Agregador de fuentes
Op-Ed Columnist: On Feeling Thankful but Fearful
‘Junk’ Mines the Milken Era for Truths That Resonate Now
Nafta Talks Have High Stakes for Two Texas Bridge Owners
Op-Ed Contributor: Is Anyone Good Enough for an H-1B Visa?
Protestants and Catholics Meet, on the Cricket Pitch
Facebook Founder’s Favor Comes With Complications
91st Edition of a Parade, and Always New
Mugabe Will Continue Living in Zimbabwe, Spokesman Says
Ben Shapiro, a Provocative ‘Gladiator,’ Battles to Win Young Conservatives
Review: ‘Bombshell’ Tells the Amazing Story of Hedy Lamarr, the Star and Inventor
Art Review: David Hockney’s Life in Painting: Spare, Exuberant, Full
As Concussion Worries Rise, Girls’ Lacrosse Turns to Headgear
A Wave of New Fiction From Nigeria, as Young Writers Experiment With New Genres
With ‘Dark,’ a German Netflix Series, Streaming Crosses a New Border
Rwanda Offers to Host African Migrants Stranded in Libya
Zadar Journal: Can a Wild Daisy Rejuvenate Croatia’s Farming Economy?
Encounters: The Rapper 2 Chainz Sizes Up the Art at Christie’s
Op-Ed Columnist: My Brother Kevin’s Not Tired of Winning
Consanguineous marriages are declining
CHARLES DARWIN MARRIED his cousin, and may have regretted it. The great scientist’s experiments on plants later convinced him of the “evil effects” of persistent inbreeding. In 1870 he wrote to an MP, suggesting that the upcoming national census ask parents whether they were blood relatives. For, as he noted, consanguineous marriages were commonly said to produce children who suffered from “deafness and dumbness, blindness &c”.
Darwin’s request was turned down. Britain did not start keeping records of marriages between first cousins, nor did it ban the practice, as some American states were doing at the time. Instead, British society gradually changed so that marriage between cousins became undesirable, verging on unthinkable. The same is now happening across the world.
Data are patchy, but the trend is clear. In Jordan, 57% of marriages in 1990 were consanguineous, but by 2012 the figure had dropped to 35%. Surveys of Israeli Arabs suggest that 20% of marriages before 2000 were between first cousins, compared with 12...
Consanguinous marriages are declining
CHARLES DARWIN MARRIED his cousin, and may have regretted it. The great scientist’s experiments on plants later convinced him of the “evil effects” of persistent inbreeding. In 1870 he wrote to an MP, suggesting that the upcoming national census ask parents whether they were blood relatives. For, as he noted, consanguineous marriages were commonly said to produce children who suffered from “deafness and dumbness, blindness &c”.
Darwin’s request was turned down. Britain did not start keeping records of marriages between first cousins, nor did it ban the practice, as some American states were doing at the time. Instead, British society gradually changed so that marriage between cousins became undesirable, verging on unthinkable. The same is now happening across the world.
Data are patchy, but the trend is clear. In Jordan, 57% of marriages in 1990 were consanguineous, but by 2012 the figure had dropped to 35%. Surveys of Israeli Arabs suggest that 20% of marriages before 2000 were between first cousins, compared with 12% in 2005-09. Consanguineous marriage has also declined in Pakistan, Turkey and south India. It seems to be growing nowhere except Qatar.
Health workers take credit for the decline. They have argued for years that consanguineous marriage increases the risk of genetic disease, on good evidence. One of the best studies is of...