While public health and individual freedoms are central to the debate that has followed, the proposal raises concerns about cultural sensitivity, scientific justification, and government overreach.
The argument for the ban rests on potential genetic risks. However, research indicates the increased risks are small—6.1% compared to 2.4%—similar to risks from factors like mother’s age, obesity, and smoking.
Singling out cousin marriages raises a critical question: why focus solely on cousin marriages while ignoring comparable situations involving similar risks?
This ban would disproportionately target minority communities, particularly those from South Asian, Middle Eastern, and European backgrounds, amongst others, where cousin marriages are rooted in tradition, family ties, and economic stability.
Instead of fostering division in our multicultural society, we should focus on education and accessible genetic counselling to empower informed choices, as proposed by MP Iqbal Mohamed.
Finally, the proposal threatens personal liberty, a core British value. In a democracy, individuals should have the right to choose their partners, provided those relationships are consensual and lawful. A blanket ban sets a worrying example of government interference in private lives under the façade of public health.
A more constructive approach would address health concerns without separating communities or undermining individual freedoms.
Amtul Shaafi
Kiln Way
Aldershot
Send letters by email to newsdesk@basingstokegazette.co.uk or by post to Editor, Basingstoke Gazette, Absolutely Offices, Lutyens Cl, Lychpit, Basingstoke RG24 8AG.
All letters and emails must include full names and addresses (anonymous letters will not be published), although these details may be withheld from publication, on request.
Letters of 300 words or less will be given priority, although all are subject to editing for reasons of clarity, space, or legal requirements. We reserve the right to edit letters.