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 So the committee recommended that criminal sanctions against incest be repealed.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?
No, of course not. The law about criminal acts 1962:700 clearly says:
Chapter 6 §6
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.
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:
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.
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 (Cousins United to Defeat Discriminating Laws through Education).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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: