Brother-sister couple challenges German incest law

[CatWoman]

Straight from the scary fairy tales of once-upon-an-adoption comes the story of Patrick Stuebing and Susan Karolewski, a brother and sister, who fell in love, had four children and now are fighting the German courts to overthrow its brother-sister incest law. As reported Wednesday by the BBC, the couple describe themselves as a "normal couple" who just want to have a family and live without discrimination. Stuebing already spent two years in jail for committing incest, and he'll get thrown back into jail for another sentence if the current incest law stands. Three of the couple's four children have been taken into foster care.

Now, maybe I'm becoming a reactionary scold in my approaching dotage, but the couple's relationship doesn't sound terribly normal, nor even, perhaps, consensual. According to the article, Stuebing, who had been adopted by another family, found his biological family at the age of 23, when Karolewski was 15. After their mother died six months later, the couple fell in love and began living together and popping out babies at a prodigious rate of four in six years. OK, vive la différence and all, but people! That's a 16-year-old living with her 24-year-old brother and pregnant most of the time. Ech.

But it's not as if they don't have a case. Incest laws around the world vary widely, though the practice is illegal in most countries. In Germany, sex with a relative still constitutes a criminal offense, punishable by up to three years in prison. But in neighboring France, Napoleon abolished incest laws in 1810, and recently Japan, Argentina and Brazil legalized it. The United States still criminalizes incest and many states still outlaw kissin'-cousin incest as well.

The particulars of Steubing and Karolewski's story are less interesting than the questions raised by their lawsuit. Invoking racial hygiene laws on the one hand and modern motherhood on the other, the case fingers the bleeding edge of our own entitlements.

"Why are disabled parents allowed to have children, or people with hereditary diseases or women over 40? No one says that is a crime," Endrik Wilhelm, the couple's lawyer, told the BBC. "This couple are not harming anyone. It is discrimination. And besides, we must not forget that every child is so valuable."


http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/?last_story=/mwt/broadsheet/2007/03/08/incest/

[Coventina]

1. Ew. I don't know what else to say.

:puke:

[eagler]

2. They must be from SOUTHERN Germany

[CatWoman]

5. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!

:rofl:

[trumad]

9. You know--- me and you are DU Brother and Sister...

but I'd still hook-up with you...

YEAH BABY.

[CatWoman]

you know how much I love you!!

:loveya:

:)

[Syrinx]

12. that is so amazingly witty!

:eyes:

[Alcibiades]

18. Another example of bigoted intolerance

Against Southerners!

As the article plainly states, the pair are from Leipzig, which is in the former GDR, i.e., East Germany. Go ahead, now that you've got the facts, make some bigoted comments about easterners.

I, for one, stopped having sex with my own sister years ago.

[CatWoman]

21. YOU PEOPLE ARE KILLING ME!!!

:rofl:

I, for one, stopped having sex with my own sister years ago.

[helderheid]

57. Bwahahahah!!

:spray: :rofl:

[HeeBGBz]

27. What the fuck ever

Another random dig at the south. How insufferably witty.

[eagler]

34. Relax. I was born in the South. It's great being a father and an

uncle at the same time, And with my extra set of hands I can type twice as fast.

[HeeBGBz]

64. With an extra set of hands, who needs a sister?

Just a little touchy down here in Biloxi.
Kinda hard up, but I don't want to date anyone who can fit into my genes.

[Catherine Vincent]

36. You bad!

:evilgrin:

[Clark2008]

39. Actually, the only person running for president who has married

a relative is from up NORTH.

Please, drop the Southern bigotry.

It's unbecoming and not terribly funny as it's tired.

[eagler]

53. You're absolutely right and I apologize

[patricia92243]

3. Usually incest is between an adult and a helpless child. Keep the law on the books!!

[AllegroRondo]

73. Statutory rape is already illegal.

theres no need for an incest law in that case.

[Kerrytravelers]

4. The incest thing aside, it seems a bit predatory to me.

Why was a 24 year old man making the moves on a teenager?

Ick.

And where the hell is the rest of the family? Is there no one else? If there is, why aren't they stepping in? This seems like a sad situation all around.

And why were the children removed?

I have a ton of questions the article didn't touch.

[VelmaD]

32. I wish I could say I was surprised...

that more people haven't noticed the age difference...and how this guy should have been in jail years ago when he was having sex with a teenager 8 years younger than him.

