Switzerland my allow incest between siblings, and parent and adult children

[Revoltingest]

I think his point was normal, unrelated consenting adults could conceive a baby that had deformities, but they'd be allowed to carry it to term, if they wanted. What do you see as the difference in the two cases?

Incest would have a higher probability of genetic disorder being expressed than with unrelated parents.
Regarding public policy, each society will decide how to balance reproductive freedom vs allowing 2-headed babies to be born.
I'm not advocating any particular agenda.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I don't think that a lot of people are just itching to have sex with their parents and siblings.

I have heard of a case where a husband and wife (who had four or five kids) found out they were brother and sister long after the fact. I don't remember the details. It seems to me like this is where the law would be most applicable, especially if they can remain legally married and have custody of their kids.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Aren't there lots of potential relationships with similar power dynamics? Should it be illegal to have a relationship with a work colleague or your tutor on an adult education course?

We presume undue influence in all sorts of cases. If a person doesn't have the capacity to freely consent to enter into a contract with you, then it seems odd to me to assume that they have the capacity to freely consent to sleep with you.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I don't think that a lot of people are just itching to have sex with their parents and siblings.

I have heard of a case where a husband and wife (who had four or five kids) found out they were brother and sister long after the fact. I don't remember the details. It seems to me like this is where the law would be most applicable, especially if they can remain legally married and have custody of their kids.

Right - and I think that illustrates an important point: when we're talking about criminal law, we're not only talking about what activites we don't want people to do, but also what we should do to people who do them anyhow.

In those sorts of cases, I don't think I want to create a situation where the parents have to choose between either breaking up their (presumably loving) family or going to jail.

 

[Revoltingest]

We presume undue influence in all sorts of cases. If a person doesn't have the capacity to freely consent to enter into a contract with you, then it seems odd to me to assume that they have the capacity to freely consent to sleep with you.

In this case....
David Epstein Incest Charges: Columbia Professor Charged With Sleeping With Daughter
....it appears that the father is prosecutable, but the adult daughter is not.
Does it make sense that when 2 consenting adults commit exactly the same crime, one is automatically exculpated by reason of gender or family relationship?
(Btw, I've seen nothing about her lacking capacity to make such a decision.)

 

[angellous_evangellous]

In this case....
David Epstein Incest Charges: Columbia Professor Charged With Sleeping With Daughter
....it appears that the father is prosecutable, but the adult daughter is not.
Does it make sense that when 2 consenting adults commit exactly the same crime, one is automatically exculpated by reason of gender or family relationship?
(Btw, I've seen nothing about her lacking capacity to make such a decision.)

Maybe she has a plea bargain?

 

[Comicaze247]

First off, I'd like to say, "Whatever floats your boat." As long as it doesn't harm anyone else, I see no problem.

You don't think the likely genetically subnormal offspring of these revolting unions are victims?
Or the society that has to support them?

I'll admit, there's a basis for the social norms established about incest, due to the observed increase in chance for birth defects. However, incest itself is not responsible for birth defects; it's if both the parents possibly carry a gene that is known to cause birth defects. If there is family history of a certain defect, then the children of that family can possibly carry the gene for it, but it may be recessive. In that case (at least in our society), it would be considered irresponsible for them to have a child together because of the risk that that child would inherit the recessive gene from both parents.

However, couples who are not related to each other can also carry the same recessive genes. Why is it considered 'less wrong' for them to have a child?

On the other hand, what if a family was known to have 'perfect' genes? As in, their family has no history of birth defects or defective genes. Since their offspring would also have 'perfect' genes, where is the risk for birth defects or the passing of defective genes? Why would be any different than non-related couples that have good genes producing a child?

Incest taboo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Some argue that the revulsion to incest is instinctual. Anthropologists disagree. The types of relationships that are defined as 'incest' vary greatly among different societies and cultures. For example:

For example, Trobriand Islanders prohibit both sexual relations between a woman and her brother,[5] and between a woman and her father,[6] but they describe these prohibitions in very different ways: relations between a woman and her brother fall within the category of forbidden relations among members of the same clan; relations between a woman and her father do not.[7] This is because the Trobrianders are matrilineal; children belong to the clan of their mother and not of their father. Thus, sexual relations between a man and his mother's sister (and mother's sister's daughter) are also considered incestuous, but relations between a man and his father's sister are not.[8] Indeed, a man and his father's sister will often have a flirtatious relationship, and, far from being taboo, Trobriand society encourages a man and his father's sister, or the daughter of his father's sister to have sexual relations or marry.[9]

Just the fact that the definitions of incest vary in different societies show that the aversion to incest is a social construction. Yes, in many cases, the social construction is justified. But if a couple has no risk of producing defective offspring, why is it still wrong?

