Not The Onion

19374 readers

1307 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

Links to news stories from...
...credible sources, with...
...their original headlines, that...
...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

kescusay@lemmy.world

330

NHS defends cousin marriages because ‘only 15 percent lead to birth defects’ (www.yahoo.com)

submitted 4 days ago by bytesonbike@discuss.online to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world

124 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Midwives have been told about the benefits of “close relative marriage” in training documents that minimise the risks to couples’ children.

The documents claim “85 to 90 per cent of cousin couples do not have affected children” and warn staff that “close relative marriage is often stigmatised in England”, adding claims that “the associated genetic risks have been exaggerated”.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Railcar8095@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

The worse question is, is it more morally rightful for me to have children when I can afford the test that ensured he wasn't affected versus those who can't afford it? Does wealth and access make me rightful?

I don't think marriage bans are OK in general. Consenting adults can do whatever they want. Hell, let's bring polynomy forward too (but I'm not sure how consent would work there). As a matter of fact, I'm not even married so restriction or not didn't matter