Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T14:05:10.551Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

KIN AND NON-KIN MARRIAGES AND FAMILY STRUCTURE IN A RICH TRIBAL SOCIETY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 January 2016

Omran Bakoush ,
Amin Bredan  and
Srdjan Denic
Omran Bakoush
Affiliation:
College of Medicine and Health Sciences, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, UAE
Amin Bredan
Affiliation:
VIB Inflammation Research Center, Ghent, Belgium Department of Biomedical Molecular Biology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
Srdjan Denic*
Affiliation:
College of Medicine and Health Sciences, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, UAE
*
1Corresponding author. Email: s.denic@uaeu.ac.ae
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Human consanguinity is often attributed to poverty, lack of education and social insecurity. Nevertheless, kin unions continue to be arranged in socioeconomically transformed societies. This study examined the structure of families and marriages in the rich tribal society of the United Arab Emirates, which has had a high gross domestic product for the last two generations and currently has one of the highest in the world. The respondents were 217 national medical students whose families are proportionally distributed to the population of the country emirates. The rate of parental consanguinity (defined as a union of any two cousins) was 36%. The social status and mean size of consanguineous and non-consanguineous families were not significantly different. In non-consanguineous families, polygamy was more common and the number of half-siblings per family was higher. The extended families were on average 7% larger among non-consanguineous families. In contrast, for the extended families of the participants’ grandparents, non-consanguineous families were smaller than their consanguineous counterparts. Participants from consanguineous families indicated that marriage of either a son or daughter was more difficult to arrange than did participants from non-consanguineous families. Though consanguineous parents had their offspring marry consanguineously more often than non-consanguineous parents, the numbers of married offspring in the two groups of families were not different. Consanguineous parents have more difficulty than non-consanguineous parents in finding spouses for themselves and for their offspring, and they arranged kin marriages for their children more often.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Biosocial Science , Volume 48 , Issue 6 , November 2016 , pp. 797 - 805
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press, 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abdel Majid, L., Abu-Khalid, F. A., Al-Amin, M. H., Al-Azmeh, A. & Al-Banna, S. (2003) Arab Human Development Report 2003. Building a Knowledge Society. United Nations Development Programme, Regional Bureau for Arab States (RBAS), New York.Google Scholar
Al-Arrayed, S. & Hamamy, H. (2012) The changing profile of consanguinity rates in Bahrain, 1990–2009. Journal of Biosocial Science 44(3), 313–319.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Al-Gazali, L. I., Bener, A., Abdulrazzaq, Y. M., Micallef, R., Al-Khayat, A. I. & Gaber, T. (1997) Consanguineous marriages in the United Arab Emirates. Journal of Biosocial Science 29(4), 491–497.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barbour, B. & Salameh, P. (2009) Consanguinity in Lebanon: prevalence, distribution and determinants. Journal of Biosocial Science 41(4), 505–517.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bittles, A. H. (1994) The role and significance of consanguinity as a demographic variable. Population and Development Review 20, 561–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bittles, A. H. (2001) Consanguinity and its relevance to clinical genetics. Clinical Genetics 60(2), 89–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bittles, A. H. (2012) Consanguinity in Context. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bittles, A., Grant, J., Sullivan, S. & Hussain, R. (2002) Does inbreeding lead to decreased human fertility? Annals of Human Biology 29(2), 111–130.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bittles, A. H. & Neel, J. V. (1994) The costs of human inbreeding and their implications for variations at the DNA level. Nature Genetics 8(2), 117–121.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chamie, J. (1986) Polygyny among Arabs. Population Studies 40(1), 55–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
CIA (2013) The World Factbook. Central Intelligence Agency, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Clark, G., Cummins, N., Hao, Y. & Vidal, D. D. (2014) The Son Also Rises: Surnames and the History of Social Mobility. Princeton University Press, NJ.Google Scholar
Denic, S., Aden, B., Nagelkerke, N. & Essa, A. A. (2013) ) β-Thalassemia in Abu Dhabi: consanguinity and tribal stratification are major factors explaining the high prevalence of the disease. Hemoglobin 37(4), 351–358.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Denic, S., Nagelkerke, N. & Agarwal, M. (2010) Choice of kin in consanguineous marriages: effects of altruism and ecological factors. Annals of Human Biology 37(6), 738–753.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Denic, S., Nagelkerke, N. & Agarwal, M. M. (2008) Consanguineous marriages and endemic malaria: can inbreeding increase population fitness. Malaria Journal 7(1), 150.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
El-Mouzan, M. I., Al-Salloum, A. A., Al-Herbish, A. S., Qurachi, M. M. & Al-Omar, A. A. (2007) Regional variations in the prevalence of consanguinity in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Medical Journal 28(12), 1881–1884.Google ScholarPubMed
Heard-Bey, F. (2001) The tribal society of the UAE and its traditional economy. In Al Abed, I. & Hellyer, P. (eds) United Arab Emirates: A New Perspective. Trident Press Ltd, London, pp. 98–116.Google Scholar
Helgason, A., Pálsson, S., Guðbjartsson, D. F. & Stefánsson, K. (2008) An association between the kinship and fertility of human couples. Science 319(5864), 813–816.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jablonka, E. & Lamb, M. J. (2014) Evolution in Four Dimensions : Genetic, Epigenetic, Behavioral, and Symbolic Variation in the History of Life, revised edition. MIT press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jurdi, R. & Saxena, P. C. (2003) The prevalence and correlates of consanguineous marriages in Yemen: similarities and contrasts with other Arab countries. Journal of Biosocial Science 35(1), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Khlat, M. (1997) Endogamy in the Arab world. In Teebi, A. S. & Farag, T. I. (eds) Genetic Disorders among Arab Populations. Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 63–82.Google Scholar
Sandridge, A., Takeddin, J., Al-Kaabi, E. & Frances, Y. (2010) Consanguinity in Qatar: knowledge, attitude and practice in a population born between 1946 and 1991. Journal of Biosocial Science 42(1), 59–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott-Emuakpor, A. B. (1974) The mutation load in an African population. I. An analysis of consanguineous marriages in Nigeria. American Journal of Human Genetics 26(6), 674.Google Scholar
Sueyoshi, S. & Ohtsuka, R. (2003) Effects of polygyny and consanguinity on high fertility in the rural Arab population in South Jordan. Journal of Biosocial Science 35(4), 513–526.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tadmouri, G. O., Nair, P., Obeid, T., Al Ali, M. T., Al Khaja, N. & Hamamy, H. A. (2009) Consanguinity and reproductive health among Arabs. Reproductive Health 6, 17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Theodorou, K. & Couvet, D. (2006) On the expected relationship between inbreeding, fitness, and extinction. Genetics Selection Evolution 38(4), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walker, R. S. & Bailey, D. H. (2014) Marrying kin in small‐scale societies. American Journal of Human Biology 26(3), 384–388.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
World Bank. (2008) The Road Not Traveled: Education Reform in the Middle East and North Africa. World Bank, Washington, DC.Google Scholar