Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-tj2md Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-15T22:20:16.751Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Prevalence and determinants of consanguineous marriage and its types in India: evidence from the National Family Health Survey, 2015–2016

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 July 2020

Santosh Kumar Sharma ,
Mir Azad Kalam ,
Saswata Ghosh Open the ORCID record for Saswata Ghosh [Opens in a new window]  and
Subho Roy
Santosh Kumar Sharma
Affiliation:
Centre for Health Policy, Asian Development Research Institute, Patna, India
Mir Azad Kalam
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University of Calcutta, Kolkata, India
Saswata Ghosh*
Affiliation:
Institute of Development Studies Kolkata (IDSK), Salt Lake, Kolkata, India
Subho Roy
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University of Calcutta, Kolkata, India
*
*Corresponding author. Email: ghosh.saswata@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to estimate the prevalence and examine the determinants of consanguineous marriage types in India. Data for 456,646 ever-married women aged 15–49 years were analysed from the National Family Health Survey (NFHS)-4 conducted in 2015–16. The overall prevalence of consanguineous marriage was 9.9%; the South region (23%) and North-East region (3.1%) showed the highest and lowest prevalences, respectively. Muslims had a higher prevalence (15%) than Hindus (9%). The prevalence of first cousin marriage (8.7%) was more than that of second cousin (0.7%) and of uncle–niece marriages (0.6%). Women living in urban areas and in nuclear families, having a higher level of education and belonging to affluent families were less likely to marry their cousins (p < 0.01). Women living in the South region of the country were more likely to marry their cousins, as well as uncles (p < 0.001). Close scrutiny of the trends in the results (odds ratios) revealed no clear relationship between socioeconomic condition and consanguineous marriage. The study results suggest that religion and north–south regional dichotomy in culture largely determine consanguineous marriage rather than socioeconomic condition in India.

Keywords

Consanguineous marriage typesDeterminantsIndia
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Biosocial Science , Volume 53 , Issue 4 , July 2021 , pp. 566 - 576
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

