Marrying Cousin

Tim Robbins

Hello,
Is it legal to marry your cousin in Ireland?

Heisenberg.

This post has been deleted.

Downtime

A man may not marry his

1. Grandmother2. Grandfather’s Wife 3. Wife’s Grandmother 4. Father’s Sister 5. Mother’s Sister 6. Father’s Brother’s Wife 7. Mother’s Brother’s Wife 8. Wife’s Father’s Sister 9. Wife’s Mother’s Sister 10. Mother 11. Stepmother 12. Wife’s Mother 13. Daughter 14. Wife’s Daughter 15. Son’s Wife 16. Sister 17. Son’s daughter 18. Daughter’s daughter 19. Son’s son’s wife Daughter’s son’s wife21. wife’s son's daughter 22 Wife’s Daughter’s Daughter 23. Brother’s Daughter 24. Sister’s Daughter25. Brother’s son’s wife 26. Sister’s son’s wife 27. Wife’s Brother’s Daughter 28 Wife’s sister’s daughter

seamus

I never realised the restrictions on affinity by marriage:
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/birth-family-relationships/getting-married/legal_prerequisites_for_marriage?tab=more

Curious as to why these exist.

Victor

The Scientist wrote: »

You wont be able do it in a catholic chuch though.

You can ask for permission.

haz

seamus wrote: »

I never realised the restrictions on affinity by marriage:
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/birth-family-relationships/getting-married/legal_prerequisites_for_marriage?tab=more

Curious as to why these exist.

"Wife’s Daughter (stepdaughter)" - for Woody Allen.

Mr. Presentable

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Hello,
Is it legal to marry your cousin in Ireland?

Yes it is. For a first cousin the Catholic church requires you get permission from a bishop. But, hey, they don't run the country now!

Jimbo

Just curious,why can't you marry your in-laws? e.g. wifes mother.

Our man in Havana

Can't see any problem myself.

Victor

Who in their right mind would marry their mother in law? Next stop BGRH.

My great, great grandfather was widowed young and married, was it the deceased's sister or cousin, I'm not sure, but it creates a glitch in the family tree that just makes your head melt.

There are a few concepts to consider aside from sanguinity:

Administration: Did you marry your mother in law after your wife or did you marry your daughter step daughter after your mother in law wife? Who will now be in the dragon's place? Will you be allowed tell your ex-wife that she's not going out with her new boyfriend "dressed like that"?

Inheritence: if you marry your step daughter or daughter in law, does she gain precedence over your natural born children. In the case of marrying you step daughter, does she get one or two shares? If you marry your grandmother and she dies, do you inherit ahead of your parents?

Child protection: should an older man be allowed have a (improper) relationship with his step daughter or daughter in law. I think we generally agree not and him marrying her doesn't make it right. That she might not be able to give evidence against her husband is a further consideration.

oneweb

So this doesn't seem to disallow...


SNIPPED

...well OF COURSE I'm just being a childish twat

Moderator tends to agree with posters last line

pvt.joker

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Hello,
Is it legal to marry your cousin in Ireland?

Snipped

Tom Young

It is an offence, contrary to s. 1, Punishment of Incest Act, 1908 (‘the 1908 Act’), for a male person to have sexual intercourse with a woman who, to his knowledge, is his granddaughter, daughter, sister or mother. Consent is not a defence. The Criminal Law (Incest Proceedings) Act, 1995 increased from 20 years’ to life imprisonment the maximum penalty for those convicted under s. 1 of the 1908 Act. According to s. 2 of the 1908 Act, it is an offence for a female person, aged at least 17 years, to consent to sexual intercourse, knowing the man to be her grandfather, father, brother or son. S. 2 prescribes a maximum penalty of 7 years’ imprisonment for females convicted of incest.

Blood relatives may legally engage in consensual sexual activity except sexual intercourse. A man does not commit incest by having sexual intercourse with his aunt or grandmother. A female may legally consent to sexual intercourse with her uncle or grandson. The offence of incest does not criminalize sexual intercourse with step-, adoptive or fostered relations. It does, however, criminalize sexual intercourse between a half-brother and half-sister.