[Waya]

6. I'm all for 'Live and let Live.....

....but I think this is a good law....keep it.

[Beausoleil]

7. Sure they didn't meet on the Love Boat?

[Psephos]

8. It's no one's business but theirs

How is this any different from any other victimless "morality crimes" that we have no problem with? Who, exactly, is being harmed here?

Smells hypocritical to me. Leave these poor people alone.

Peace.

[Beelzebud]

10. The victims will be the children they have.... Unbelievable...

Ever hear of genetics?

I'm astounded that anyone could argue in favor of brother and sister having sexual relations...

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

13. Are the children disabled?

I'd suspect the story would have mentioned it if they were.

They've got a good counterargument. Are people with genetic defects outlawed from reproducing? Women over 40?

[Beelzebud]

17. If brother and sister mate, there will be genetic defects. Read a book...

Holy Shit I can't believe there are people standing up for INCEST.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

20. Not at all.

If brothers and sisters mate, the odds of genetic defects being expressed goes up.

But it's not like it's a guarantee that they're going to have extra super retard babies.

[Javaman]

31. Creeps me out, reminds me of that intense X-Files episode...

with the family of imbreds. Really good scary one.

[CatWoman]

43. I remember that episode!!!

creepy, indeed!!! :scared:

[mentalsolstice]

59. Are you talking about the Peacocks?

Where they kept Mama under the bed? Creepy!

[Javaman]

72. That's the one. Oh man. just so creepy bizarro! nt

[HockeyMom]

33. I worked with two people (brothers) who were the product

of a brother/sister relationship. They were not only physically disabled, but SEVERELY mentally disabled with the capacity of a newborn. Both were totally dependent on round the clock care for all their basic needs.

I also worked with two other people who were the product of a father/daughter incest. The results of that was even worse than the brother/sister relationship.

There is a genetic reason for barring close family members from mating. If this couple had 4 children together and none were disabled, there were very, very lucky.

[wuushew]

44. Isn't "defect" a subjective term?

as a person posting on a leftist forum I find your support for co-coercive regulation of human procreation rather fascist.

[Beelzebud]

62. A: This isn't a "leftist" forum. B: Liberals don't condone incest.

[uppityperson]

54. Not horribly overall.

Brother/sister might have more genetic problems, but the word is "might", not "will". Age has a bigger impact on genetic problems.

Incest laws are to protect predation. If it is consensual, go for it. If incest laws are to protect from genetic problems, why are older parents allowed to breed, why are people with inherited genetic problems allowed to breed?

[helderheid]

60. Boggles the mind!

:crazy:

[wicket]

26. Found another article - 2 of their 4 children are severely disabled:

LINK

In October 2001, aged just 16, Susan gave birth to a baby boy, Erik. He was taken into care and now - aged five and living with foster parents in Potsdam - can hardly walk or speak properly.

Sarah, now four, was born in 2003 and suffers similar disabilities. She was also taken into care, as was Nancy, nearly three, who appears to be normal. Sophia, now two, was born while Stuebing was in prison.

Under the care of German social services, Susan tried to hide the pregnancy by wearing baggy clothes. She gave birth alone in the bath. Stuebing has since been sterilised in the mistaken belief that if he has no more children with his sister, he will evade jail. And yet both are apparently in denial about their children's disabilities, despite expert opinion.

[originalpckelly]

50. Nice how people conveniently forget this.

:grr:

I cannot believe someone would defend this type of relationship.

[wicket]

74. Me too

Never thought I'd see the day incest would be defended on DU :crazy:

[LisaL]

71. They have 4 children.

According to this article, 2 children are mentally and physically disabled.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=439288&in_page_id=1879

[JackRiddler]

65. It's still none of our business

If it's consensual...

And what really seems weird is all these people here who are no doubt MUCH older than both acting like 24/17 is some kind of awesome huge difference.

[Alexander]

11. What about the kids, who tend to suffer from genetic defects?

Yes, you are harming people - the unfortunate children. Kids born to incestuous couples can - and often do - get the genetic short end of the stick.

[santaclawsz]

19. they're not the only ones.

There are a lot of people carrying various genetic diseases that have kids.

[Hosnon]

14. I would agree if there were no children involved. NT.

[not_a_robot]

37. NO way!

These people are convenient vicitms. It's socially taboo so you can say or do whatever you want to them, and definitly laugh in glee at their pain and suffering!

