Close Menu
    Vereinigtes Königreich

    Wut, als NHS Hebammen auffordert, die Ehe mit Cousinen zu unterstützen, da „nur“ 15 Prozent deformierte Babys haben


    Wut, als NHS Hebammen auffordert, die Ehe mit Cousinen zu unterstützen, da „nur“ 15 Prozent deformierte Babys haben

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15473581/NHS-midwives-cousin-marriage-deformed-babies.html

    Von StGuthlac2025

    View 17 Comments

    17 Kommentare

    1. chase___it on

      what exactly are these supposed benefits? the article doesn’t mention anything that couldn’t be gained from marrying someone you’re not related to, and then not having the chance of disabled children.

    2. BobMonkhaus on

      “And marrying a relative – fairly common in the Pakistani community – can offer ‚economic benefits‘ as well as ‚emotional and social connections‘ and ’social capital‘, the document says.

      It adds that staff should not ’stigmatise‘ predominantly South Asian or Muslim patients who have a baby with their cousin, because the practice is ‚perfectly normal‘ in some cultures.”

      Yeah don’t think of the quality of life the kids will have, focus on the social capital the cousin fuckers will get.

    4. itditburdsshit on

      If anyone goes to a NHS hospital for baby scans and it is established the parents are cousins, there should be an automatic opt out for any NHS treatment relating to abnormalities/deformities from incest for life if the parents wish to continue with the pregnancy.

    8. Due_Ad_3200 on

      > The document, used as training for midwives, states that ‚discouraging cousin marriage is inappropriate‘ and would be ‚alienating and ineffective‘.

      It is probably true in regards to the bit about effectiveness. I don’t think people are going to a midwife to decide who they should marry. That decision has already been made before midwives are involved.

    9. AwarenessWilling5435 on

      The stock images on these articles are always so funny. This is the first one I’ve seen that shows a traditionally not Western couple so fair play. 

      Call me racist but dont fuck your cousins. 

    10. DennisAFiveStarMan on

      Even Shelbyville weren’t this blatant about marrying their cousins

    11. mostlymildlyconfused on

      If you marry your cousin and have an abnormal child as a result of the union, is the rest of the country liable for the lifelong care of the poor offspring you so stupidly brought into the world?

    12. Impressiveusername39 on

      I mean, how many of those cousin marriages are truly voluntary? Those countries aren’t exactly beacons of human rights, particularly with respect to women and children.

    13. TheChaoticCrusader on

      This is a really stupid reason to back this . If Anything if I was told a good 1/6 roughly kids we’re gonna be deformed because of this id vote right against it . It’s not fair on the kids who have to be born like this . Are we really going backwards as a society ? Did we learn nothing from the royals who did this constantly and some of the deforms and horrid lives they had because of it? And who’s going to pay for this child’s bill oh right the everlasting pocket of the tax payer .  15% is such a high chance it should not be pushed at all 

    15. sober_disposition on

      It is really annoying to see this kind of prevaricating that is intended to avoid offending astronomically entitled and over-sensitive people.

      Just take a clear and consistent position – cousin marriage is wrong. It is immoral and irresponsible. It is a crime against society and people who do it knowingly should be punished.

    16. millerz72 on

      Yes people shouldn’t marry their cousins; but let’s not twist this into something it isn’t.

      This refers to a blog post from [September](https://www.bmj.com/content/391/bmj.r2061) which was pulled almost immediately. It was never intended intended and never had constituted official healthcare policy.

    17. Socialistinoneroom on

      The Daily Mail headline is doing what it always does: mixing a real issue with sensational framing..

      What this was about wasn’t the NHS saying cousin marriage is safe or a good idea. It was training guidance for midwives on how to talk to families where it already happens, because going in judgement-first can mean people disengage from healthcare altogether.

      The genetic risk is real and well-established. First-cousin couples have a higher risk of recessive genetic disorders in children. But it’s usually described as an increase in absolute risk (roughly from ~2–3% to ~4–6%), not the “most babies are deformed” implication you get from tabloid headlines. Repeated cousin marriage over generations raises the risk further, which is why genetic counselling matters.

      The problem is the NHS guidance was poorly worded and came across as minimising that risk, which is why it was criticised and then pulled. That’s fair criticism. But that’s very different from the idea that the NHS was “promoting” cousin marriage.

      This is basically a case of:

      clumsy guidance

      legitimate scientific risk

      and a headline designed to make it sound far more extreme than it actually was

      Which, unfortunately, is pretty standard Daily Mail territory.

    Leave A Reply