Our man in Havana

Blood relatives may legally engage in consensual sexual activity except sexual intercourse.

That is interesting. So only the act of sexual intercourse is illegal and everything up to intercourse is legal?

Tom Young

Bond-007 wrote: »

That is interesting. So only the act of sexual intercourse is illegal and everything up to intercourse is legal?

Hardly - consent needs to be ready in line with the other relevant statute and crimes!

1908 Act is worth a gander!

Gobán Saor

The motivation for the 1908 Act was purely to prevent inbred offspring. (Can't be bothered to Politically Correct the terminology:D)
Thus, it only dealt with full sexual intercourse and didn't include step/fostered relationships. And they probably reckoned that the Granny of a sexually mature young fella was past child-bearing age;)

Other sexual acts were covered by the unlawful carnal knowledge, gross indecency and indecent assault offences.

Twikd

in researching my ancestors on my Fathers side it apears I have found his Aunt, the sister of his mother, who may have married her cousin with the same last name. They were born and resided in Oughaval Aclare, Sligo but seemed to end up in Stockport, Chesire, England and got married in 1936. I'm wondering if they would have been able to be married in Ireland and perhaps that is why they left for England?

_Brian

In my own tree on mums side, two brothers married two sisters, first cousins.
1800’s.

Twikd

So it seems it would not be all that uncommon, right?

_Brian

I can only speak for my tree, it happens twice.

Both COI, mum says it was common enough as it was such a small community in Ireland.

Samuel T. Cogley

Many of ye with webbed feet? :pac:

splinter65

It’s still very common within the traveling community .
In actual fact it’s the preferred match as far as the parents are concerned, but a lot of young travelers now are picking their own spouses rather then being pushed into matches with close relatives.

coylemj

There is no legal ban on first cousins getting married. Queen Victoria married her first cousin - her mother and Prince Albert's father were brother and sister and it wasn't an arranged marriage which she was forced into, she was a single woman when she became queen so was free to marry anyone she chose - as long as he wasn't a Catholic.

If those people (post #17) eloped to the UK to get married in 1936, it could only have been necessary if the Free State had passed legislation banning marriage between first cousins and I don't believe this happened. More likely they travelled because the parents didn't approve of the marriage.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

exaisle

I think this offers further clarification on the subject of incest...

Victor

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Of course. It's a misunderstanding that second cousins are closer genetically than first cousins. The issue is second and subsequent generations of first cousins marrying.

There should actually be restrictions on cousins who are children of identical twins marrying, as they are genetically half-siblings.

CelticRambler

Can't believe nobody's posted this classic yet:

https://youtu.be/eYlJH81dSiw

Maybe y'all are too young to remember it!

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

CelticRambler

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Assuming Downtime's list in post #3 is comprehensive, then yeah, I suppose so. The singer isn't marrying a blood relative, and neither is the father. After that, it all hinges on not using the terms "step" or "in-law" to describe the relationships.

It make for a great inheritance nightmare if yer man died without leaving a will! :pac:

4ensic15

Charles Darwin's parents were first cousins which was one of the factors which made him interested in evolution. In the catholic church the popes permission is needed for first cousins to marry. Many parish registers record such permission. The bishops permission is needed for relationships out to the fifteenth degree.
In some cultures only cross cousins can marry, parallel cousins can't.

coylemj

4ensic15 wrote: »

In the catholic church the popes permission is needed for first cousins to marry.

That can't be the case. There must be thousands of weddings every day around the world involving Catholic first cousins. Consider predominantly Catholic countries with a massive population like the Philippines, Mexico and Brazil - the Pope has to sign off on every first cousins' wedding? Don't think so.

Victor

coylemj wrote: »

That can't be the case. There must be thousands of weddings every day around the world involving Catholic first cousins. Consider predominantly Catholic countries with a massive population like the Philippines, Mexico and Brazil - the Pope has to sign off on every first cousins' wedding? Don't think so.

