani population than the general population

I remember a story where a woman was dying of cancer and she finally told her husband that her father had been raping her for decades, some of their children were actually her dads kids. My heart broke for her, her husband went to the police with it. A lot of families would have hushed that up so I’m not that surprised.

https://www.thetimes.com/comment/columnists/article/silence-on-cousin-marriage-is-the-unspeakable-face-of-liberalism-870z5rpmf

Verifying Device

https://www.thetimes.com/comment/columnists/article/silence-on-cousin-marriage-is-the-unspeakable-face-of-liberalism-870z5rpmf

Weeellokthen · Yesterday 18:44

Huxon · Yesterday 16:36

Shouldn't be banned at all. We allow LGBT marriages. 2 consenting adults. The risk for a one-off one is minimal. We don't tell people who have genetic issues to not reproduce do well. If someone has Huntington's should we ban them from having kids?

😮

PrettyPickle · Yesterday 18:45

Interesting question/discussion

Historically, cousin marriage was completely normal in the UK and Europe You’re right: when people lived in small geographic circles, had limited mobility, and inheritance mattered, cousin marriage was a practical choice. Victorian Britain was full of it, even Charles Darwin married his first cousin Emma Wedgwood. It wasn’t seen as “taboo”; it was seen as local availability.

The modern UK taboo is cultural, not biological. Most Brits today react with a “yuk” because cousins are socially treated like siblings. The thought of marrying my male cousins makes me shudder. That’s not universal, in cultures where cousins are part of a wider clan rather than a nuclear family, the emotional framing is different. So the instinctive reaction is learned, not biological.

I think the genetic risk is real but not catastrophic. This is the part that gets weaponised politically, so it’s worth being precise. Children of unrelated parents have a baseline risk of congenital issues of about 2–3% whereas children of first cousins have roughly 4–6%. (So yes, double, but double a small number.)
The real issue isn’t one cousin marriage, it’s repeated cousin marriages within the same extended family over generations, which can concentrate recessive conditions.

That’s why some communities have higher rates of certain disorders: not because cousin marriage is inherently disastrous, but because it’s repeated within a closed gene pool. With modern genetic screening, the risk can be assessed very accurately.

If the UK banned cousin marriage, and there is no serious talk about this that I can find, its raised by certain political people but not really on the agenda. The idea of banning first‑cousin marriage in the UK tends to pop up from Individual MPs making comments (usually Conservative backbenchers), think‑tank reports about congenital disorders in certain communities, newspaper opinion pieces and Local authority health reviews in areas with high rates of consanguineous marriage. But crucially, no UK government has ever formally proposed legislation to ban cousin marriage. Not Labour, not Conservative, not coalition, not anyone.

It’s talk, not policy. But f they did ban it, how would it look? Would sex between cousins be illegal? Would having children be illegal? Would it criminalise relationships or just block marriage certificates?

Most proposed bans globally only restrict marriage, not relationships. But it’s messy, and it would disproportionately affect certain communities, which is why it becomes politically charged.

Realistically, the UK is extremely unlikely to ban it. It’s legal across most of Europe, North America, and the Commonwealth. The trend is simply that the practice declines naturally as mobility increases.

Instead of banning cousin marriage, the UK focuses on genetic counselling, community health education, screening for recessive disorders. This is the same approach used for Tay‑Sachs in Ashkenazi Jewish communities, Thalassaemia in Mediterranean communities, Sickle cell in African and Caribbean communities. It’s evidence‑based and non‑punitive.

Currently if two adults aren’t coerced, understand the genetic risks and have access to screening…then the UK state doesn’t have a strong reason to intervene.

It’s not a religious issue, not a moral issue, and not a public‑health emergency. It’s a cultural discomfort that society is gradually ageing out of.

From a factual standpoint: It’s allowed, it’s low‑risk with screening, and it’s fading naturally without needing a ban.

But having said all of that, if one of my sisters kids wanted to marry one of mine, Yuk would be my first response but I would get my head around it (I hope).

Ketzele · Yesterday 18:45

It's a tricky one. I don't feel icky about it - I have plenty of cousins I've never met, and to marry one of them really wouldn't be like marrying a sibling. I do have a close relative who married a cousin.

The risks are low as a one-off, but accumulate rapidly within tight communities. My ex came from a small island where there were about 20 families who intermarried frequently over the centuries. I can't say for sure it's related, but the rate of psychosis in that family was quite something.

But is it a good idea to ban it? I think the bar for that has to be higher than, is this generally a bad idea? (I feel the same about halal, kosher and religious circumcision, so am aware Im in a minority round here.) So I think this has to be thought through very carefully, and with the communities concerned.

ElizaMulvil · Yesterday 18:45

Pistachiocake · Yesterday 17:45

Yes, it was allowed in the past (but so was child marriage); they didn't know then what we know now. Even dog breeders try not to have close relatives mating.
What's more worrying than cousin marriage is how many people might be dating someone related to them, as a lot of people don't even know their father these days-and apparently we're more likely to be attracted to someone who is a relative, but that we don't know is a relative-look up GSA. Some people have found their boyfriend is a step-sibling, because their mum never knew who the father was, and they randomly find out.

And, several States in the US still have no minimum age for marriage.

Another2Cats · Yesterday 18:45

MellowSubmarine · Yesterday 16:39

We don’t ban people with genetic illnesses from having children, even something extremely severe like huntingdon’s with a 50% chance of your child having it and a 100% fatality rate. ETA - and actually the comparison would be banning someone with Huntingdon’s from even getting married.
So I find the “we must ban it for the children” argument disingenuous tbh.

Edited

"...even something extremely severe like huntingdon’s"

If you're referring to Huntington's disease then this is normally an adult onset disease with symptoms appearing in the 30s or later.

By this age, people will already have married and/or had children.

It is only in the last 30 years that there has been a genetic test to determine if a child has inherited the gene.

I really do wonder how many (I would suspect very few indeed) children who were told that they had inherited this gene from one of their parents would then want to go on and have children of their own anyway after seeing what becomes of their parent and what will happen to them in the future.

In contrast, where cousin marriage is ingrained within a culture, a person is totally aware that they are marrying their cousin. They will also likely be aware of families that have suffered from the results of this within their own community.

Yet, there is still the pressure to undertake such a marriage.

renovationchoas · Yesterday 18:47

@Isthismykarma

It would be quite easy to check though, for a legal marriage, as you have to give notice to registry offices and they could check via documentation and require a blood test if there was no adequate verification available. You could also require evidence that spouses are not cousins before allowing a spousal visa. Blood tests are quite conclusive and are very cheap, certainly a lot cheaper than treating certain conditions. We already have a legal
age for marriage and a requirement that people are not more closely related - you cannot marry an uncle, so first cousins would not be that hard. I think it is only fear of racism accusations that is preventing anything from being done - in Bradford, the rate of child disability is extremely high because repeated cousin marriage from one area of Pakistan is practiced

Bringemout · Yesterday 18:47

One of the reasons that it was banned in a Scandinavian country was to disrupt criminal gangs connected by family.

The grooming gangs was an interesting one, many grouos include family members operating together, fathers, cousins, brothers, everyone knew no-one would dob them in.

renovationchoas · Yesterday 18:48

Aside from medical reasons, first cousin marriage is anti-integration and is a way to oppress women by keeping them within the control of a family

Huxon · Yesterday 18:48

If someone has Huntingdons would you ban them from having children?

Also as we say to the pro-lifers "don't like an abortion don't have one." Can't we say "don't cousin marriages don't get married to your cousin"

Grizzlylemming · Yesterday 18:50

IsAStart · Yesterday 18:39

Your role must be really interesting.

Would the genetic risk of disorders also increase where two brothers have married two sisters, or twins have married twins?

Yes it would but I’ve never seen that happen ever . First cousins seems to be the bare minimum of what is acceptable. People do not marry their brothers and sisters . Also plenty of people marry their cousins and never have any issues . A lot of these disorders there is a 1/4 chance of your child having it if both parents are carriers . Therefore there is a 3/4 chance the couple will have a child who is unaffected . Some couples can be lucky and not have any affected children and never even know about it . Others could have all their children affected. It’s a role of the dice .

AndImVictoriaMalcolm · Yesterday 18:50

It’s a really bad idea from a genetic standpoint, especially if it’s repeated through the generations. Look at many of the royal families in history. Portraits portrayed royalty and aristocracy in the best light possible and even the artists could only do so much.

From a social or moral standpoint, I personally would find it icky and I’m sure my cousins feel the same way about the idea of marrying me.

Shedsqueek · Yesterday 18:50

If it is legal then it is legal. Not that common though I dont believe
Probably should be "illegal" imo in this day and age.

ohdelay · Yesterday 18:51

Bringemout · Yesterday 18:42

There was an article by matthew syed in the times about reseacrh from biobank uk pointing to a much higher rate of incest births (thats brothers and fathers) in the pakistani population than the general population

I remember a story where a woman was dying of cancer and she finally told her husband that her father had been raping her for decades, some of their children were actually her dads kids. My heart broke for her, her husband went to the police with it. A lot of families would have hushed that up so I’m not that surprised.

https://www.thetimes.com/comment/columnists/article/silence-on-cousin-marriage-is-the-unspeakable-face-of-liberalism-870z5rpmf

I had a friend at uni who would tell me horror stories about noncey uncles and being touched throughout her childhood. They thought it was normal as their lines were so blurred. It makes homes unsafe for female children.

4andnotcounting · Yesterday 18:52

I’m not married to a cousin, (but was a forced marriage-)
when I was younger the trend was first cousin marriages to keep family wealth in .

Now the tables have turned as people are now educating their kids so now they are the bigger earners.
first cousin marriages are now less common, but I am still seeing a trend of emotionally blackmailing/ forcing marriage to people from back home. I’ve seen a rise of this happen more with boys than girls . (reverse of before) This is because the boys are now educated and earning well, so the parents of the boys want to keep “control”of that money by making them marry a girl they don’t want , so she has no influence on him.

(I’m Asian background Kashmiri )

Yes first cousin marriages should definitely be banned.

BananaPeels · Yesterday 18:53

Banned 100%. We know the genetic issues that come from it and regardless it is barf! I have a cousin marriage a few generations back on my family and we all feel really uncomfortable about it. I see first cousins on the same way as siblings , just no!

JustSawJohnny · Yesterday 18:53

Weird and genetically risky.

I'd be happy to see it legally banned.

Weeellokthen · Yesterday 18:54

Ablondiebutagoody · Yesterday 16:48

Have you seen Deliverance?

Oh great!!! Now I have the dualing banjo's as an earworm.
Thanks a lot 😱

81Claire81 · Yesterday 18:55

The amount of people on here where it isn't an 'ick' and they only think it should be banned because of health conditions, it's quite alarming.

Another2Cats · Yesterday 18:55

ElizaMulvil · Yesterday 18:45

And, several States in the US still have no minimum age for marriage.

There are three states that applies to.

In California people under 18 can get married but at least one parent must agree and a judge must approve the marriage after a formal court hearing.

In Mississippi boys under 17 and girls under 15 can get married but at least one parent must agree and a judge must approve the marriage after a formal court hearing.

In New Mexico a person under 16 can marry with an order from the Family Court.

BananaPeels · Yesterday 18:57

@PrettyPickleyou ask how a ban would look- you treat cousins the same as siblings. Literally enforcement is treated exactly the same.

Mindthenicedeadpeople · Yesterday 18:57

81Claire81 · Yesterday 18:55

The amount of people on here where it isn't an 'ick' and they only think it should be banned because of health conditions, it's quite alarming.

It’s really not, it just doesn’t aline with your viewpoint.