Voice of British Muslim Women

Ayesha Naseem Mirza, Walsall

The recent discussion around the supposed necessity to ban cousin marriages in the UK has emerged following comments from Conservative Member of Parliament (MP) Richard Holden to the House of Commons. The case to impose such a ban is suggested to promote better public health and to decrease the likelihood of birth defects among children born in consanguineous marriages. But the whole premise is deliberately rooted in prejudice and seeks to marginalise communities that have such a practice in their culture.

When politicians can be focusing on bigger and more pressing matters like inequality, poverty, crime and injustice, picking and stirring debates on issues that affect only 10 per cent of the global population (and even less of the British population) is certainly an interesting choice.

Richard Holden mentions scientific findings to argue that there are increased risks of congenital anomalies in children of first cousins, deliberately overlooking the overall risk which is still low and small. If the concern is public health and welfare of the future generations, why didn’t the MP make any mention of similar health risks to children born to mothers who are above the age of 34 or the general drinking and smoking habits among couples. These are also factors known to have caused congenital anomalies among newborns. [1]

Astonishingly and boldly at best but not at all surprisingly, Richard Holden also linked the increased rate of cousin marriages among British Pakistanis, majority of whom are Muslims, to forced marriages and the lack of freedom for women. There is a clear bias at display and an intentional rhetoric of us versus them. By distinctively making this about one diaspora living in the UK and by directly making this about forced marriages and the freedom of women but on the pretext of scientific research, Richard Holden expresses Islamophobic sentiments and seeks to marginalise communities with his divisive and discriminatory rhetoric. Islam, however, forbids forced marriages and categorically establishes the freedom and right to choose in marriage for both men and women. While cousin marriages are permissible in Islam, they are not obligatory.

As needless and unimportant as this whole debate is, the most unsettling part about it as a Muslim woman is that yet again, another Western politician has, undesirably, assumed the responsibility of dictating how Muslim women should free themselves. Even though he throws his weight behind cultural notions, he absolutely means Muslim women when he calls the “freedom of women” at “stake” because he is aware that the practice of consanguineous marriage is common in Pakistani communities who are mostly Muslims. As Muslim women, we do not need and certainly do not want others to be speaking for us. Anything otherwise is opposing our freedom.

He also admits that historically first-cousin marriages were very common in Europe, but he likens their decline and the change in European cultural practices to civilisation and a weakening of blind family ties. This is another form of prejudice against societies and communities that still have this practice in their culture. The comfort with which Western politicians label people with cultural practices different to theirs as uncivilised is extremely unsettling and a very typical and known Western way of trying to dictate and regulate individual choices of others while claiming to be the flag bearers of leading people towards their freedom.

The narrative around the health risks is deliberately phrased in a way that it disseminates incorrect understandings. For example, when it is said that first-cousin marriages ‘double chances of hereditary diseases’, the chance goes from 2% to 4% which is still considered minimal. Moreover, there is no policing or even a suggestion on any policing on individuals who also pose a risk to their progeny with their lifestyle choices of smoking and drinking because it would impede on their autonomy. Then why is it so easy to hinder the autonomy of the minorities?

No rational and sound reason can justify such a divisive and biased framing of this topic not least because it can create a sense of cultural and societal isolation for communities that practice cousin marriages. The concerns for public should seem genuine and not discriminatory when they take all factors that can cause congenital anomalies into account. Otherwise, any advocacy for a ban on cousin marriages would be breaching the autonomy of individuals to make informed decisions for themselves.

References

[1] Sheridan (2013)

[2] Marriage (Prohibited Degrees of Relationship Bill)