Is incest legal in Sweden?

[rhettbutler]

While working on an anthropology paper, I read an essay by Yehudi Cohen, reprinted from the July 1978 issue of Human Nature, called "The Disappearance of the Incest Taboo." He relates the tale of a brother and sister who were raised separately, met as adults, and married and had several children, all without knowing that they were related.

So, a low-level bureaucrat going through birth and marriage records apparently discovered that they were full brother and sister, and they were arrested and tried. The trial court found their marriage illegal and voided it, but the Swedish Supreme Court overturned the verdict and declared the marriage legal and valid on the grounds that they had not been raised together.

In response, the Minister of Justice appointed a committee to examine the issue of incest, and the committee heard testimony from a professor of psychiatry named Carl-Henry Alstrom, who argued that incest laws are unneccesary because "psychological deterrents to incest are stronger than legal prohibitions." So the committee recommended that criminal sanctions against incest be repealed.

The article ends this part of the discussion by saying "The question will soon go to Sweden's Parliament, which seems prepared to follow the committee's recommendation."

Now, I assume that, since this was printed in 1978, the Swedish Parliament has decided on this issue already, but I can't find anything about it on Google. I know that governments are slow, but that slow?

Can anybody help? Are there any references available as to whether or not they actually did decriminalize incest?

[astro]

Not specifically germane to your hunt, but a fascinating article I ran across while looking for a cite for you.

Incest in Iceland 1500-1900 (http://web.uvic.ca/~becktrus/incest.html)

[Charlie Tan]

No, of course not. The law about criminal acts 1962:700 clearly says:
Chapter 6 §6
Har någon, i annat fall än som avses förut i detta kapitel,
samlag med eget barn eller dess avkomling, döms för sexuellt
umgänge med avkomling till fängelse i högst två år.

Den som, i annat fall än som avses förut i detta kapitel, har
samlag med sitt helsyskon, döms för sexuellt umgänge med syskon
till fängelse i högst ett år.
Rough translation:
Anyone having sexual intercourse with his/her own progeny or grandchild may be sentenced to prison for a maximum time of two years.
Anyone having sexual relationship with a sibling for no more tan one year.

The law hasn't been amended.

I've checked a number of Swedish reference sites and can't find any reference to the supposed incident. Carl-Henry Alstrom worked in genetics, not psychiatry. Link to his bio (http://www.btinternet.com/~eyeconditions/alstrom/news6.htm).

[t-keela]

I'm not sure that incest is even illegal in the US. At least not in every state. I realize that it is illegal to marry within a certain proximity. First cousins and closer or something like that. I also know that it's illegal to have sex with family members that are minors OF course.
But to claim that incest between consenting adults outside of marriage. I don't think that is against the law in most states. I could be wrong. It wouldn't be the first time, that's for sure. :rolleyes:

[Lumpy]

t-keela, sodomy (meaning not just gay sex, but oral-anal sex between consenting married heterosexuals) is still technically illegal in some states. I'm sure every state in the union has anti-incest laws. It's just that ordinarily the vice squad isn't actively hunting for people having incest. Generally the laws are applied when a particular case comes to the government's attention for some reason.

[Walloon]

First cousins can marry in the majority of the U.S. states.

The marriage of first cousins is unresticted in 20 U.S. states and DC. It is permitted in six further states if the bride is above child-bearing age, and a seventh after genetic counselling. For more information, see the helpful folks at C.U.D.D.L.E. International (http://www.cuddleinternational.org/laws/laws-explained.html) (Cousins United to Defeat Discriminating Laws through Education).

[Mathochist]

t-keela, sodomy (meaning not just gay sex, but oral-anal sex between consenting married heterosexuals) is still technically illegal in some states.

Not unless Lawrence v. Texas was overturned and nobody in the media noticed.

[t-keela]

How did this turn into a question about homosexuals? I surely didn't mean to go there. I am aware that the term sodomy isn't specific to anal sex or homosexuals.
I was simply saying that I am not aware of any specific laws against incestual relations between consenting adults, other than those involving minors and/or marriages.
If you have any examples I would be interested in seeing them. Not unwritten or implied statutes but actual laws. I'm not aware of any, but I could be mistaken. So, feel free to show me. I'm not one to condone ignorance (or incest for that matter).
If I'm wrong I'll gladly admit it.

[Walloon]

Wisconsin Statutes, 944.06:

[Walloon]

Wisconsin Statutes: 944.06 Incest.Whoever marries or has nonmarital sexual intercourse with a person he or she knows is a blood relative and such relative is in fact related in a degree within which the marriage of the parties is prohibited by the law of this state is guilty of a Class F felony.

[Dunderman]

I'd like to add to The_Gaspode's excellent summary that the (probably fictional) couple in the original post wouldn't have been convicted under Swedish law since their crime obviously lacked the requisite of intent. It's clear that they didn't know they were siblings, so they didn't intend to commit incest.

[t-keela]

Wisconsin Statutes:
944.06 Incest.Whoever marries or has nonmarital sexual intercourse with a person he or she knows is a blood relative and such relative is in fact related in a degree within which the marriage of the parties is prohibited by the law of this state is guilty of a Class F felony.

That's one. Okay, apparently it IS illegal in Wisconsin. How far does it extend?
parental, 1st cousin...doesn't change the fact that you DID cite one.
Then you also said: First cousins can marry in the majority of the U.S. states.
:dubious: You are correct in showing the inconsistency of the US legal system. What's wrong in one state may be okay in another. That's pretty much the norm here isn't it? I can carry a handgun in Texas but I better be damned careful when I leave the state. Thanks.

WTF does any of this have to do with the OP? rhett I didn't mean to hijack your thread. It was an excellent question. Sorry about that.

[BwanaBob]

The OP's question reminds me of an old thread of mine from Cafe Society. I saw a movie (British in origin) about two siblings who were raised apart (the male who was older didn't even know he had a sister as he had left home not knowing his mother was pregnant). They meet and fall in love and move in together. Slight difference there was they knew they were siblings but didn't think of each other that way. They get arrested but exhonorated because the judge felt that being raised apart that they weren't (in their minds) siblings, and they agreed to not have children. Purported to be based on a true story.

No one could ID the movie; it's still a mystery.

Good question though.

[JRDelirious]

t-keela, I don't have the chance to look details up right now but all US States or territories have some penal proscription against some form of incestuous conduct, even if not as a separate statute. e.g. a proposed new Penal Code under consideration for my jurisdiction would subsume it into the Sexual Assaults statute, by making the incestuous situation one of those in which it is statutorily defined that consent is invalid.

The customary baseline for the incest statutes was sex between two persons who would be forbidden marriage reason of consanguinity. The most common statute these days forbids sex between people in the direct line of descent (blood or adoptive), between siblings (half or full, blood or adoptive), and between aunt|uncle - niece|nephew.

[Mathochist]

You are correct in showing the inconsistency of the US legal system. What's wrong in one state may be okay in another.

That's not an inconsistency; it was designed that way.

Amendment X - The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

That is to say, other than the stuff we said before that the federal government is in charge of, the states can run things all in pretty much their own way.

[Walloon]

Massachusetts General Laws:Chapter 272: Section 17 Incestuous marriage or sexual activities
Persons within degrees of consanguinity within which marriages are prohibited or declared by law to be incestuous and void, who intermarry or have sexual intercourse with each other, or who engage in sexual activities with each other, including but not limited to, oral or anal intercourse, fellatio, cunnilingus, or other penetration of a part of a person's body, or insertion of an object into the genital or anal opening of another person's body, or the manual manipulation of the genitalia of another person's body, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than 20 years or in the house of correction for not more than 2 1/2 years.Oregon Statutes:163.525 Incest. (1) A person commits the crime of incest if the person marries or engages in sexual intercourse or deviate sexual intercourse with a person whom the person knows to be related to the person, either legitimately or illegitimately, as an ancestor, descendant or brother or sister of either the whole or half blood.
(2) Incest is a Class C felony.Kansas Statutes:21-3602. Incest. Incest is marriage to or engaging in otherwise lawful sexual intercourse or sodomy, as defined by K.S.A. 21-3501 and amendments thereto, with a person who is 18 or more years of age and who is known to the offender to be related to the offender as any of the following biological relatives: parent, child, grandparent of any degree, grandchild of any degree, brother, sister, half-brother, half-sister, uncle, aunt, nephew or niece.
Incest is a severity level 10, person felony.Georgia Statutes:16-6-22.
(a) A person commits the offense of incest when he engages in sexual intercourse with a person to whom he knows he is related either by blood or by marriage as follows:
(1) Father and daughter or stepdaughter;
(2) Mother and son or stepson;
(3) Brother and sister of the whole blood or of the half blood;
(4) Grandparent and grandchild;
(5) Aunt and nephew; or
(6) Uncle and niece.
(b) A person convicted of the offense of incest shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than 20 years.Colorado Statutes:18-6-301. Incest. (1) Any person who knowingly marries, inflicts sexual penetration or sexual intrusion on, or subjects to sexual contact, as defined in section 18-3-401, an ancestor or descendant, including a natural child, child by adoption, or stepchild twenty-one years of age or older, a brother or sister of the whole or half blood, or an uncle, aunt, nephew, or niece of the whole blood commits incest, which is a class 4 felony. For the purpose of this section only, "descendant" includes a child by adoption and a stepchild, but only if the person is not legally married to the child by adoption or the stepchild.

[Gravity]

Hm. I just searched VT Statutes, but other than a mention in the definitions ( § 4912) saying
(8) "Sexual abuse" consists of any act or acts by any person involving sexual molestation or exploitation of a child including but not limited to incest, prostitution, rape, sodomy, or any lewd and lascivious conduct involving a child. Sexual abuse also includes the aiding, abetting, counseling, hiring, or procuring of a child to perform or participate in any photograph, motion picture, exhibition, show, representation, or other presentation which, in whole or in part, depicts a sexual conduct, sexual excitement or sadomasochistic abuse involving a child.