Al-Gazali, LI, Bener, A, Abdulrazzaq, YM, Micallef, R, Al-Khayat, AI and Gaber, T (1997) Consanguineous marriages in the United Arab Emirates. Journal of Biosocial Science 29(4), 491–497.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Armstrong, K (1991) Muhammad: A Western Attempt to Understand Islam. Harper Collins, London.Google Scholar
Assaf, S and Khawaja, M (2009) Consanguinity trends and correlates in the Palestinian Territories. Journal of Biosocial Science 41, 107–124.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Banerjee, SK and Roy, TK (2002) Parental consanguinity and offspring mortality: the search of possible linkage in the Indian context. Asia-Pacific Population Journal 17, 17–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbour, B and Salameh, P (2009) Consanguinity in Lebanon: prevalence, distribution and determinants. Journal of Biosocial Science 41(4), 505–517.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bener, A and Hussain, R (2006) Consanguineous unions and child health in the state of Qatar. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology 20(5), 372–378.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bhagat, RB (2017) Migration and Urban Transition in India: Implications for Development. Population Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, UN. URL: https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/events/pdf/expert/27/papers/V/paper-Bhagat-final.pdf (accessed on 14th January, 2020)Google Scholar
Bittles, AH (1994) The role and significance of consanguinity as a demographic variable. Population and Development Review 20, 561–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bittles, AH (2001) Consanguinity and its relevance to clinical genetics. Clinical Genetics 60, 89–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bittles, AH (2002) Endogamy, consanguinity and community genetics. Journal of Genetics 81(3), 91–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bittles, A (2011) The Global Prevalence of Consanguinity. URL: http://www.consang.net.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bittles, AH (2012) Consanguinity in Context. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bittles, AH and Black, ML (2010) Consanguineous marriage and evolution. Annual Review of Anthropology 39, 193–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bittles, AH, Coble, JM and Rao, NA (1993) Trends in consanguineous marriage in Karnataka, South India, 1980–89. Journal of Biosocial Science 25(1), 111–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bittles, AH and Hussain, R (2000) An analysis of consanguineous marriage in the Muslim population of India at regional and state levels. Annals of Human Biology 27, 163–171.Google ScholarPubMed
Bittles, AH, Mason, WM, Greene, J and Appaji, RN (1991) Reproductive behaviour and health in consanguineous marriages. Science 252, 789–794.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chatterjee, C and Ramu, S (2018) Gender and its rising role in modern Indian innovation and entrepreneurship. IIMB Management Review 30, 62–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Datta, PB and Gailey, R (2012) Empowering women through social entrepreneurship: case study of a women’s cooperative in India. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 36 (3), 569–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deshai, S (2008) The Great North–South Debate Rages. URL: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/2949925.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst (accessed10th October, 2019).Google Scholar
Dyson, T and Moore, M (1983) On kinship structure, female, and demographic behavior in India. Population and Development Review 9(1), 35–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Filmer, D and Pritchett, LH (2001) Estimating wealth effects without expenditure data– or tears: an application to educational enrolments in states of India. Demography 38, 115–132.Google ScholarPubMed
Ghurye, GS (1961) Caste, Class and Occupation. Popular Prakashan, Bombay.Google Scholar
Givens, B and Hirschman, C (1994) Modernization and consanguineous marriage in Iran. Journal of Marriage and the Family 56, 820–834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamamy, H, Antonarakis, ES, Cavalli-Sforza, LL, Temtamy, S, Romeo, G, Kate, LP et al. (2011) Consanguineous Marriages: Pearls and Perils. Geneva International Consanguinity Workshop Report. Genetics in Medicine 13, 841–847.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hamamy, H, Jamhawi, L, Al-Darawsheh, J and Ajlouni, K (2005) Consanguineous marriages in Jordan: why is the rate changing with time? Clinical Genetics 67, 511–516.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hussain, R and Bittles, AH (1998) The prevalence and demographic characteristics of consanguineous marriage in Pakistan. Journal of Biosocial Science 30, 261–275.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hussain, R and Bittles, AH (2000) Sociodemographic correlates of consanguineous marriage in the Muslim population of India. Journal of Biosocial Science 32, 433–442.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
IIPS and ICF (2017) National Family Health Survey (NFHS-4), 2015–16: India. International Institute for Population Sciences, Mumbai, India.Google Scholar
Islam, MM (2012) The practice of consanguineous marriage in Oman: prevalence, trends and determinants. Journal of Biosocial Science 44, 571–594.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Islam, MM (2018) The changing pattern and determinants of declining consanguinity in Jordan during 1990–2012. Annals of Human Biology 45(2), 140–147.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Iyer, S (2002) Demography and Religion in India. Oxford University Press, Oxford, Delhi.Google Scholar
Jurdi, R and Saxena, P (2003) The prevalence and correlates of consanguineous marriages in Yemen: similarities and contrasts with other Arab Countries. Journal of Biosocial Science 35, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kalam, MA, Pal, S and Ray, S (2016) Trends of consanguineous marriage among the Darbhangia Khotta Muslim population of Chandipur village of Malda, West Bengal. Indian Journal of Physical Anthropology and Human Genetics 35(2), 171–177.Google Scholar
Kaplan, S, Pinar, G, Kaplan, B, Aslantekin, F, Karabulut, E, Ayar, B and Dilmen, U (2016) The prevalence of consanguineous marriages and affecting factors in Turkey: a national survey. Journal of Biosocial Science 47, 718–726.Google Scholar
Kelmemi, W, Chelly, I, Kharrat, M and Chaabouni-Bouhamed, H (2015) Consanguinity and homozygosity among Tunisian patients with an autosomal recessive disorder. Journal of Biosocial Science 47, 718–726.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koc, I (2008) Prevalence and socio-demographic correlates of consanguineous marriages in Turkey. Journal of Biosocial Science 40, 137–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krishnamoorthy, S and Audinarayana, N (2001) Trends in consanguinity in South India. Journal of Biosocial Science 33,185–197.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Majumdar, DN (1958) Caste and Communication in an Indian Village. Asia Publishing House, Bombay.Google Scholar
Mammen, K and Paxson, C (2000) Women’s work and economic development. Journal of Economic Perspectives 14(4), 141–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Modell, B and Darr, A (2002) Science and society: genetic counselling and customary consanguineous marriage. Nature Reviews Genetics 3, 225–229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MOPPP (2019) Special Representation in Services for SC/ST. Department of Personnel and Training, Ministry of Personnel, Public grievances and Pensions, Government of India. URL: https://dopt.gov.in/sites/default/files/ch-11.pdf (accessed 12th December 2019).Google Scholar
MOSJE (2020) Welfare of the Other Backward Classes. Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Government of India. URL: http://socialjustice.nic.in/UserView/index?mid=31548 (accessed25th January 2020).Google Scholar
MOSPI (2017) Selected Socio-economic Statistics India 2017. Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Central Statistics Office, Social Statistics Division, Government of India. URL: http://mospi.nic.in/sites/default/files/publication_reports/SelectedSocio-EconomicStatisticsIndia2017_27oct17.pdf (accessed 25th December, 2019)Google Scholar
Mukherjee, DP, Das, S and Banik, SD (2007) Trends of consanguineous marriages in a Sunni Muslim population of West Bengal, India. Anthropologischer Anzeiger 65, 253–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Padmadas, SSP and Nair, SP (2002) Consanguineous unions and their effect on reproductive outcomes: the case of India. Genus 58, 113–139.Google Scholar
Rao, SP, Inbaraj, SG and Jesudian, G (1972) Rural–urban differences in consanguinity. Journal of Medical Genetics 9, 174–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shami, SA, Grant, JC and Bittles, AH (1994) Consanguineous marriage within social/occupational class boundaries in Pakistan. Journal of Biosocial Science 26, 91–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shenk, M, Towner, MC, Voss, EA and Alam, N (2016) Consanguineous marriage, kinship ecology, and market transition. Current Anthropology 57, S167–S180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tadmouri, GO, Nair, P, Obeid, T, Al-Ali, MT, Al Khaja, N and Hamamy, HA (2009) Consanguinity and reproductive health among Arabs. Reproductive Health 6, 17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tfaily, R (2005) First cousin marriages and marital relationships in Egypt, Jordan, Turkey and Yemen. Paper presented at the XXV International Population Conference of International Union for the Scientific Study of Population (IUSSP), Tours, France. Google Scholar
TFSS (2006) Research on Family Structure in Turkey. Family, Ministry of Family and Social Policy, Turkey. URL: https://ailevecalisma.gov.tr/uploads/athgm/uploads/pages/indirilebilir-yayinlar/research-on-family-structure-in-turkiye-2006.pdf (accessed 30th January, 2020).Google Scholar
Washbrook, D (2009) Intimations of modernity in South India. South Asian History and Culture 1(1), 125–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar