is incest neccessarily always bad?... sorry this is sensitive.

[namechanging2008]

been told today that some very close family members are involved in a relationship.

i started off thinking my god this is so wrong, but feel they talked me round.

sorry for namechange, im totally at sea now.

they are very closely related, same age, both consensual, both determined their love will be enough, they know it means they cant have children.

i cant believe it. they want my support.

i dont know what to do.

i want to tell them its ok, but is it?

It's interesting that most people would make a distinction between siblings that have been raised together and those who haven't. Similarly, there is the distinction between step parents and step children being able to marry legally. The stipulation being that both are over 21, and the step child could not be 'of the family' whilst under 18.

It could be that with the advance in genetics, the moral objection as far as siblings reproducing could be managed, or at least managed from a scientific stance.

So, what may be left is the last taboo.

I hope it went OK OP.

ilovemydogetc, i think maybe the distinction comes from a (probably very accurate) feeling that when people have previously related to each other in 'family' terms, moving on from there to a couple-relationship is far less likely to be free of some sort of abuse of power.

My concern is towards the vasectomy. I think this would be a big mistake.

There is no guarentee that any relationship will last, but the added stress here will put exceptional pressure on their relationship. There may be higher odds that their relationship will not be a lasting one.

For all concerned it would be silly to have a permanent form of birth control.

In a few years, one of them may wany children. The other may not. Regardless that they know they can't/shouldn't, the feelings to have children can be very powerful & overriding. You only have to search the forums here to see that.

If if came to it & they seperated, he wanted to start a family & he couldn't, I think this would damage the sibling relationship as he would start to resent her for it. Rightly or wrongly!

IMO, they need to be careful what they do & would not advocate either being permanently sterilized!

& I would not advocate

No, no, no, no. This is probably illegal as well as having a strong ick factor. Taking into account the fact that there has been an up and down history in the family, I'd suspect that one of the twins is being victimised by the other in some way even if it all feels right for them -- taking advantage of someone's need for love and turning it into a sexual relationship. They need counseling and some sort of thorough psychological investigation.

OP, I have been reading this thread with interest, and just wanted to say how much I admire you. Your siblings are very lucky to have such a sensitive, loving and thoughtful sister, and if you're on the market for any more, I would happily adopt you as my sister!

The announcement must have come as an enormous shock to you, and it's not something that is going to make any sense to you at first, not for a long time, so you should give yourself plenty of time to think about it, and make sure your siblings know that you will need this time to absorb the shock and get used to the idea.

Although it is illegal in the eyes of the law, and unacceptable in most people's eyes, no-one can make up your mind as to whether this relationship is right or wrong. Only you can know whether or not you are able to adjust to the situation and support your siblings' relationship.

I think that most people's reactions are based on their own experiences, and to most people (you included, I am sure), the idea of having sex with their brother repulses them. However, very few, if any, of us can know what it is like to grow up separately from one's twin, and then meet them at a later stage in life when both are ready for an adult relationship.

I hope that one day you may be able to use your experience of this highly unusual situation to help others.

Sending you lots of love and strength, and, above all, admiration and respect.

It seems to me that a lot of the arguments against incest... 'it's abusive'... 'it's illegal'.... 'it's unnatural'... 'it's because of an illness'... 'it's abusive'... 'it stops you having children'... are all things that were said about homosexual relationships in decades and centuries gone by. I can't think of any real reason why incest is any worse, only the possibility of genetic problems with offspring. But surely if that was SO bad, it would mean that anyone with any kind of bad gene is immoral or irresponsible for having children?

I think the issue of them seperating is the biggest one, but is it so different to having a relationship with your best friend? It's just a slightly more extreme.

They'll have agonised over this, but clearly this agony is less than the agony they had before. Just make sure you're all aroud for each other, and be there for them, together ot apart.

coming this late, this has probably already been answered: it is illegal in this country, and many other european countries, so they'd best get legal advise asap!!

Doha

Could Doha please contact me regarding GSA topic above.

happyhomely at hotmail dot com

Need help reassurance ...

I don't think there is anything wrong with it.

I also don't think there is anything wrong with them having children. It seems such a double standard in our society as we would never take this approach to any other genetic disorder.

But I realise I'm probably a lone voice in the wilderness on this one.

I'm sure the same argument has been used about same-sex parents, mixed-race parents etc...the reason it's a problem for the children is because of society's reaction. Doesn't mean it is intrinsically wrong.

Inbreeding wouldn't happen really quickly for the very reason that we don't want to have sex with our immediate family that we have grown up with (that goes for me too). However, the scenario where two people haven't grown up together, meet as adults and are sexually attracted to each other is becoming more common and I think we have to revisit the basic reasons for our opposition to such relationships.

If it is on the grounds of preventing the perpetuation of genetic disorders then that is completely out of kilter with our approach to other disorders and disabilities. The implict assumption is that 'inbreeding' is bad...but why? Because there is a higher likelihood of genetic disorders being passed on. Can you imagine telling someone carrying the CF gene that they could only marry and have kids with someone who didn't carry the CF gene?

If it is because society is uncomfortable with the idea of siblings having a sexual relationship, then that's society's problem. I couldn't care less who people have sex with so long as it's consensual.

The same type of bigotry that is directed towards same sex parents and mixed race parents would be directed towards the children of co-sanguinous parents because people are uncomfortable with the relationship in the first place. If society accepted these relationships then why would it mess with their kids' heads? It wouldn't be a problem.

Maybe I just read a bit too much Virginia Andrews as a teenager.

Perhaps I am wrong on it just being society. We'll never know though will we. The point is it is happening here and now and it is a real issue for people.

As to me being offensive, I think many people would find it more offensive to dictate that we must prevent children with genetic disorders from being born.

And what exactly are you getting at when you say it 'sounds like you've done a lot of thinking about this - more than Virginia Andrews maybe'? That sounds more than a little snide. FWIW I recently attended a seminar on medical law and ethics and it was a topic for debate, so yes, it has been quite topical in my life recently.