Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41071459›Full record

ArticleHealth care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy2025

Consanguineous Marriage: Law and Public Health.

Nicola Glover-Thomas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Nicola Glover-ThomasUniversity of Manchester, Manchester, UK. nicola.glover-thomas@manchester.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article examines the complex interplay of cultural practices, genetic health risks, and evolving legal frameworks surrounding consanguineous marriage, with a focus on England and Wales. Consanguineous unions, increase offspring's risk of autosomal recessive genetic disorders and congenital anomalies due to heightened homozygosity. The 'Born in Bradford' study revealed that 37% of babies in the cohort were born to related parents, with over 60% of marriages in the Pakistani-origin population being consanguineous. This was associated with a near doubling of the congenital anomaly risk (3% to 6%) and accounted for an estimated 30% of all congenital anomalies and 25% of infant mortality in Bradford. While Norway and Sweden have recently banned or are set to ban first-cousin marriages, citing public health and forced marriage concerns, England and Wales maintain a permissive stance. Proposed legislation, like the Marriage (Prohibited Degrees of Relationship) Bill 2025, aims to prohibit these unions and is argued to mitigate NHS strain. However, such proposals face significant human rights challenges (right to marry, privacy, non-discrimination) and concerns about driving the practice underground. The paper concludes by advocating for nuanced, culturally sensitive public health strategies-including enhanced genetic counselling, targeted education, and proactive screening-to empower informed choice and improve health outcomes without legal coercion, aiming to balance state responsibility with individual and cultural freedoms.

Indexed as

ConsanguinityMarriagePublic HealthEnglandFemaleHuman RightsHumansWalesConsanguineous marriageGenetic health risksHuman rightsMarriage (prohibited degrees of relationship) bill 2025Public health policy

Identifiers

PMID41071459
PMCPMC12634778

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.