Married to first cousin??

Quality

Met a girl yesterday, she told me she was married to her first cousin? Is that legal???

Is it right?

Can it not cause birth defects with children etc?

Mena

It is legal in Europe, and half of the United States. According to this study, marrying your first cousin raises the risk of genetic defect from 3 to 4% to 4 to 7%.

Is it wrong? That's for the individuals to decide.

anonymous_joe

Bit weird, but if they're both happy, why not?

GAAman

I know a guy (and no its not me :rolleyes: ) who's parents were first cousins and the only defect between him and his sister was she didnt have that bit of flesh behind your tongue that holds it in place so she had to sleep with a retainer of sorts so she didnt swallow it

Mena

It's getting more common. I've heard figures of 20% of marriages are between first cousins...

anonymous_joe

20%? That seems very high.

I'm aware of one couple but I'd be shocked at a figure like that.

Mena

anonymous_joe wrote: »

20%? That seems very high.

I'm aware of one couple but I'd be shocked at a figure like that.

It does seem very high yes, I'll see if I can drag up a reputable source.

stovelid

Mena wrote: »

It's getting more common. I've heard figures of 20% of marriages are between first cousins...

Would be pretty surprised if this was the case?

As for the OP: each to their own. Whatever about the other risk factors, I certainly don't find it morally repulsive.

Mena

Well for a start, it's estimated that 55% of all Pakistani marriages in Britain are between first cousins, according to the BBC at least - Link

anonymous_joe

Irish culture isn't quite the same as Pakistani culture though.

Mena

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Irish culture isn't quite the same as Pakistani culture though.

Not sure what your point is there. I'm not basing anything solely on an Irish perspective, hell, I'm not even Irish :pac:

Quality

Mena wrote: »

It is legal in Europe, and half of the United States.

Is it wrong? That's for the individuals to decide.

Thanks for clearing that up.

I must say I was shocked, and I am not usually shocked, It was my first time coming across this situation, and the girl just said it very plain and simple.
I would say my face was a picture. I would usually be a very questioning person. But felt it better to keep my mouth shut, just in case I insulted her.

Just a case of ignorance being bliss!!!

DublinWriter

Quality wrote: »

Met a girl yesterday, she told me she was married to her first cousin? Is that legal???

It is, but you have to get special dispensation from the Pope for a church wedding...

...and have 'Here Comes the Bride' replaced with 'Dueling Banjos' for the Bridal March.

rainbow kirby

Mena wrote: »

Well for a start, it's estimated that 55% of all Pakistani marriages in Britain are between first cousins, according to the BBC at least - Link

I've heard that this has caused some rather nasty genetic problems too - just because it seems to be a cultural thing among certain groups to favour a marriage to a cousin.

sorella

In Orkney the remoteness narrowed the choice for marriage which resulted in in-breeding over many generations.

The incidence of MS is very high; also multiple births.

We have noticed what seem to be a high incidence of mental handicap in Ireland. at one training centre we visited, they put some of it down to adopted children who did not know their birth parents "accidentally" marrying siblings or close cousins.

Also the case in some cults. where they are not allowed to marry outsiders

It is a dangerous thing that will not affect only the first or second generation.

Wondering if farmers and animal breeders would allow this.

rainbow kirby wrote: »

I've heard that this has caused some rather nasty genetic problems too - just because it seems to be a cultural thing among certain groups to favour a marriage to a cousin.

Dades

I don't see much wrong with it tbh.
It is quite the cultural norm around the world.

That said, it wouldn't be my bag.

djpbarry

anonymous_joe wrote: »

20%? That seems very high.

It's not terribly uncommon in certain parts of the world.

Hands up who fancied one (or more) of their cousins...

Hugh_C

I think I read something about it being more dangerous to marry your 2nd cousin, just consulting google:

Nope must have been dreaming.

ANyway, from this site:

It is estimated that 20 percent of all couples worldwide are first cousins. It is also estimated that 80 percent of all marriages historically have been between first cousins!

Mena

djpbarry wrote: »

It's not terribly uncommon in certain parts of the world.

Hands up who fancied one (or more) of their cousins...

I'd have to put mine up. She's a model now, and I'm still interested

Bottle_of_Smoke

Mena wrote: »

Well for a start, it's estimated that 55% of all Pakistani marriages in Britain are between first cousins, according to the BBC at least - Link

That's frightening, laws should definitely be brought in to stamp this kind of thing out

smelltheglove

I know first cousins with 4 grown children. Don't know of any defects they have bar one had a hole in her inner ear that caused her a lot of trouble but never said it was anything to do with her parents.