Once again the europeans demonstrate liberalism taken too far.

While I personally wouldn't take part in an incestuous relationship, questioning laws and social norms is not a bad practice.

Disgusting...boycott the Swiss.

But . . . but what about knives? And chocolate?!

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Incest would have a higher probability of genetic disorder being expressed than with unrelated parents.
Regarding public policy, each society will decide how to balance reproductive freedom vs allowing 2-headed babies to be born.
I'm not advocating any particular agenda.

I heard a good response to this on the radio last night: certain races and ethnic groups have associated with them certain genetic traits. If "avoiding genetic disorders" is a valid purpose for government laws, then does this mean it would also be valid to prohibit a person of one ethnic group to have children with a person of the same ethnic group?

If preventing Habsburg-style hemophilia or prognathism warrants a prohibition on marriage between close family members, does preventing sickle-cell anemia warrant a ban on marriage between any two people who are of sub-Saharan African descent, for instance?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

In this case....
David Epstein Incest Charges: Columbia Professor Charged With Sleeping With Daughter
....it appears that the father is prosecutable, but the adult daughter is not.
Does it make sense that when 2 consenting adults commit exactly the same crime, one is automatically exculpated by reason of gender or family relationship?
(Btw, I've seen nothing about her lacking capacity to make such a decision.)

Gender, no. Family relationship, perhaps.

 

[Revoltingest]

I heard a good response to this on the radio last night: certain races and ethnic groups have associated with them certain genetic traits. If "avoiding genetic disorders" is a valid purpose for government laws, then does this mean it would also be valid to prohibit a person of one ethnic group to have children with a person of the same ethnic group?

I don't know what would be "valid" & what wouldn't.

If preventing Habsburg-style hemophilia or prognathism warrants a prohibition on marriage between close family members, does preventing sickle-cell anemia warrant a ban on marriage between any two people who are of sub-Saharan African descent, for instance?

The high probability of genetic disorders from incestuous parents appears to be the basis for that taboo.
Should the taboo be legally extended to situations where the probability is less? That's not for me to decide.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

It does seem like incest should not be illegal in itself - so much so that a court only need to find out if sex occured and not consider any other circumstances (consent, knowledge of relation, and so on).

Personally I'm a little uncomfortable talking about something that consenting adults do in their own homes that is not inherently harmful.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Personally I'm a little uncomfortable talking about something that consenting adults do in their own homes that is not inherently harmful.

However, on that note, I would harass this professor to no end if we were friends and he told me about the "relationship." A man doing that kind of thing deserves open good-natured (and maybe caustic) ridicule among his friends - this is a bit more serious than the other things men harass themselves about - rooting for the wrong sports team, wearing women's clothing on accident, breaking a chair just by sitting on it ....

 

[Comicaze247]

rooting for the wrong sports team, wearing women's clothing on accident, breaking a chair just by sitting on it ....

I'm getting the feeling that you have experience with that. lol

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I'm getting the feeling that you have experience with that. lol

Years.

 

[Magic Man]

In this case....
David Epstein Incest Charges: Columbia Professor Charged With Sleeping With Daughter
....it appears that the father is prosecutable, but the adult daughter is not.
Does it make sense that when 2 consenting adults commit exactly the same crime, one is automatically exculpated by reason of gender or family relationship?
(Btw, I've seen nothing about her lacking capacity to make such a decision.)

They're not performing the exact same crime. The crime of the father is wrongly influencing his daughter into sleeping with him.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

They're not performing the exact same crime. The crime of the father is wrongly influencing his daughter into sleeping with him.

It could easily go the other way 'round.

I wonder if this guy was in his daughter's life at all as they were growing up - and I bet the mother is dead now or his head would be on a pike. Mother dies - daughter seeks father - leads to sexual relationship.

[nope - she's still alive and well]

 

[Revoltingest]

They're not performing the exact same crime. The crime of the father is wrongly influencing his daughter into sleeping with him.

How do you know that he influenced her?
And would you always exculpate someone commits a crime as a result of being influenced?

 

[Magic Man]

wearing women's clothing on accident...

Yeah...that's it. I wore them on accident...

 

[Magic Man]

It could easily go the other way 'round.

It could go the other way, but it's much, much less likely. It's the parent who has the dominant role in the relationship. Lolita situations are not common at all.

 

[Magic Man]

How do you know that he influenced her?

I don't, but that's sort of the idea with charging him but not her.

And would you always exculpate someone commits a crime as a result of being influenced?

Not always, but we have to look at things on an individual basis.