Inbreeding is bad, actually.

You’d think that would go without saying. Not in the United Kingdom, where the Genomics Education Programme of NHS England recently published guidance touting the supposed “social advantages” of cousin marriages.

In Redbridge, East London, one in five child deaths was linked to consanguineous parents.

This is what happens when a subject becomes so controversial that no one dares to speak plainly. For years, journalists avoided discussing rampant cousin marriage for fear of alienating the Pakistani population. Even right-leaning newspapers mostly looked the other way.

Imported dysfunction

Last year, however, the Daily Express broke ranks, running a story headlined: “Pressure mounts for marriage ban for first cousins over birth defect fears.” The paper urged Britain to follow Scandinavia’s lead and outlaw the practice. Conservative MP Richard Holden even proposed legislation to that effect.

But both efforts skirted the central truth: The overwhelming majority of cousin marriages in Britain occur within the Pakistani community. Pakistan itself has one of the world’s highest rates — up to 65% — and immigrants have carried the custom with them.

Scandinavia, by contrast, is moving decisively in the opposite direction. Sweden’s nearly 150-year-old law permitting cousin marriage is about to be repealed. Denmark has announced similar plans. Norway went first, declaring its own ban earlier this year. These changes were spurred by rising rates of cousin marriage among Pakistani immigrants and the health risks — and forced marriages — that accompany the practice.

RELATED: UK health service says inbreeding has 'potential benefits,' ban would stigmatize Pakistani community

HANNAH MCKAY/POOL/AFP via Getty Images

Honor violence

The situation in Britain is no less alarming.

Academic Patrick Nash estimates that about half of British Pakistanis are married to their first cousins. In Bradford, the figure is closer to 75% — compared to just 1% among white Britons in the same town.

The costs are not only medical but social. Consanguineous marriages often entrench cultural isolation, fuel inter-family conflicts, and spark honor violence when women refuse to comply.

Consider the case of Somaiya Begum, a 20-year-old biomedical science student at Leeds Beckett University. At age 16, her father threatened her with violence if she refused to wed her cousin in Pakistan. She resisted and obtained a court order blocking the marriage.

Years later, her defiance led to atrocity. On June 25, 2022, Somaiya vanished from her Bradford home. Her body was found weeks later, wrapped in a rug, a four-inch metal spike driven into her back. Her uncle, Mohammed Taroos Khan, was convicted of her murder and sentenced to 25 years in prison.

Somaiya’s story is not an isolated horror. In 2022 alone, police recorded 2,594 cases of honor-based abuse — including rape, forced marriage, and assault — a 60% rise since 2020 and nearly triple the number reported in 2016.

Tribal ties

Cultural relativists insist that we must not judge other traditions by Western moral standards. Yet the evidence shows otherwise: Not all practices are equal, and some import measurable harm.

History proves this point. Afghanistan, with one of the world’s highest rates of cousin marriage, remains a rigid tribal society. When kinship ties dominate, democracy fails. By contrast, in early medieval Europe, the Catholic Church’s ban on incest and cousin marriage broke down tribal barriers, fostered cooperation, and laid the groundwork for national identity and democracy itself. That prohibition was abandoned in England with the Marriage Act of 1540 — nearly five centuries ago.

It is time to revisit it.

Preventable harm

A modern ban would protect women from coercion, reduce genetic disease, and strengthen social cohesion. The medical evidence is stark: Children of first cousins face double the risk of congenital defects, rising from 3% to 6%. In Redbridge, East London, one in five child deaths was linked to consanguineous parents.

The Guardian itself reported that one-third of birth defects among Bradford’s Pakistani population stemmed from cousin marriages. Children born into such unions are ten times more likely to suffer from conditions such as heart disease, cerebral palsy, cystic fibrosis, and missing limbs.

Cousin marriage is not just antiquated — it is indefensible. Britain should follow Scandinavia’s example and end the practice. How many more preventable tragedies will it take before the law catches up with reality?