Dispatches - When Cousins Marry

[a.c.]

Did anyone see this episode of Dispatches?

What did you think?

[Jasmine]

Yea, Malcolm and I saw it. I thought it was really revealing into the kinds of attitudes that keep people so tied down to tradition and scripture and blind to some very big realities... I'll let Malcolm talk about it tho, I'm sure he'll have lots to say!

[chweetgurl]

I watched it AC, It was appalling how an religious leader was not prepare to support the cause rather giving it a religious view.
I hope people get wiser an stop such social evil practices rather then letting anothr life suffer lifetime.

2 of my cousins from same family had heart conditions due my aunt and uncle being first condition. One of them died when she was 26 yrs old but suffered whole life..!

[booktalker]

It was very interesting - and sad too - a classic illustration of religion and culture and fear and denial all rolled up into one. It's also one of those subjects that you think twice before saying what you really think, for fear of offending anyone. However, since my OH is from exactly that mindset, I feel at least partly qualified to speak.

What I see is people who put what others think of them before the interests of their own family, which seems to be par for the course in many of the issues raised in this forum. AND, religious belief that has no space at all for logic and reason (did anyone see Richard Dawkins on TV? Another subject...).

Whether the practice is backed up by religion or not is kind of irrelevant here, but it always seems to end up as an "us and them" issue - the imperialist west bashing the backward east. Yet I don't believe that the criticism is for marrying first cousins, but for denying that there's a risk.

[Malcolm]

As Jasmine said, I watched it as well.

It strikes me as being one of those unfortunate issues where the populations that it is affected are in denial of the effects that consanguineous relationships have in the face of overwhelming medical evidence.  Further compounded by the this attitude of 'fate' and 'God's will' allowing people to refuse responsibilty for what is happening. 

Any attempt by the health authorities to raise awareness of the issue, targeted at the very people who are most at risk, is seen as a racial slur and an attack in Islam and the immigrant Pakistani community.  It's ridiculous in my opinion.

I found one conversation particularly terrible.  When confronted with the question of whether they believed the fact that they were cousins may have caused their children to be born with heritable health complications the father's response was that basically "[his] brother married hsi cousin and they have five healthy children" so he couldn't understand why it could be the fact that he and his wife were related that had caused it.  His wife believed that since her children were born "healthy" and then been to hospital and the doctors had given her children medicines then it must have been the doctors that had made her children sick...

[booktalker]

I was looking forward to your take on this, Malcolm! I'm also interested in the different reasons for people justifying the practice, especially between south Asians who are Muslim, and those who aren't.

IMHO, from the Muslim perspective, it's an attack on the religion, and the reason it's defended so vigorously is - in their logic - If there were health risks associated with first cousin marriages, then Allah wouldn't have permitted it; Islam says it's OK for first cousins to marry, ergo there is no problem.

But how do non-Muslim families justify carrying on the practice in light of the evidence? I wish the programme hadn't just focussed on Pakistani Muslims, as it gave a very one-sided angle.

Chweetgurl, what is the prevailing attitude to first cousin marriages in your community and culture? Is it just tradition, or are there "reasons" used to justify it as a good idea?

I was discussing this with someone and their view is a bit more frank than mine - I'll paste what they said here to add another vp to the discussion:

"No one is saying you can't ever marry first cousins, hey these things happen very occasionally , but deliberately planning it that way regardless of other factors is stupid. You know of course it is all for the same old reasons again - to entrap the woman. They say they feel "safe" marrying into family - but surely the issue is that they shouldn't have to feel unsafe marrying out should they?  And what chance has she of escaping her husband when absolutely all your inlaws are related and culpable if they help you go against the family wishes? OK yes some can be happy marriages, but the interviews with younger people in the UK told the truth!
 
Also to deny that there is a problem with disabled kids in Pakistan and India and places where first cousins marry is codswallop! The world's smallest/ tallest man? Twins with one body and two heads? Cleft palates also seem to be quite common judging by those awful charity appeals!"

[chweetgurl]

I dont know if many of here are aware 1st cousin marriage not only is practised among muslims also in amongst hindus, Not sure about sikhs.

Amongst hindus If a brother (younger) had son or daughter they marry off with thier elder sister's son or daughter! which technically is first cousin.. and are related. 
I think the reason this could exist due to caste system and they want to marry with thier own.

[saffron]

Malcolm I have to say that the particular point you made about the parents of the 3 disabled children and their view that its not a problem because of first cousin marriage...really spoke volumes to me about the need for people to protect themselves...ie... it made me think..how could I as a parent say to my children ..you were born with the disability because your mum and Dad caused this to happen?

Also if the parents admitted to their real belief/understanding from medical information...they would be seen as not supporting Islam or their communties..they would have been worried about not being accepted by their community.

The fact that this particular famliy came on TV...spoke volumes too...they had incredibly difficult situation for the care of their children..the mother said this a number of times. I felt for her,but another lad who was taking all those tablets for his Liver and was deteriorating...said that their should not be first cousin marriages..right at the end of the programme.

I also saw first cousin marriages in my extended family...but also I saw my mothers nieces marry my fathers nephews..because it was considered good to keep everyone in the same family. That second group is not directly first cousin I dont think...but it shows that family marriages were quite common..less than 30 years ago...in my family.needless to say it wasn't as close a family as the elders thought it would be..one side fell out with the other..loosing more than just friendships..

I have heard many sikhs marry first cousins..even though it was not consdiered the right thing to do by many sikhs.I think it comes frm the muslim tradition ..somewhere in the past.Marrying your brothers wife is also known to happen in the odd family...I have seen this also amongst sikhs..not so much in this country..again thats very islamic. I dont think many sikhs would like to admit to these things..but they did happen ...

Many sikhs have close family links in their communities..surnames in the same clan for instance...so you are more likely to be closely related to another sikh if you marry them..from the same clan then if you married from another clan..does that make sense? A jat marrying a Thakhan is a bit further than a thakhan marrying a thakhan is a closer genetic match..you could say its not a good idea!! Nw thats really contraversial.

I worked in hospital for many years and saw many children from pakistani background with severe disabilities, some of them I have never seen before or since, it is very sad. I also Have a friend who has lost the first child born to her and the second and third children also have the same condition and their is deteriorating for them both...she married her forst cousin and is pakistani.The suffering is very hard to hear of, she is an incredibly strong person and not atall bitter.

Another thing to remeber is that some of our royals married first cousins..one of the children in the royal family born to an Edward...was disabled and hidden from the world..first cousin marriage?

Its very sad that even professionals who are muslim can be in denial of this issue..I have seen this recently..however it begs the question..if we think of british society and look at health..sexually transmitted diseases we know are on the increase each year..why do  many young people between 16 to 25 continue to deny that they need to look at this and protect themsleves from ie..infertility in the future ?

Or..Aids in Africa...its well known that many know this exists but still continue to infect others or sleep with multiple partners increasing their risk in african countries,again I saw for first hand when in Rwanda..that their is superstition and denail involved when aids is spread.

Perhaps denial is a human condition too?

[booktalker]

Great post, Saffron, very interesting and insightful. And what you said about AIDS, goes straight back to the subject of religion being used as a big stick on people at the high cost of human health and life - the Catholic Pope says that the use of contraception - especially condoms which would help prevent the spread of AIDS - is against the religion. Blind faith vs reason...

[a.c.]

Seeing this programme made me worry about how much pressure is on MPs not to speak out.

There are 650-ish MPs who are meant to represent all of us, the people. Each one should be able to speak about issues without fear. If you can bully them into silence, it is as if their whole constituency has been silenced.

The documentary also covered the forced marriage aspects, and will have made a big impression outside the Pakistani community (if not within it?)

[booktalker]

Is this their shame, then? Political correctness gone dangerously wrong? AKA fear of offending... Germaine Greer - famous, outspoken Australian feminist - said back in 1999 that attempts to outlaw the practice [of female genital mutilation] amounted to "an attack on cultural identity", adding: "One man's beautification is another man's mutilation."  She said that women should have the right to undergo genital mutilation as a form of "self-decoration". (!)

vs Nahid Toubia, M.D:

 "The unnecessary removal of a functioning body organ in the name of tradition, custom or any other non-disease related cause should never be acceptable to the health profession. All childhood circumcisions are violations of human rights and a breach of the fundamental code of medical ethics. It is the moral duty of educated professionals to protect the health and rights of those with little or no social power to protect themselves."

Same applies to the topic in question, I reckon. Anyone who's forced or coerced to do something which is potentially harmful should have the right to protection, and someone (MP's???) should speak up for them if they feel unable to themselves.

[Jasmine]

Political correctness has gone dangerously wrong, people live in such fear of offending others that they cannot say how they really feel, and change cannot happen in areas where it really needs to take place. And if it has gone so far that MPs, who are surely the ones with the most power to bring about change and bring these kinds of issues to peoples attention, cannot speak out against them then political correctness has gone too far.

Why is it that religion seems to fear change so much? Seems to be a running theme to me, faith is blind, and deviating from what is 'known' and written in scripture in favour of what is discovered, especially by science and the modern age, is considered to be deviating from your faith. I remember when my mum told me that the very nature of faith is that you just believe, even if people tell you you are wrong. Surely if God is all knowing, and we are simply small humans then we can't possibly know everything there is to know about the world yet and we can't possibly think we know all there is to know about God, and therefore we should be open to change, and when there is such evidence to show us that something we thought was one way is actually another we should be willing to change our minds?

And how exactly doctors can look at their medical knowledge and deny it I have no idea...

[a.c.]

Jasmine, you've hit the nail on the head there. That is why campaigners like Jasvinder Sanghera and Ann Cryer are so important, because they are speaking out against political correctness.

It would help if all the forced marriage charities would band together and make their voices count as one. However, some of the other groups actually subscribe to a politically correct viewpoint. For instance, they will not support a separate criminal offence of forced marriage because, erm, it might be used more against certain groups. Of course it would be used more against certain groups- the groups where forced marriage is more prevalent!

We shouldn't shy away from anything just because it means telling the truth.

[booktalker]

ac, have you had a chance to read the draft of my book yet - given the subject under discussion (forced marriage..) - that's one of my objectives, to bring the isues to a wider audience through one girl's experience. I'd like to know what you think...

[saffron]

Jasmine,

 the point about religion being progressive is very interesting, Islam of all religions apparently considers that science and religion have many links...so do many other religions..yet..the contradiction is there when the action is needed to eradicate suffering of some kind or another..people say 'its not Islam..its someone else's interpretation of Islam...but my question would be..what are the rest doing to stop those practices if they believe the interpretation is wrong? It seems to me that many human beings are often  not prepared not to rock the boat...

I also agree that political correctdness has gone too far in many cases in this country...blind to the issues that affect us as a world people sometimes...I listen to the views of older people who say that this country interms of govt and decisions and rules...are afraid to be politically incorrect...I am often asking myself why this is the case..why we are not strong enough as a nation to eradicate certain practices, why we tolerate, tolerate or indeed accept certain practices?Maybe we are not the only country like this, but we certainly have our fairshare people in parlaiment who do not speak out for the suffering of many...forced marriage ac is one subject I agree..where a criminal offence needs to be made clear..not just civil...because as we know many civil offences dont have enough basis for action.

Id like to see a stronger govt then we have, but many believe that if it was... many civil liberties would become issues...the argument for some would be that we would be moving to a govt ruled state that a govt ruled state without democracy would not work...but some things are really unjust...and as weve said that our govt is blind to these things...mixTogether and the need for support and greater issues such as protection to the right to family life..the support required for our communities to recognize and manage this..is not acknowledged or even recognized..if it was we would have national projects and funding to provide those services to people who need them.We probably reach the tip of the iceberg interms of the people we reach who have problems in mixed relationships...with this small forum...but we believe that this will make an impact in years to come...however , I do I wonder how many MP's know of us...and choose to do little to help.