Yes, but we know they won’t because it would be difficult, possibly violent and lose them votes.
[removed]
Yeah, or perhaps block first cousin offspring from free NHS treatment…
Well it would stop some communities breeding themselves into Sterile Imbecility faster than the Spanish Hapsburgs so you know it might be an idea to consider.
Consanguineous marriage, which in certain communities has led to inbreeding depression. Even in generous studies it doubles or triples the risk of congenital abnormalities. First cousin marriages are the cause of 30% of genetic disorders.
20-40% of child deaths are associated with this practice.
> It warns that, according to research, focusing on cousin marriage in this way stigmatises certain communities, undermines trust in medical services and causes couples to disengage from clinical support.
Don’t care. It should be stigmatised. Not only for the child’s health but also the fact the NHS and the SEND and DWP are paying insane amounts of money for something that never should have happened.
You could ban it but we all know certain groups would ignore the ban
[removed]
Yes clearly it should be banned as the risks are known and evidence proves the harm that is caused to the children.
Children born in marriages between first cousins have double the risk of congenital anomalies, a new UK study has found.1
Researchers followed 13 776 pregnancies in Bradford and found that 6.1% of children born to first cousins had congenital anomalies and that 98% of these children were born to people of Pakistani origin. This compared with a 2.4% risk of congenital anomalies in non-consanguineous marriages in the study (multivariate relative risk 2.2 (95% confidence interval 1.7 to 2.9) and a background risk of 1.7% in the UK population. The researchers found that the risk was unchanged when they controlled for socioeconomic status.
No because if it is banned, the danger is that the immigrant cultures that still do practice this regularly will just shift to non legally sanctioned marriages that will provide no protections for women if they do want or need to seek a divorce. So something also needs to be put into place that these fake cousin marriages are treated the same as legal marriages in the case of divorce.
Absolutely. Look how messed up the off springs are. One is even in the Epstein files.
Yes, and combined with a public awareness campaign about the dangers of it so that people in first cousin marriages take suitable contraceptive precautions.
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
Not the marriage I care about, it’s just a peice of paper at the end of the day. But if a child has a genetic illness and the parents are found to be cousins they should be going to jail for causing it, in the same way you would if they were siblings.
[removed]
Ban it. I’ve seen multiple cases of ‘the prettiest girl in the family is forced to marry her richest cousin’
The rich male cousin basically doesn’t look beyond the attendees of last Sundays dinner to find a mate. He is usually a spoiled mummy’s boy.
The aunties aren’t much better, often calling dibs on a girl for her son, when the poor girl is only a year into puberty.
It’s despicable.
This should not even be a debate just read the below facts:
Over the last five years, a single NHS trust has spent £3.6 million treating the genetic defects of children born from related parents
Data from Born in Bradford (BiB) from 2023 showed that in three inner-city wards, 46% of mothers from the Pakistani community were married to a first or second cousin. Cousin marriage has been cited as the cause of 53% of all South Asian infant deaths from genetic disorders in the city.
There is not yet data for how many cousin marriages there are in Birmingham but studies suggest that 20% of infant deaths in the city are the result of genetic complications from birth, the risk of which is doubled by having parents who are related.
And how is it defended?
Independent MP Iqbal Mohamed defended the practice in the House of Commons. He argued that the Government should not outlaw cousin marriage and said that rather than “stigmatising” it, related couples who wish to have children should be given advanced genetic screenings. Mohamed also said that the practice can “help build family bonds”.
I guess it’s up to us the tax payer to help build those family bonds. Ban it and ban it now.
[removed]
Yes. How they would actually stop it happening, though, I don’t know.
I don’t get why we can’t ban it without any of the racist comments
It should always be mentioned on this topic that first cousin marriage was not uncommon and not remotely frowned upon in the UK, at least until mid 20c, H G Wells and Charles Darwin married their first cousins for example.
That’s not really a reason not to ban it today but anybody claiming it’s somehow not part of our culture is talking bollocks. It’s actually deeply rooted in our culture as Protestant churches specifically tend to allow it as a point of opposition to Catholicism, as they argue it’s not prohibited in scripture.
In a vacuum there’s actually not much more risk of genetic conditions in children born of first cousins than those of unrelated individuals. The problem is more that certain communities are far more likely to practice it than others, and practice it over several generations of the same family.
If it was just the odd relationship it wouldn’t really be an issue, but it isn’t.
The only real issue with doing it is what happens with existing marriages. You can’t really ban married couples from having children or retroactively make their marriages illegal.
Do I think it’s highly inadvisable to have sexual relations with your own relatives, even if everyone participasting is onboard with it? Yes.
Do I think that involving the police and social services in cases where all parties were above the age of consent and nobody is alleging they were under duress at the time is in *anybody’s* best interests? No.
It shouldn’t even be up for discussion. It should definitely be banned.
It’s one way for controlling families to keep their money in the same family. It traps vulnerable people into relationships built on business deals. It raises risks of serious conditions. There’s no good reason for it.
27 comments
[removed]
Yes, but we know they won’t because it would be difficult, possibly violent and lose them votes.