I actually found it quite shocking tbh, I couldnt imagine ever looking at my cousins that way, but they said they never met until they were adults and then fell in love, although it caused trouble in the family.

Mena

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

That's frightening, laws should definitely be brought in to stamp this kind of thing out

And why exactly do we need to stamp it out?

djpbarry

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

That's frightening, laws should definitely be brought in to stamp this kind of thing out

But then I'll feel guilty when I fantasize about my cousins!

ChocolateSauce

No, it is not wrong in the slightest.

Anyone who say it is probably couldn't come up with any argument other than "it's icky".

tba

its only right if they are very, very, very.... good looking.

ChocolateSauce

tba wrote: »

its only right if they are very, very, very.... good looking.

And hence not icky at all!

Quality

personally, I find it a bit strange.


I dont like the idea of having "that" sort of relationship with a cousin.

anonymous_joe

Well I know most Irish people wouldn't be entirely approving of such a relationship.

The question I would have is, how the bloody hell do they work out the other might fancy them back?

What weird night ends up with two cousins going 'ah may as well.'

I suppose the only objection I had is that I was brought up knowing my cousins quite well, and I'd view them as almost brothers and sisters. Doing one would just be weird.

But as I've said before, if they love each other, nothing wrong with it I suppose.

The_Minister

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

That's frightening, laws should definitely be brought in to stamp this kind of thing out

Damn right, far too many Pakistani's around these days.:mad:

Bally8

I work with traveller teenagers and it is definately the norm to marry first cousins with them. Not marrying a cousin is unusual for them.

djpbarry

Quality wrote: »

personally, I find it a bit strange.


I dont like the idea of having "that" sort of relationship with a cousin.

Ah, you just haven't met the right cousin yet.

anonymous_joe wrote: »

The question I would have is, how the bloody hell do they work out the other might fancy them back?

Walk in on them while they're in the shower.

anonymous_joe wrote: »

I suppose the only objection I had is that I was brought up knowing my cousins quite well, and I'd view them as almost brothers and sisters. Doing one would just be weird.

See my family were never terribly close, so I have plenty of cousins that I've met maybe once, or never at all. I could quite easily meet one of them at some point in the future and not realise I was related to them, although, admittedly, we’d probably figure it out pretty quickly. Hopefully not quick enough to prevent the sex happening…

finalfantasist

When I was living in Dun Laoghaire, on Crofton Street, my neighbours were first cousins and had a daughter. They weren't allowed to get maried, and as far as I know there was nothing wrong with the daughter, although her dad was a bit mad.

Bottle_of_Smoke

The_Minister wrote: »

Damn right, far too many Pakistani's around these days.:mad:

I have no issues with Pakistanis, actually think they're pretty damn hot!

djpbarry wrote:

But then I'll feel guilty when I fantasize about my cousins!

It's not an issue unless you're so fertile that your fantasies impregnate them

Mena wrote:

And why exactly do we need to stamp it out?

You linked the article, did you gloss over all the mentions of health defects? I can see the advantages that it might make relationships more stable but that's not much use to your kid with cystic fibrosis. Didn't you read the part about Myra Ali who's skin blisters with a slight knock.

And most tellingly "British Pakistanis are 13 times more likely to have children with genetic disorders than the general population - they account for just over 3% of all births but have just under a third of all British children with such illnesses"

So that is exactly why it needs to be stamped out.

Dave!

How do they define "genetic disorders"? Because that could probably stretch from something relatively benign like ocular albinism to grotesque mutations involving extra limbs.

Bottle_of_Smoke, do you extend your outrage to people with confirmed hereditary medical conditions who have children? eg. haemophilia, some types of anemia.

Would you oppose incestuous relationships in a situation where pregnancy was not an issue? ie. infertility, sterilisation.

What do people think of an incestuous couple adopting a child? I suppose it's the same situation as homosexual couples in a way. The argument will probably be that the child will be teased, etc., in school.

There's quite a few responses to that argument -- but a point I just thought of is, would those who oppose adoption on those grounds also oppose adoption in a situation where one or both parents themselves had some sort of disfiguration or mutation? eg. if the parent was born with limb disfiguration as a result of thalidomide use while in the womb (they may have stumps for arms).

The child would be surely teased to bits over this.

If you do oppose adoption in that scenario, then how far do you extend it? Amputated limb? An electrolarynx because of a laryngectomy? Cross-eyed?!