I find no mention of it.
Oh, and as of 2000, it is legal for first cousins to marry in VT.

[Walloon]

Vermont Statutes:§ 205. Intermarriage of or fornication by persons prohibited to marry
Persons between whom marriages are prohibited by the laws of this state who intermarry or commit fornication with each other shall be imprisoned not more than five years or fined not more than $1,000.00, or both.

[Gravity]

Ah- HA! Thank you, Walloon, I was very puzzled when I couldn't find it in there!

[FX45 4Ever]

I just got married in Hawaii on 9/22, and on the Marriage form there was a check block that asked if we were of blood relations. Apparently full blooded Hawians tend to like to maintian their heritiage (said the clerk).. ewwe :eek:

[FX45 4Ever]

I just got married in Hawaii on 9/22, and on the Marriage form there was a check block that asked if we were of blood relations. Apparently full blooded Hawaiians tend to like to maintain their heritage (said the clerk).. ewwe :eek:
Dang, hit post instead of preview. cite:
Cousin Marriages: Cousins may marry. However, the blood relationship between the prospective bride and groom cannot be closer than first cousins.
http://usmarriagelaws.com/search/united_states/hawaii/index.shtml

[CC]

Donald E. Brown, quoted in Steven Pinker's The Blank Slate, lists a number of Human Universals - "surface" universals noted by ethnologists the world over. Universals in this sense are behaviors or overt language structures that are found in EVERY culture examined. It omits near-universals (traits that most but not all cultures show) and conditional universals (if a culture has A trait, it always has B). On that list are "incest between mother and son unthinkable or tabooed," and "incest - prevention or avoidance." The list does not distinguish between cultures that have actual written laws in place, and those that do not. However, it does appear that using this as a reference, it would be difficult to find a culture that does not express this universal behavior in some fashion. Even liberal old Sweden.

[Badge]

Washington state has an incest law as well. I've convicted one person of it (elderly man having a sexual relationship with his 23 year old developmentally delayed granddaughter).

RCW 9A.64.020
Incest.
(1)(a) A person is guilty of incest in the first degree if he or she engages in sexual intercourse with a person whom he or she knows to be related to him or her, either legitimately or illegitimately, as an ancestor, descendant, brother, or sister of either the whole or the half blood.

(b) Incest in the first degree is a class B felony [up to 10 years in prison].

[Chronos]

Intriguing... Under the Georgia statutes as posted by Walloon, homosexual incest (except between grandparent and grandchild) would be legal. Presumably this is because homosexual sex (regardless of relation) is prohibited elsewhere? If that's the case, then they're going to have a bit of a mess on their hands when that other law is eventually repealed. Or perhaps the "twin sisters porn" industry just has powerful lobbyists in Georgia?

[PoorYorick]

Donald E. Brown, quoted in Steven Pinker's The Blank Slate, lists a number of Human Universals - "surface" universals noted by ethnologists the world over. Universals in this sense are behaviors or overt language structures that are found in EVERY culture examined. It omits near-universals (traits that most but not all cultures show) and conditional universals (if a culture has A trait, it always has B). On that list are "incest between mother and son unthinkable or tabooed," and "incest - prevention or avoidance." The list does not distinguish between cultures that have actual written laws in place, and those that do not. However, it does appear that using this as a reference, it would be difficult to find a culture that does not express this universal behavior in some fashion. Even liberal old Sweden.
In my Kinship and Marriage class (anthro grad student), my professor must have been citing this when he mentioned that the incest taboo was one of the few universal taboos. The trick, though, is how each culture defines incest. In some, marrying your niece is fine; at the other end of the spectrum, men in some cultures feel unclean if they even view their mother-in-law.

[SCSimmons]

... at the other end of the spectrum, men in some cultures feel unclean if they even view their mother-in-law.

Hell, I feel unclean when I talk to my mother-in-law on the telephone ...

[t-keela]

That's not an inconsistency; it was designed that way.



That is to say, other than the stuff we said before that the federal government is in charge of, the states can run things all in pretty much their own way.

Of course it was designed that way... that doesn't change the fact that from state to state a person should be aware that the laws may not be the same. State laws are not consistent in the sense that, they may be breaking the law once they cross the border. I was reading some article recently regarding a married couple winding up in jail because their marriage wasn't legal in the state they were visiting. Maybe they had just moved there. I'll see if I can find it again. They were an older couple who got married as first cousins in order basically to help each other survive. They pooled their resources and moved in together. IIRC the problem arose when they wanted to redo their wills making each other their beneficiary...anyway my point was just that you better be careful because there are plenty of laws that aren't "consistent" across state lines.
Cecil speaks (http://www.straightdope.com/columns/041001.html)

[Mathochist]

I interpreted "inconsistent" in a technical sense of "self-contradictory". My mistake.

[t-keela]

That's understandable, I wasn't exactly happy with the word either but couldn't find a better one off the top of my head without going into a long explanation.
Perhaps I should have said, "inconstistency of the laws" instead of the legal system. The system IS fairly consistent. It's the laws that aren't.

Better? :)