First cousin marriage

[Danceswithwhippets]

I don’t think I know (family or wider) anyone in a first cousin marriage.
I listened to this interesting podcast.
There is quite an ick factor about it -the podcaster (a “data journalist” -I didn’t know there was such a thing but I think we need them!) refers to it as a taboo. I suppose that maybe correct, if you do regard it as a part of the incest taboo.
She suggests the ick factor may be a reflection of racism, as first cousin marriage is now unusual in western societies.
What I find interesting is that although in western societies it’s largely frowned upon, few western countries legally prohibit it or restrict it.
Listen to what she says is the genetic evidence about risk -she seems to consider, for first cousin marriages, a doubling of risk of a major genetic problem from 3 to 4% (ie to 6 to 8%) is not great. I wouldn’t agree with that.
Any geneticists, or for that matter any first cousin marriages out there?

It's on BBC Sounds
www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0ch1vn3#xtor=CS8-1000-%5BPromo_Box%5D-%5BNews_Promo%5D-%5BNews_Promo%5D-%5BPS_SOUNDS~N~p0ch1vn3~P_AmINormalCousinMarriage_SEG_PNC%5D

It repeat generations of people marrying cousins, not just first cousins, that is a problem.

This is been known for decades.

You want to have children with someone who has as diverse genes from you as possible.

It gives me the ick as we are brought up to treat our first cousins like brothers and sisters. However in some cultures you know from a young age you’ll marry your cousin.

it is definitely a huge issue in Birmingham and Bradford putting pressure on the health services. When I was in hospital with my youngest in Birmingham a woman had her 7th!!!! Child with LD. she explained they had told her it was because her husband was her first cousin. She said she had no way of stopping getting pregnant. No access to contraception. The Consultant explained she had a paper thin uterus due to the multiple c-sections and had offered her the option of being sterilised but she refused as there was pressure to produce a healthy child. Although in her head she said she had to take what God rewarded her with.

really an eye opening interaction for me. I think of her often.

I know a couple who are first cousins, not from an ethnic minority, both white British and from "middle class" backgrounds. They have 3 adult children who are all fine. I agree the risk of defects really becomes a problem when it's multiple generations inter-marrying. But I also really agree with pp who said it's no more "wrong" than people with various conditions reproducing. If you posted on here to say "anyone with autism shouldn't be allowed to have children as there's a risk of passing it on" you'd be, quite rightly, torn to shreds. I wouldn't marry my own cousins as it just feels a bit weird, but I think that probably depends how close you were to your cousins growing up

I personally couldn't find any of my cousins attractive, any more than I could find my brother attractive! I'm not sure why. A natural instinct?

@Passmethewhat yep

There are cousin - though not first cousin - marriages in my extended family.

I noticed my older siblings when they were single were suddenly not interested if someone revealed a blood link to them. I was the same especially after learning some relations were cousins on both my paternal and maternal side.

I really fucked up my explanation lol. It should read.

I'll try again.

Mum and Dad
A + A
A + B
A + A
B + A
B + B

I think that's right?

It actually happened with my dd. One of her friends had met some guy at the weekend and was showing my dd his photo on Monday morning. Dd was initially 'oh he's cute!' but THANK GOODNESS recognised him after a second look as being her second cousin (my first cousin's son)! That really gave her the ick.

She would have rarely met this guy as we simply don't mix much with that family but she had met him once at my grandmother's funeral (their great grandmother).

I’m not sure what you aren’t grasping or if you’re being disingenuous. There is no law - thank the nonexistent gods - which says that two people in a relationship who want to have children have to be married in a ceremony which is legally recognised in the UK. Most of the couples - who tend to be overwhelmingly more religious and culturally traditional - who practice first cousin marriage already disregard legal marriage, because to them, the religious ceremony is the only true or valid one - in which what they were doing is not illegal or wrong. So how would introducing a UK law which says they can’t have a legal marriage change anything? They didn’t want one in the first place. Do we then take the argument to its logical end and say that only people who are legally married can have children?

Hence, far better to promote grassroots education, screening and genetic counselling, which has worked very well among Orthodox Jews, where simply making it illegal for Orthodox Jews to marry within their tiny and therefore genetically less diverse community, would never have.

But I also really agree with pp who said it's no more "wrong" than people with various conditions reproducing. If you posted on here to say "anyone with autism shouldn't be allowed to have children as there's a risk of passing it on" you'd be, quite rightly, torn to shreds

I disagree. As per my post above the genetics are different.

We tend to be attracted to people who look like us, apparently. I often notice that couples have similar facial structure and sometimes have mistaken spouses for siblings!

So that could be why cousins who haven't grown up together fall for one another.

As far as I'm aware, they haven't isolated a gene which causes autism?

I had a friend who had multiple miscarriages and they went for genetic testing after multiple losses. Whatever gene they were both carrying was resulting in foetuses with severe abnormalities which resulted in the foetus dying very early on.

I know that she was devastated but I lost contact with her several years ago. I can't recall the ins and outs, or indeed whether she gave me the ins and outs, but she was broken at the time. It was devastating for her.

We had met on a website similar to this one and the cruelty of some posters there was criminal. One particular nasty cow referred to her as barren. She was heartbroken.

I recall our lecturer asking us what we thought would be the best predictor of who you 'married/partnered up with'. We were psychology students so not entirely thick (arguably we were in fact thick!) but we came up with all sorts of things such as wealth, similar interests, intelligence, good looks, similar social circle, similar politics, similar social class, similar education, health etc. etc. etc. Not one of us got it right and there were about 120 of us idiots in that lecture.

Care to guess what it was?

Attractiveness, as in if a large sample scored you each on a scale if 1-10 you’d tend to pair off with someone at a similar level?

Whether you both happened to be in the same pub at the same time, and were reasonably drunk?

Nope. It was rather alarming to discover what it was in fact because we all thought that we would never follow a typical pattern. Yet........... we did.

You're almost there!

Which college you attended?

A reputable one but I'm not willing to share the name of it.

It's not something I could ever comprehend doing. Dh to be and I had a baby with severe abnormalities and we are not in any way related I can't imagine what it would be like having a baby with a very close relative

I'm so sorry to hear that. It must have been devastating. x

Sorry, that wasn’t a poorly written request, I was wondering if the key factor was where you studied.

Lol no, but you're also on the right track!

To put you all out of your misery, the biggest single factor in determining who you will date/marry/procreate with is the simplest of all..............

Drum roll please?

It is geographical proximity. 😍

Oh I know this...just some posters seem to think differently.