In low-trust societies, the practice of cousin-marriage ensures that property will not devolve to a stranger, but remain within the family. Muslim societies are low-trust, so the percentage of cousin-marriages is staggeringly high. Cousin-marriages have dreadful consequences: many of those who are born from such marriages have congenital illnesses, for which there are no cures and are tremendously expensive to treat, in order to ameliorate the resulting condition. The National Health Service (NHS) in the U.K. is spending more and more money on the children produced by cousin-marriages. Yet the British government does nothing to discourage the practice, despite the certainty of congenital illnesses and the human misery that results for the Muslim families involved, and the ever-increasing expenses of treating the children with those illnesses, an expense borne by the British taxpayer.
Now the NHS, instead of discouraging cousin-marriages — particularly high among Pakistani migrants in the U.K. — has been advertising for nurses who specialize in dealing with the progeny of “cousin-marriages.” One such ad asks for “cousin-marriage nurses who value diversity.” More on this seeming acceptance of the practice can be found in this article from several weeks ago: “Another NHS trust posts ‘exciting’ job ad for cousin-marriage nurse who ‘values diversity,'” by James Saunders, GB News, February 10, 2026:
A Manchester NHS Trust has advertised what it called an “exciting new job opportunity” for a nurse specialising in “close-relative” marriage support.
The position, which has now closed, aims to help cousins having children together through “informed reproductive decision-making”.
Job requirements made it clear the trust wanted someone fluent in Urdu and who “values diversity and difference”.
As part of the role, posted by Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, the nurse will help parents “make informed choices in a culturally sensitive empowering way”.
Cousin marriage is prevalent among communities in Britain like those of Pakistani and Bangladeshi heritage – and has been the subject of serious warnings over safety.
Earlier this year, top Tory Richard Holden told GB News how cousin marriage “is an issue bound up with serious health implications, closed communities, and the isolation of the vulnerable”.
But recent NHS guidance has described concerns about disease risks from cousin marriages as “exaggerated” and “unwarranted” – and has even told midwives about the “benefits” of the practice….
Just think of that. So afraid is the NHS of offending Muslims, so desirous of showing that it is not “racist” or “Islamophobic,” that it deliberately downplays the danger of such cousin-marriages, and has even told its midwives about the “benefits”of the practice. There are none. It can only create more misery both for the parents and for the progeny in these cousin-marriage situations.
The guidance suggests health risks “should be balanced against the potential benefits… from this marriage practice.”
These, it claims, include “economic benefits” alongside “emotional and social connections” and “social capital.”…
The economic benefit is only this: whatever property the husband and wife bring to the marriage, it will remain within the extended family to which they both belong. And there may be “emotional and social connections” if they are already so connected with each other’s families. But what are those compared to a lifetime of suffering, and likely early death, to the progeny of such a marriage?
No matter how harmful cousin-marriages turn out to be for the children who result, no matter what misery the practice brings the Muslim families involved, no matter the huge expense to the British taxpayers who pay for the NHS, the government doesn’t dare to try to stamp out the practice, lest it be called — so unfairly — “racist” or “Islamophobic.” The truly “racist” thing to do is to fail to discourage the practice, or ideally, to halt it altogether.
By recruiting nurses who specialize in treating “inter-family couples” — a delicate way to describe cousin-marriages — the NHS appears to be prepared to tolerate the practice, when it ought to be moving heaven and earth to get the practice outlawed. For cousin-marriage has nothing to recommend it; it leads to a catastrophic increase in congenital illnesses that have no cure and are expensive to treat; the cost of such treatment threatens to cost the NHS so much that it has come close to bankruptcy; it has had to severely cut its expenditures on treating conditions that, unlike congenital illnesses, can be cured. The NHS has to decide what it cares about most: helping Muslims to understand the consequences of cousin-marriage so that such marriages can be avoided, or avoiding the predictable criticism, if it does the former, that it is “racist” and “Islamophobic.”
Troybeam says
I had neighbors who were Muslim, husband and wife were 3rd cousins. Their oldest daughter married a man who looked just like her father.
Children: 5 girls, 1 boy. The girls were very pretty but the son was not even handsome, to me looked like road kill. The mother told me per Muslim custom all children sleep with parents until age 2, then they get put in their own room.
Husband was a nice man but continually ignored his wife’s requests, example, her birthday she asked for a dinner date with just him and no one else. Get to restaurant and 50 people are there, another time he called and asked his wife to cook lunch for a business luncheon and said they be there around noon. All set up, food ready and husband was a no show….lack of respect.
Bought her new cars, she had to ask for grocery money and explain why she needed it and where she spent the money he gave her. People 6 children to clothe and feed.
Last but not least, asked about a few Quran issues, bottom line, she lied.
Which is why I always state Never Trust a Muslim.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Why don’t European countries do to women carrying the babies of their brothers/cousins what Iceland did to everybody who was detected carrying a baby w/ Downs’ Syndrome: abort them! Once muslims see that is the accepted norm & practice, they’ll quickly make beelines back to Fuckistan, Beggardesh and all the other third world 💩🕳️ they come from
Also, “inter-family couples” is the wrong way to describe them: “intra-family couples” would be the right term. Anybody who marries someone from another family completely unrelated to them would be an “inter-family couple”. In other words, an inter-family couple would be a normal couple! That’s not what the NHS is describing here
GFF says
‘intra’, quite correct.
This wilful befuddlement may be categorized as ‘baffle ’em with BS’.
Jason Lee says
I work in a hospital in a town with the highest percentage Pakistani population in the UK.
Every single day I see the disgusting results of this practice.
Totally wrong on every level before you even get to the part about their severe lack of contributions into the system 🤬🤬🤬
Westman says
Cousin-marriage may have been the norm prior to Islam when babies with defects and, in times of famine, healthy babies, were buried by wandering groups in the sand.
Islam brags that it was Islam which stopped the practice of burying healthy babies during hard times. The details are in the how – rising from poverty by sacking other societies and stealing their wealth which didn’t take exceptional intelligence.
Any Muslim who could wield sword and knife, free of conscience about killing an infidel, could do the job. With more wealth, anchored community, and captured women, larger families accelerated Islamic expansion yet did not stop the congenital problems of cousin-marriage. The use of captive women actually would have diluted those effects which should be more prevalent today.
Cousin-marriage is one of the restraining forces in Islam. Resources must be absorbed for serious genetic disorders. The less-affected become lessor mental and physical competitors in a modern world where wielding a sword does not lead to financial success.
The UK could stop or greatly reduce the practice by demanding marriage licenses with the relationships clearly indicated and checked. But it won’t, it will let Muslim clerics be the interface to a dependent parallel society having its own laws.
Taffy says
4% of each birth from an ordinary cousin marriage results in a recessive birth defect. But in endogamous cousin marriages (those with a history of past generations marrying cousins) the risk of recessive birth defects jumps to 6% according to an article in The Lancet (Britain’s New England a journal of Medicine equivalent).
Why the British taxpayer has to deal with this Pakistani crap is beyond me. Health insurance should have exclusions to diseases caused by consanguineous marriages, or they should be placed in assigned risk, where they have to pay actuarially calculated premiums commensurate with that risk.
James Lincoln says
Taffy,
Yes, serious birth defects are common.
As well as significant lowering of IQ.
Westman says
Agreed Taffy,
If it is against the law to deny paid insurance then the premiums should definitely reflect the risk, however, nations with government socialist insurance will lay that expense directly on the taxpayers making it.
Quite the perk. Why would Muslims stop the practice of cousin-marriage in any nation having a national health system? It’s ideal, the infidels pay. They will praise their diety for the “blessing” while cursing the host nation.
LSWCHP says
If this means that Muslims continue to be physical weaklings and mental retards who are easy to kill in battle then I’m all for it.
OLD GUY says
Boy there is a lot of islamophobia here, the telling of the truth about Islam.
PMK says
Job requirements made it clear the trust wanted someone fluent in Urdu and who “values diversity and difference”.
Those job requirements are in conflict with one another. Urdu is Pakistani and Indian in its origins and first cousin marriage doesn’t promote diversity or difference in the gene pool. How many nurses in Britain are fluent in Urdu, anyway? How many Pakistanis living in Britain are nurses?