Time to outlaw cousin marriages?

[mrsruffallo]

Interesting article here
Would you support it being made illegal?

Morals are personal, what one person finds abhorrent the next is just fine with. Neither of them are actually right/wrong.

Morals are manmade.

So are traditions and cultures
And marriage

Thanks thumbwitch Will have a look. As I said earlier, as soon as they realised the relationship was going somewhere they took a step back and seriously looked into it so I guess if there was anything stopping them getting married they wouldn't be. Very different situation to my other lot who were very cloak and dagger about it all and even now no one talks about it openly. Was definitely a great source of shame for their familes.

I'm still not getting this morally wrong thing. I can't imagine it because my family is very close. DD will grow up with her only male cousin (so far) as more of a brother. If she went on to marry him then yes, I would see that as a problem. But if we weren't close and my brother had gone off to live at the other end of the country and his kids were brought up there with DD never seeing them then I don't think it would bother me. I can't say for sure of course. You don't know how you'll react till it happens but I don't agree with morally wrong.

mrsruffallo "So are traditions and cultures
And marriage"

Yes? What is your point?

Really? So how many people here would welcome their sister/brothers child as their new daughter/son in law?

Is there really no right or wrong in this matter? Surely it is a case of, if not outlawed, it should be strictly discouraged and people should be educated against the practice.

Wouldn't everyone agree that this is for the best?

I'll do some digging lillyb. AFAIK it's all been straightforward but I'm over here in the UK so we may not have been kept in the loop about any difficulties they might have had.

perhaps you should also read the wikipedia page on this issue, mrsruffallo - it's very interesting how various different religions/cultures/countries deal with it. Not everyone would agree with you at all.

Yes, I think education about the risks is the key.

But, once people are fully informed of the risks, I believe it's up to consenting adults to make decisions about their private lives. The risk of a one-off cousin marriage is negligible.

Springheeled Jack - the incidence of genetic disorders in the over 35s is no where near as high as that in cousins.

The problem is that the recessive gene is not bred out when relations interbreed as so it is always there and you get two of them and whammo your kid has cystic fibrosis or is blind or deaf or has such severe neurological problems that they do not live beyond their 1st birthday and then your next child has the same thing and the next and then one doesn't but they go onto marry their cousin and that cousin also has the gene you have been touting about within your little community and their child has a neurological disease and on and on and on.

British pakistanis make up 3% of the british population yet their offspring account for 33% of the children born with genetic diseases.

Why oh why oh why would they not want to stop this bloody suffering????

mrsruffallo "Wouldn't everyone agree that this is for the best?"

Clearly not, or we wouldn't be having the discussion as nobody would be doing it.

Do I think it is a bloody stupid idea to marry your cousin and breed with them? Absolutely, but there are many things that people do for many reasons (religious/tradition/culture) that I think are bloody stupid. It isn't up to me to apply my morals to someone else.

I think it should be illegal. Imagine your two children, and in the future, their children marrying!!!

I agree with Goblinchild though, probably nothing would happen the first time. It's when it becomes acceptable, and your cousin is put forward as an obvious candidate for marriage that it would all end in disaster.

I don't know if that is realistic Morloth. There are some traditions in other countries that would be frowned upon here (in UK)or that would even be against the law.

So you would agree to a completely amoral land then?

I don't want the government (or anyone else) interfering in my sex life. I can't say that and then think it is OK that my morals are applied to someone else's sex life.

Are you OK with consenting adults being arrested for having sex with someone? Because that is what this boils down to.

As people upthread have commented, education is going to be a whole lot more effective than a law here. If you make it illegal for people to officially marry then they are simply not going to officially marry. But they will still get married according to their own cultural traditions.

However, as a previous poster also mentioned a lot of the genetic problems that extend from these arrangements are put down to superstition. If that can be changed then people would be able to make informed decisions.

I am also a great believer in evolution, I think these things will take care of themselves. I do willingly admit that this is quite cold though because evolution does not give a damn about individuals and so individual people and kids will suffer as people breed themselves out of existence.