[removed]
Yeah, or perhaps block first cousin offspring from free NHS treatment…
Well it would stop some communities breeding themselves into Sterile Imbecility faster than the Spanish Hapsburgs so you know it might be an idea to consider.
[Charles II of Spain – Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_II_of_Spain)
Consanguineous marriage, which in certain communities has led to inbreeding depression. Even in generous studies it doubles or triples the risk of congenital abnormalities. First cousin marriages are the cause of 30% of genetic disorders.
20-40% of child deaths are associated with this practice.
> It warns that, according to research, focusing on cousin marriage in this way stigmatises certain communities, undermines trust in medical services and causes couples to disengage from clinical support.
Don’t care. It should be stigmatised. Not only for the child’s health but also the fact the NHS and the SEND and DWP are paying insane amounts of money for something that never should have happened.
You could ban it but we all know certain groups would ignore the ban
[removed]
Yes clearly it should be banned as the risks are known and evidence proves the harm that is caused to the children.
Children born in marriages between first cousins have double the risk of congenital anomalies, a new UK study has found.1
Researchers followed 13 776 pregnancies in Bradford and found that 6.1% of children born to first cousins had congenital anomalies and that 98% of these children were born to people of Pakistani origin. This compared with a 2.4% risk of congenital anomalies in non-consanguineous marriages in the study (multivariate relative risk 2.2 (95% confidence interval 1.7 to 2.9) and a background risk of 1.7% in the UK population. The researchers found that the risk was unchanged when they controlled for socioeconomic status.
https://www.bmj.com/content/347/bmj.f4374.full
Yes, but also no.
Yes because come on, it’s obvious.
No because if it is banned, the danger is that the immigrant cultures that still do practice this regularly will just shift to non legally sanctioned marriages that will provide no protections for women if they do want or need to seek a divorce. So something also needs to be put into place that these fake cousin marriages are treated the same as legal marriages in the case of divorce.
Absolutely. Look how messed up the off springs are. One is even in the Epstein files.
Yes, and combined with a public awareness campaign about the dangers of it so that people in first cousin marriages take suitable contraceptive precautions.
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
Not the marriage I care about, it’s just a peice of paper at the end of the day. But if a child has a genetic illness and the parents are found to be cousins they should be going to jail for causing it, in the same way you would if they were siblings.
[removed]
Ban it. I’ve seen multiple cases of ‘the prettiest girl in the family is forced to marry her richest cousin’
The rich male cousin basically doesn’t look beyond the attendees of last Sundays dinner to find a mate. He is usually a spoiled mummy’s boy.
The aunties aren’t much better, often calling dibs on a girl for her son, when the poor girl is only a year into puberty.
It’s despicable.
This should not even be a debate just read the below facts:
Over the last five years, a single NHS trust has spent £3.6 million treating the genetic defects of children born from related parents
Data from Born in Bradford (BiB) from 2023 showed that in three inner-city wards, 46% of mothers from the Pakistani community were married to a first or second cousin. Cousin marriage has been cited as the cause of 53% of all South Asian infant deaths from genetic disorders in the city.
There is not yet data for how many cousin marriages there are in Birmingham but studies suggest that 20% of infant deaths in the city are the result of genetic complications from birth, the risk of which is doubled by having parents who are related.
And how is it defended?
Independent MP Iqbal Mohamed defended the practice in the House of Commons. He argued that the Government should not outlaw cousin marriage and said that rather than “stigmatising” it, related couples who wish to have children should be given advanced genetic screenings. Mohamed also said that the practice can “help build family bonds”.
I guess it’s up to us the tax payer to help build those family bonds. Ban it and ban it now.
[removed]
Yes. How they would actually stop it happening, though, I don’t know.
I don’t get why we can’t ban it without any of the racist comments
It should always be mentioned on this topic that first cousin marriage was not uncommon and not remotely frowned upon in the UK, at least until mid 20c, H G Wells and Charles Darwin married their first cousins for example.
That’s not really a reason not to ban it today but anybody claiming it’s somehow not part of our culture is talking bollocks. It’s actually deeply rooted in our culture as Protestant churches specifically tend to allow it as a point of opposition to Catholicism, as they argue it’s not prohibited in scripture.
In a vacuum there’s actually not much more risk of genetic conditions in children born of first cousins than those of unrelated individuals. The problem is more that certain communities are far more likely to practice it than others, and practice it over several generations of the same family.
If it was just the odd relationship it wouldn’t really be an issue, but it isn’t.
The only real issue with doing it is what happens with existing marriages. You can’t really ban married couples from having children or retroactively make their marriages illegal.
Do I think it’s highly inadvisable to have sexual relations with your own relatives, even if everyone participasting is onboard with it? Yes.
Do I think that involving the police and social services in cases where all parties were above the age of consent and nobody is alleging they were under duress at the time is in *anybody’s* best interests? No.
It shouldn’t even be up for discussion. It should definitely be banned.
It’s one way for controlling families to keep their money in the same family. It traps vulnerable people into relationships built on business deals. It raises risks of serious conditions. There’s no good reason for it.
Comments are closed.