Si Hunt Whispers "IS INCEST WRONG?"

[Si Hunt]

At their home in Leipzig, Patrick Stuebing and Susan Karolewski are in the kitchen, playing with a young toddler. But Patrick is Susan's brother and they are lovers.

"Many people see it as a crime, but we've done nothing wrong," said Patrick, an unemployed locksmith.

"We are like normal lovers. We want to have a family. Our whole family broke apart when we were younger, and after that happened, Susan and I were brought closer together," he said.

Patrick, who is 30 years old, was adopted and, as a child, he lived in Potsdam.

He did not meet his mother and biological family until he was 23. He travelled to Leipzig with a friend in 2000, determined to make contact with his other relatives.

He met his sister Susan for the first time, and according to the couple, after their mother died, they fell in love.

She says she does not feel guilty about their relationship.

"I hope this law will be overturned," Susan said.

"I just want to live with my family, and be left alone by the authorities and by the courts," she went on, in a hardly audible voice.

Patrick and Susan have been living together for the last six years, and they now have four children.

The authorities placed their first son, Eric, in the care of a foster family, and two other children were also placed in care.

"Our children are with foster parents. We talk to them as often as possible, but the authorities have taken away so much from us," said Susan.

"We only have our little daughter, Sofia, who is living with us," she said.

Incest is a criminal offence in Germany. Patrick Stuebing has already served a two-year sentence for committing incest and there is another jail term looming if paragraph 173 of the legal code is not overturned.

"Under Germany's criminal code, which dates back to 1871, it is a crime for close relatives to have sex and it's punishable by up to three years in prison. This law is out of date and it breaches the couple's civil rights," Dr Wilhelm said.

"Why are disabled parents allowed to have children, or people with hereditary diseases or women over 40? No-one says that is a crime.

"This couple are not harming anyone. It is discrimination. And besides, we must not forget that every child is so valuable," said Dr Wilhelm.

"Eric, our eldest child, has epilepsy, but he was born two months premature, he also has learning difficulties. Our other daughter, Sarah, has special needs," Patrick said.

In 2004, Patrick voluntarily underwent a vasectomy.

"It's legal for the couple to live together, and to share a bed. But they are breaking the law once they have sex. If there are no more children, then who will be able to prove that they are a couple?" asked their lawyer.

This is all a bit grim isn't it - and those kids have got a humdinger of a "sit down chat" to have when they are older.

But is this something that is freakish and should be banned? On the face of it, Patrick and Susan met years after childhood, fell in love, and have a normal life. What would you do if you found our your lover was related to you? It's not a million to one chance? Does it make any difference, kids aside. Perhaps they should be allow to be a couple but not allowed to breed?

Let's have a HEATED DEBATE!

Si.



Patrick and Susan - kids may have nine heads

[Carol Baynes]

I'm probably the one person on here who has thought about this one, due my adoption history. I have a whole other family who, with the exception of one member, I have never met.
There is something called 'Genetic sexual attraction', which is always a risk when meeting related members of the opposite sex for the first time in adulthood. It doesn't occur that often, but it can and does happen.
The sexual 'imprinting' that occurs during childhood is absent, and the other person is seen as a potential love interest in much the same way as you would anybody else, whereas a family member you have been raised with would never be viewed in that way.

As to whether I think insest is wrong rather depends on the scenario, but I think if the situation was based more on selfish lust that would affect others very deeply, it would need to be seriously questioned by the people involved.

[Dirk Gently]

OK, essentially I'm against it. Not for moral reasons but from a medical standpoint. There is a perfectly good reason why brothers & sisters should not have children. And it seems that those reasons have been borne out in this instance. But if this chap has had the snip then I don't see a problem in the two living together.
If I found out my missus was a close relative it wouldn't change my feelings towards her but I would have the snip & adopt if children were important.

[Si Hunt]

If you then fell for your Mother-in-law, all kinds of complicated scenarios could present themselves. You could end up being your own auntie or something.

Si.

[Wayne]

OK, essentially I'm against it. Not for moral reasons but from a medical standpoint.

Precisely Tim. I feel the same. You can't help who you fall in love with, but if there are compelling reasons like in this case then you really should just walk away. I don't know much about the medical side of it, but i think that choosing to go ahead & have children who could have a big risk of unpleasant medical problems is incredibly selfish, personally.

[Raston]

Oh dear, it strikes me as very wrong indeed. I don't see why Germany should overturn a law because someone breaks it and uses 'love' as an excuse to somehow justify it, people use that as a justification for other crimes and still get punished without the law being changed for their sake.

If they are so set into their incest, they could always just move to a country that allows it like Japan, Turkey or Brazil.

[SiHart]

I'd also say it was wrong. Genetically and morally wrong. Of course, they weren't to know in this case that they were brother and sister, but when they found out, that should be enough to call the whole thing off- or at the very least stop having children.

That said, even people who aren't related can have genes that are incompatible- we're well aware of this, as both my nephew and neice have been born with rare genetical problems with their hearts because my sister and her husband have somethin in their genetic make up that when combined causes these heart problems. The odds against that are huge- the odds for the incest couple's children having genetic problems/ deformaties etc is far, far higher.

Si xx

[Trudi G]

I've read about this a few times, where children have been seperated and adopted, and later fallen in love only to find they are brother and sister, and i do think that 'Genetic sexual attraction' has alot to do with it. I don't think they should have had children under the circumstances, because of the genetic problems involved, but if they are both consenting adults, then who can really say what's right and what's wrong?
It's obviously not an easy thing to overturn a law that is there to protect among others, children being abused by parents and other siblings (i have a friend who was sexually abused by her own brother as a child, and it's totally messed her up) and not having been through any of these things myself, i don't know what the solution is.
Maybe they should just move to a country that allows it and have done with it.

[Wayne]

Does it make any difference, kids aside. Perhaps they should be allow to be a couple but not allowed to breed?

Just to pick up on Si's earlier point. In their circumstances i can't say i have a problem with them being together. If it was down to me, i'd be happy to make that acceptable within the law. But certainly not the having kids bit. To me that's thoroughly irresponsible & selfish. Not just for the medical/genetic reasons mentioned, but also as Si points out, for what it's going to do to the kids pyschologically & socially as they grow up in a society which for the most part views incest as morally wrong, & even 'sick'. It's the kids i feel sorry for, not Patrick & Susan.

[Nathan]

Nat and Georgia Simpson anyone?

I'm just wondering why (and when) they made this legal in France.

[Paul Monk]

Ok who thinks Susan Karolewski looks a bit like Catherine Tate?
And are you bovvered?

[Alex]

I agree with everyone who's mentioned that bringing children in to the world when there's such a high chance of genetic disfunctions is very wrong, but if a brother and sister do fall in love and agree not to have children because of this fact, then I don't see the problem theoretically.

in a society which for the most part views incest as morally wrong

Oddly enough I was thinking about this a couple of weeks ago (and no, no, as much as I like my Sister, I don't like her like that!), and I guess the reason people think it's morally wrong is a hangover from religious times where we were instructed that it was wrong and just shouldn't happen. But I do disagree, if two people do fall in love, what harm are they doing as long as they decide not to bring children in to it? Why in that situation is it morally wrong?

[Si Hunt]

(i have a friend who was sexually abused by her own brother as a child, and it's totally messed her up)

That's obviously horrible, but it reminds me of an article I saw recently on BBC News which noted that the amount of children treated by psychiatrists for "inappropriate sexual behaviour" has rocketted. You never hear about it though.

There's so many things which are taboo, which we don't like to talk about. Perhaps if we did, and explored WHY people do these things, we could understand and prevent them.

Si.

[Si Hunt]

if a brother and sister do fall in love and agree not to have children because of this fact, then I don't see the problem theoretically.

Lots of people have said this, but I feel somehow uneasy in condoning it. It's not so much if it should be allowed, as wondering HOW it could happen in the first place. Is it people mistaking 'family love' feelings for something else because they don't know they are related? My sister feels very much to me like she is 'of my own blood' and so to think of her that way would just be wrong. But is this feeling natural, or is it something that has been instilled during upbringing (which this pair wouldn't have had?).

It would make sense for nature to prevent you having feelings like that, in which case are these people going against nature?

Si.

[Jason Thompson]

It would make sense for nature to prevent you having feelings like that, in which case are these people going against nature?

Si.

Before I say what I am about to say I want to make it clear I mean no offence to anyone whatsoever.

Assuming the reason you say it would make sense is from the viewpoint of the production of healthy offspring, would it not also make sense for nature to prevent animals and people of one sex from having amorous feelings for a member of the same sex, where there is no reproductive potential at all? Are homosexuals going against nature?

Clearly not, since, as has been mentioned many times by various individuals and groups, we are not afforded the luxury of choosing who we fall for. A man falling in love with a man, a woman falling in love with a woman, a pair of family members falling in love: none of these are sensible from a standpoint of continuation of the species. Yet they happen, as many of the denizens of this very board will testify. Homosexuality was illegal until recently, and the law was quite rightly overturned. Now what harm does incest do beyond the problems of reproduction? Why should it be any more illegal than homosexuality?

As for the 'there's something mummy and daddy have to tell you' talk that will presumably have to come, I doubt that would be any more confusing for a child, if properly handled, as explaining they are adopted or that their family is different because they have two mums or two dads. As much progress has been made with homosexuality in society, the fact remains that kids still get picked on for having gay parents, still have to deal with the knowledge that their family is 'different' from their friends'. Hell, even adopted children can be the butt of playground cruelty.

So, do I agree with incest? I don't know, after all that. I'm just not sure it should be illegal in any and all cases. As with all things involving sex and emotions, there are grey areas, and the law should reflect that or stay out of it.

But it won't happen that way because people can't get past the 'it's sick' mode f thought that caused such an uproar when a police officer said last year that the law should be relaxed in cases of sex involving under-16s. Everyone jumped up and shouted 'but sex with children is wrong' without considering such scenarios as a girl of 15 being sexually active with a boy of 17, wherein technically their sexual relationship becomes illegal for the period of time between his 18th and her 16th birthdays. Does that make sense? No. Does criminalising two people who are in love and who are not harming anyone make any more sense? Not to me.

And could they be mistaking familial love for amorous love? Maybe they could, but haven't many people thought they were in love with someone only to find they weren't, it was some other feeling? Why should the fact that they are related stop them from making those mistakes and moving on when they discover them? Why should the fact they are related stop them actually falling in love? Who are we to say 'they can't be properly in love because they are related'?

[Alex]

I wonder if it is nature though, or whether or not it's just the moral guidance of our parents?

I have to say I'm not sure what you mean by nature though, do you mean it's in our dna, or whether it's because of God?

I've looked around on the net and it seems that animals do commit incest in certain situations, so it would seem it's only humans who often think it's wrong.

Erm, I'm coming across really pro-incest here which I don't actually mean too. It's just that I have no problem with it as long as the two individuals involved make a decision not to bring children in to the world...

[Jason Thompson]

Erm, I'm coming across really pro-incest here which I don't actually mean too. It's just that I have no problem with it as long as the two individuals involved make a decision not to bring children in to the world...

I don't think you are coming across as pro-incest at all, Alex. I think you're making some pertinent observations. To me it seems like you are having trouble getting past the moral objections that society has yourself. Don't take this the wrong way, but it seems like you are retreating from an expected round of finger pointing of the 'look at the sick pro-incest guy' type, which I very much doubt would be forthcoming from anyone here.

I'm not sure if I'm pro or against incest, myself. I don't think I'm either, really. I'm just unsure about the legal attitude towards it and the rights of the individuals.

[Si Hunt]

would it not also make sense for nature to prevent animals and people of one sex from having amorous feelings for a member of the same sex, where there is no reproductive potential at all?

Oh yeah, I didn't think of that!

Si.

[Jason Thompson]

lol

[Mike Saville]

Incest is a very broad term and is never really as black and white as society wants us to think, and that's a shame. Many siblings 'play' with each other in their formative years, but it tends to be a phase and it quickly passes, but it would be too easy to label these exploratory kids as immoral or criminal.

I certainly think to carry on into adult life is something different, especially when those kids grew up together. Love is a complex beast though, and many a mortal has had a problem separating out the different kinds of love and what is appropriate within that relationship. I'm not talking societal morals here, because I don't give a monkeys about their archaic views, but about emotional definition, and the inability of some to manage their family love with a romantic love.

In the case highlighted here, it is difficult. They met as adults, and as Carol said, when adults meet our hormones and pheremones and translator circuitry is trained to behave in a different way, so they register it differently than when we grow up with people in prepuberty. In these circumstances I think it is unfortunate, and they should have been helped before it got to this stage. They weren't and to criminalise them seems a little harsh. I personally would leave them alone... although I do have concerns for their offspring, as has been mentioned before.

[Si Hunt]

There'd be less presents at Christmas too, as your Dad would also be your Uncle.

Si.

[Dirk Gently]

And your Mum would be your Aunt.

[Si Hunt]

You'd be your own cousin as well wouldn't you? Which means technically you'd be committing incest with yourself if you had a wank.

Si.

[Jason Thompson]

No less than some of us who don't have aunts and uncles anyway.

[Alex]

I don't think you are coming across as pro-incest at all, Alex. I think you're making some pertinent observations. To me it seems like you are having trouble getting past the moral objections that society has yourself. Don't take this the wrong way, but it seems like you are retreating from an expected round of finger pointing of the 'look at the sick pro-incest guy' type, which I very much doubt would be forthcoming from anyone here.

Ah, yeah, I think you're spot on there, I guess I was worrying about a reaction which wouldn't actually happen. It's quite interesting that though, I guess despite my initial response that society's reaction is wrong, I still reacted that way...

On a slightly different tangent, I find it interesting that many people I know have fallen in love with their best friend, and their relationship has moved on from there. The love I feel for my best friends is similar to how I feel for my family (if not stronger), if with any female friend it was to develop in to a sexual relationship, how would that differ from the concept of incest?