Bottle_of_Smoke

Dave! wrote: »

How do they define "genetic disorders"? Because that could probably stretch from something relatively benign like ocular albinism to grotesque mutations involving extra limbs.

Such as the ones in the linked articles, but there's no way of knowing which ones you're carrying, benign or chronic, but we do know the chances of your child getting two copies is significantly increased if your partner is also your cousin.

Bottle_of_Smoke, do you extend your outrage to people with confirmed hereditary medical conditions who have children? eg. haemophilia, some types of anemia.

No, I think that would be too inhumane, whereas with cousin pregnancies you're knowingly making the conscious decision to increase the risk. If you have a child with someone who's not related the chances of passing on haemophillia/anemia are greatly decreased.

Would you oppose incestuous relationships in a situation where pregnancy was not an issue? ie. infertility, sterilisation.

Not morally. Though for the purposes of law it would have to remain illegal for them to marry I'd imagine.

What do people think of an incestuous couple adopting a child? I suppose it's the same situation as homosexual couples in a way. The argument will probably be that the child will be teased, etc., in school.

I wouldn't have a problem as regards teasing etc but as far as I know the couple would have to married to adopt. So in light of my responses I guess I'd have to say no.

There's quite a few responses to that argument -- but a point I just thought of is, would those who oppose adoption on those grounds also oppose adoption in a situation where one or both parents themselves had some sort of disfiguration or mutation? eg. if the parent was born with limb disfiguration as a result of thalidomide use while in the womb (they may have stumps for arms).

The child would be surely teased to bits over this.

If you do oppose adoption in that scenario, then how far do you extend it? Amputated limb? An electrolarynx because of a laryngectomy? Cross-eyed?!

As above.

Pgibson

sorella wrote: »

Wondering if farmers and animal breeders would allow this.

Albert Einstein married his first cousin.
See:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Did_Albert_Einstein_marry_his_first_cousin

.

mumhaabu

sorella wrote: »

Wondering if farmers and animal breeders would allow this.

I once had a dog who impregnated his mother (accidental as they were not segregated during her "in heat" season) and out of the ensuing litter of pups 5 out of 6 died, the 6th lad was a little bit meek but survived although you'd know he was not right but he was very special, he died quite young afterwards after being run over by a car.

Inbreeding is not good at all and a similar situation to the Orkney Islands exist in the Pitcairn Islands in the Pacific.

iguana

mumhaabu wrote: »

Inbreeding is not good at all and a similar situation to the Orkney Islands exist in the Pitcairn Islands in the Pacific.

But that's only because it was inbreeding on top of inbreeding on top of inbreeding. Like if you and your brother both married your cousins and each had a child who married each other and had a child who married someone from a similar history who was also related to you. In that situation you are extremely likely to have problems. But if it's an occasional thing it isn't that damaging.

Even siblings having a child together isn't a huge deal genetically. It increases the risk of passing on existing genetic deficiencies, but it does not create new problems.

Bottle_of_Smoke

iguana wrote: »

Even siblings having a child together isn't a huge deal genetically. It increases the risk of passing on existing genetic deficiencies, but it does not create new problems.

It makes it far more likely that recessive genes will come together and cause problems. Ie if those siblings had non related partners there would be a tiny chance of those problems occurring?

CDfm

Its very common and I see it all the time on Jerry Springer.

In Ireland it can happen if you watch the Late Late Show with your cousin. If the phone rings for a competition and you dont answer- it its in the rules that you marry your cousin.

ChocolateSauce

CDfm wrote: »

Its very common and I see it all the time on Jerry Springer.

In Ireland it can happen if you watch the Late Late Show with your cousin. If the phone rings for a competition and you dont answer- it its in the rules that you marry your cousin.

I wouldn't consider Jerry Springer a reliable source for much, except proof that some people will believe anything.

Such as the ones in the linked articles, but there's no way of knowing which ones you're carrying, benign or chronic, but we do know the chances of your child getting two copies is significantly increased if your partner is also your cousin.

Actually, there is. A full genetic profile can map out a person's genes and determine the liklihood of a defect manifesting in offspring. They can also determine if there are no defective genes to be passed on.

CDfm

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

I wouldn't consider Jerry Springer a reliable source for much, except proof that some people will believe anything.



Actually, there is. A full genetic profile can map out a person's genes and determine the liklihood of a defect manifesting in offspring. They can also determine if there are no defective genes to be passed on.

I suppose you dont believe in the Maury Show either.

That would be evil.

Mr Benevolent

Charles Darwin married his cousin, Emma Wedgewood.