[originalpckelly]

49. No, this is not a morality crime, it's a science crime.

They are biologically related siblings, and their children may have as of yet undianosed problems because these two individuals procreated. This relationship is also very predatory, there is an 8 year difference between the parties to the relationship, and one of the parties is 16.

[smirkymonkey]

67. There is a reason for incest laws, none of which have to do with

sexual prudery. Although having sex with a sibling IS pretty creepy.

The children of couples who are closely related usually end up deformed or disabled in some way. Look at the royal families of Europe. And the Bushes.

[no_hypocrisy]

15. Hansel and Gretel want to marry? n/t

[Hosnon]

16. Two consenting adults should be able to marry, have sex, etc.

However, until there is sufficient technology to protect against the negative effects of inbreeding, reproduction should be limited.

[Colobo]

22. What a world we live in...

[mainegreen]

23. Their wanting to have kids is stupid, but the arguments I see here are like arguments for this:

[Alcibiades]

24. It's not a slippery slope here

These are age-old laws that are there for a good reason. There are other reasons, besides genetic ones, to prohibit incest. The normal family dynamic is messed up enough without adding sex to the mix.

Thankfully, no one is suggesting that people with genetic defects, mental illnesses, or beyond a certain age be prohibited from breeding. Though that may sound like a good idea to some, government inevitably becomes repressive when it bars people from procreating--bars people from procreating beyond the general prohibition against incest, that is.

He did his time once, and has been made an example of. Leave them alone, but take the laws off the books? That's going too far.

[Perky]

25. ewwww ewwww ewwwwww

to each his own but ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

:wow: :puke: :wow: :puke: :wow: :puke: :wow: :puke: :wow: :puke:

[stevedeshazer]

28. Uncle Dad! Auntie Mom!

:silly:

[enid602]

29. incest

in the Bush family, it's considered a mixed marriage if the bride and groom aren't related before the wedding.

[Nye Bevan]

30. I am a social libertarian

But I will make an exception here and say that I think we should keep the laws against incest.

Most of the reaction in this thread is along the lines of "Ugh, gross", and there is a very good reason for this. Over thousands of years we have been programmed by evolution into believing that incest *is* disgusting and gross-- people who thought that it was OK to breed with their siblings tended to have babies with genetic defects who were less likely to grow up to breed themselves. (I read that there is a 50% chance that the offspring of siblings will have genetic defects).

And for those who can get comfortable with brother-sister incest, how about the case of consensual incest between a 42 year old father and his 22 year old daughter? I am usually wary of "slippery slope" type arguments but I think that this does apply here. I am also concerned about the example decriminalization would set for 14 and 15 year old brothers and sisters who are starting to experiment sexually.

I think there is a stark contrast with the issue of gay marriage here, which I am 100% in favor of. Opponents of gay marriage are bigoted homophobes. Laws against incest, on the other hand, rationally proscribe an activity that has (for good reason) always been taboo.

[LeftyMom]

35. Okay, here's a fair compromise

Permit incestuous pairings when one or both parties can demonstrate that they are sterile as a result of age, health condition or surgical intervention. At that point it's still a bad idea but no worse from a risk to society than unstable or simply incompatible people marrying, and no business of the state. When the risk of bearing children with retardation of disease is very high, the state has an interest in preventing such pairings, so forbid them in fertile people. Sure, there's still the "ick factor" but that kicks in for some people when they see same-sex couples or mixed race couples or even couples who aren't terribly attractive and we can't base law on people's biases, as much as I happen to share this one.

[not_a_robot]

40. I feel the same way.

But your statement is missing a lot. For instance retarded people, mentally ill people, anyone that has a genetic 'defect' or has had childhood illness should also be included. If you are born blind deaf or with mishapen limbs, skin irregularities, muscle deformation, or any other form of impurities you should also be included in the sterilization rule. Also why don't we make sure those darkies and squinty eyed people cant reproduce either, or really anyone that doesn't fit in with aryan ideals.

Thanks guys this thread is the push i needed. The one that helped me realize that there is no difference at all between republican loyalists and democratic loyalists. You are all the same hearless souless people that just want to be on some winning team.

[uppityperson]

56. Golly, broadbrush much?

[Ron Green]

63. I just checked out the "comment" in your profile, and I've got to say

that you're pretty wrong in your assertion that DU members and FR members are ethically the same. In fact, I'll go so far as to say your thinking in this matter is really fucked up.

[uppityperson]

68. You mean this comment?

"After visiting both DU and free republic for over a year I can confidently state that you all have more in common ethically that anything. You're all just chosing teams so you have something to cheer for."

[Ron Green]

69. Yep, that's the one.

I've spent enough time on the other site to know there's something missing in basic human decency over there. We have our extreme cynics here, but for the most part DU consists of warm and caring people. In my experience this is not the case at the other place.

[uppityperson]

70. There are extremists all over. The number varies from place to place.

I guess it just goes to show you can always find what you are looking for if you look through enough stuff hard enough. Another friend to keep an eye on.

[uppityperson]

55. If I, an aging female, want to have sex with my aging partner, should we be compelled to do this too

since it have been well proven that older couples have a higher chance of Down's syndrome and other defects like that? How about people with genetic things they can pass on?

I agree with a lot of what you write. The "eww, icky" factor can be applied to "mommy and mom" (in reference to another post above "uncle dad/aunt mom") or 2 people whose skin colors aren't exactly the same.

I would be interested in seeing evidence of genetic problems between bro/sis, not just "everyone knows". I would like to see numbers, but am on a borrowed computer for a bit so will check back later to see.

[LeftyMom]

58. Huge disparities in odds of birth defects

First cousin pairings have a similar increase in odds of unfavorable outcome to the increase in risk when birthing at 41 rather than 30. Interesting article on that here: http://discovermagazine.com/2003/aug/featkiss/ It's a bit of a jump, but there's no compelling state interest there and problems generally only crop up when the inbreeding continues for several generations. The risk or significant impairment when siblings reproduce is about 50%. If the odds of you running somebody over any time you got in your car were 50%, you'd never get a license to drive- odds like that definitely indicate a compelling state interest, especially in Germany where those children's medical care will be funded by the state.

[Critters2]

61. Well said, LM. Wise compromise

Still, that "ick factor" is pretty strong for me, but your points are all correct.

[B Calm]

38. did Adam and Eve's children have sex together?

[CatWoman]

41. who else were they going to have sex with?

:shrug:

the serpent?

:shrug:

[Colobo]

42. Mmmm! Tough call!

[Kerrytravelers]

45. While most people won't see their sibling in a sexual manner, if incest laws are repealed,

then won't that create a way to defend those who manipulate their children into sexual relations? I'm not talking about children, but parents who pursue their older children (older teens) and those who are vulnerable? I can see a defense attorney taking advantage of the repeal of these laws.

Well, I'm no lawyer and have no experience in this area at all. This is just my initial reaction to repealing incest laws. Even if someone presents an intellectual argument that would stump my intellectual argument, I still can't help but see this as opening the floodgates to something that would be a negative for society, not a positive.

[wuushew]

46. Just prosecute it as normal statutory rape

The vast majority of humanity is not sexually attracted to kin, so I don't believe whether or not incest is legal has much of a bearing on its prevalence.

[Kerrytravelers]

47. This is true. But having incest on the books gives them an additional count, and if one gets tossed,

then there is still a crime to be charged with.

But, I am no legal expert. That's for sure!

[originalpckelly]

48. We know the relationship was predatory, and they are biologically related.

In my book those are two very good reasons to be against it, and I hope they lose.

[Sabriel]

51. Do they still qualify for the child bonus payment program?

Inquiring minds want to know.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6211737.stm

[cloudbase]

52. Next on Jerry Springer. . . n/t

[Donald Ian Rankin]

66. Some thoughts:

:-It's very hard to be objective about this, because of the "ick factor" - the fact that I *want* there to be good reasons to justify incest being illegal make it harder for me to decide if there really are.

:-A great many incestuous relations are the result of unethical pressure on one of the participants.

:-Many incestuous relations would be illegal anyhow, because one of the participants is under age - this might make a specific ban on incest less necessary.

:-Incestuous couples are much more likely to have disabled children than others. So are parents in various other categories who no-one is even suggesting forbidding from having children.

:-I find it very hard to see what business of the state it is if two consenting adults choose to have sex, even if they are closely related. As such, on balance I have to say that I don't think incest should be illegal. I wish that wasn't the case, though.