Is it time to ban first cousin marriage

[Greavsy]

Do we ban women over 35 from having children for the same reasons? They are at similar levels of risk of having a child with a disability?

 

Please tell me how 1% is simular to 25%?

[Plain Talker]

It's so wrong, those children wouldn't be the way they are if their parents weren't so stupid!

 

That Pakistani woman had 4 children which were all disabled in some way or another. Did she not think after having the first that a 2nd child could turn out the same? Selfish! Giving them children that way of life because they are to bloody ignorant to see the risks.

 

We are also paying for them 4 children to be cared for and have hospital treatment because of their parents.

 

0Don't get me wrong I think disabled people should be treated but when they could have prevented it then it is wrong.

 

You know what just have 10 more disabled children so they can marry their cousins and can carry on reproducing more disabled children!

 

There needs to be a ban now. It's absolutely ridiculous!

 

I seriously doubt that the parents of that poor lad, and his sisters will intend marrying them off, so there'd be little to worry about on that particular count.

 

As I said in a previous post, I would strongly advocate genetic counselling for those families affected.

[mike84]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/physical_health/conditions/downssyndrome1.shtml

 

See here for information on the increase chances of downs syndrome in children born to a mother over 35.

 

This is just one type disability. There are hundreds of types of disability. I'm sure there's more evidence for different disabilities as well.

[Greavsy]

You're confusing probability with outcomes.

 

Well this argument is based on probability and outcomes.

 

Basically there is a 25% chance that the child will be disabled.

[Plain Talker]

Do we ban women over 35 from having children for the same reasons? They are at similar levels of risk of having a child with a disability?

 

Please tell me how 1% is simular to 25%?

 

as Boyfriday said, you seem to be confusing probabilities with outcomes.

[mike84]

Do we ban women over 35 from having children for the same reasons? They are at similar levels of risk of having a child with a disability?

 

Please tell me how 1% is simular to 25%?

 

You're confusing the probability of something happening to actual outcomes.

 

In this case, 1st cousin marriages have a higher risk of having a child with a disability. It doesn't mean that it will actually happen. Infact the majority of children born are perfectly healthy and well.

 

Just the same as older women giving birth. They have much higher chance of giving birth to a child with a disability, the majority don't and babies are well.

[NumbBum]

If you saw my cousin - no one would want to marry her either.

[Bulgarian]

If you saw my cousin - no one would want to marry her either.

 

I got them impression from the program that what the people getting married want is of little concern.

[Greavsy]

First cousin marriages do not have a 25% chance of having an abnormal baby. I don't care how good the person who made that claim is, it is flat out wrong. The absolute maximum i can find is 5%.

 

Oh hang on - it increases the chances by 25% makes sense - a 25% increase on 1% or 2% still doesn't give you much of a chance.

 

Apologies to the person that made the 25% claim, i realise now that it isn't wrong, but has been interpreted wrongly by greavsy (unless you really were saying 25%, in which case you are still wrong)

 

Obviously you seem to think it is ok for 1st cousins to be married?

 

Why do you think they should? Is it fair on the children involved?

[NumbBum]

Well that would be the end of the Royal Family as we know it

 

Now, I would vote for that.