The Pope's Office, not the Pope personally.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

splinter65

coylemj wrote: »

That can't be the case. There must be thousands of weddings every day around the world involving Catholic first cousins. Consider predominantly Catholic countries with a massive population like the Philippines, Mexico and Brazil - the Pope has to sign off on every first cousins' wedding? Don't think so.

It’s a dispensation from the bishop, an entirely different thing.
The Travelling community, in their own particular mix of Catholicism and superstition, believe that the dispensation waves a magic wand that will mean that the babies won’t have the genetic disabilities.

splinter65

Fred Swanson wrote: »

Like indulgences, these things can be purchased for the right amount.

There’s no charge for a dispensation.

coylemj

splinter65 wrote: »

It’s a dispensation from the bishop, an entirely different thing.
The Travelling community, in their own particular mix of Catholicism and superstition, believe that the dispensation waves a magic wand that will mean that the babies won’t have the genetic disabilities.

+1 I had heard a long time ago that the bishop's sign-off was required for first cousins. I still say that Rome - sorry, I meant the Pope's 'office' :rolleyes: - has nothing to do with it.

Day Lewin

I was once in a hospital next to a patient in next bed who was married to her first cousin. This was a couple of decades ago.
They were very nice people, and they were Catholics. From a small country district. I got the impression that half the village was related.
But the kids were not that bright, if I may so express it.
So, like, there's a reason why breeding in may not be a good idea in all cases.

Avatar MIA

Day Lewin wrote: »

I was once in a hospital next to a patient in next bed who was married to her first cousin. This was a couple of decades ago.
They were very nice people, and they were Catholics. From a small country district. I got the impression that half the village was related.
But the kids were not that bright, if I may so express it.
So, like, there's a reason why breeding in may not be a good idea in all cases.

I don't think first cousins marrying would affect intelligence. The stereotype is that they are dumb, but possibly stems from them typically being from poorly populated backward areas that may be less worldly.

I don't see from a genetic point of view why they'd be less intelligent, open to correction. More prone to illness, which may have an indirect effect on intelligence.

4ensic15

Avatar MIA wrote: »

I don't think first cousins marrying would affect intelligence. The stereotype is that they are dumb, but possibly stems from them typically being from poorly populated backward areas that may be less worldly.

I don't see from a genetic point of view why they'd be less intelligent, open to correction. More prone to illness, which may have an indirect effect on intelligence.

When first cousins marry there is a 6% higher chance of genetic abnormality than in the case of strangers. With Second cousins it is 3%. After 3rd cousins it is the same as random.

Peregrinus

coylemj wrote: »

. . . If those people (post #17) eloped to the UK to get married in 1936, it could only have been necessary if the Free State had passed legislation banning marriage between first cousins and I don't believe this happened. More likely they travelled because the parents didn't approve of the marriage.

Or, more simply, because Ireland in the 1930s was a fairly depressed place, economically speaking, and they chose to start their married life somewhere that offered better prospects.

Victor

Peregrinus wrote: »

Or, more simply, because Ireland in the 1930s was a fairly depressed place, economically speaking, and they chose to start their married life somewhere that offered better prospects.

Things weren't great in other places either: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Depression_in_the_United_Kingdom#Rearmament_and_recovery

mazwell

4ensic15 wrote: »

When first cousins marry there is a 6% higher chance of genetic abnormality than in the case of strangers. With Second cousins it is 3%. After 3rd cousins it is the same as random.[/quoa

Peregrinus

Victor wrote: »

The Pope's Office, not the Pope personally.

Not any more. Since 1983, diocesan bishops have the right under canon law to grant this dispensation.

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

There is generally no charge for a dispensation. Practice varies from diocese to diocese, but generally in order to get a dispensation a couple will have to show that they have obtained medical advice on the genetic implications of their marriage, and that they have considered possible adverse social/familial reaction to their situation. (Plus, of course, first-cousin marriage has to be lawful, or they have to comply with any civil legal requirements, in the jurisdiction in which the marriage is to be celebrated.)

(And, with respect to the sale of indulgences, your information is a little out of date. The practice has been prohibited, on pain of excommunication, since 1564. Apparently some German monk got all steamed up about it, or something of the kind.)