I loathe the way the article refers to cousin marriage as a Muslim practice. It is not. Islam doesn't outlaw it but neither does it encourage it, same as normal UK law, but we wouldn't call it a British practice even though plenty of British people seem to do it. I wish they'd just call it a practice common to certain immigrant groups rather than making it sound like something recommended in Islam.

And it is not necessarily part of arraged marriage either, an arranged marriage is just that - an arranged marriage. As a Muslim who had an arranged marriage I can say that the practise of cousin marriage is totally alien to mine and not something any of us approve of.

I don't think it should be outlawed but the risks should be made known so that people can make their own decision. I don't find it immoral, but I personally don't see any pros for it, only cons.

Totally agree with Morloth - simply banning cousin marriage seems like the quick fix solution but it isn't. Actually putting time and effort in to education that changes people's minds is what will change behaviour.

And if we are going to head down that route then the natural extension is to insist on genetic testing of everyone before they have sex with each other.

Once you start dictating who can sleep with/breed with who, there is no reason to stop. Each step is small and sensible and makes sense in itself.

Gattica anyone?

"I couldn't find any studies suggesting overly high levels of genetic disablity in India, pakistand and KSA."

But you are not suggesting the figures quoted here are wrong?

"Why oh why oh why would they not want to stop this bloody suffering????"

I do agree with Madame C here.

Goblinchild seems to have by far the most experience and I would trust her view that education is the way ahead.

This view, that morals are manmade: it's a disingenuous point. We can't just say, well morals are manmade so polygamy is ok, because it's just one person's morals against another, or adultery is ok, because it's just a wife's moral viewpoint against her husband's, and so on.
It's a sort of empty point really.

this is quite interesting too:
Acta Pædiatrica
Volume 82 Issue s391, Pages 17 - 26
Published Online: 21 Jan 2008

Early child health in Lahore, Pakistan: II. Inbreeding
ABSTRACT
The prevalence of consanguineous marriages was studied in 940 families belonging to four different socio-economic groups in and around Lahore, Pakistan. The births occurring in these families from September 1984 to March 1987 were also investigated for birth defects. The overall prevalence of consanguineous marriages was 46%. The first cousin marriages were most common (67%), followed by the marriages between second cousins, 19%. The prevalence of consanguineous marriages was clearly associated with the socio-economic status of the study groups; 50% of the marriages was related in the periurban slum, 49% in the village, 44% in the urban slum and 31% in the upper middle class. The birth defects were also more prevalent in the poorer areas, being highest in the periurban slum (17.7%) followed by the urban slum (15.6%) and then the village (14.8%) and lowest in the upper middle class (12.3%). Although, the frequency of both consanguinity and birth defects were related with the socio-economic levels of the study groups, there was no association between inbreeding and birth defects. Perhaps, deleterious recessive genes for birth defects have been "bred out", because of continuous inbreeding over generations in this population. There was a significant predilection of major birth defects in boys without clear sex linkage. The conclusion is that the rate of consanguineous marriages was high, especially in the poorer areas, but the relationship between consanguineous marriages and birth defects was little or none. However, other child health indicators may be affected by consanguineous marriages.

(my highlighting)

Riven, when you get on the pregnancy conveyor belt older women are treated differently in terms of additional screening and checks. Plus I would guess most younger women know that delaying childbirth has associated risks. Do you not think people have the right to know about the risks of inbreeding? Or are you suggesting we keep quiet about any risks to unborn children life choices may have as the government has no right to poke its nose in. If I remember correctly at my booking in appointment the midwife does ask if we are related. Your point about morality being man made well, so what so is modern medicine and the world is a better place for it.

"there was no association between inbreeding and birth defects"

You only have to look at pedigree dogs to see that is isn't true.

thumbwitch, have you considered the level of medical intervention and support available in this country?
If you die of an inherited illness before you reach marriageable age, or because of other complications linked to a pre-existing condition, you are not going to pass on that genetic abnormality.
There isn't an easy answer, and I am by no means an expert. But if the first response is to deny the possibility of a problem, then I doubt that change will happen in my lifetime.