ENGLAND: He Was Always Nicknamead Crazy Geeoerge So It is No Real Surprise when He Married His Sister, March 22, 2008

DAILY MIRROR
March 22, 2008

'He was always nicknamed Crazy George so it was no real surprise when he married his own sister' - EX-WIFE MABEL YESTERDAY
Lottery winner George Wass married to his sister Alice
Dark secret of £5m George

By Laurie Hanna 22/03/2008

A married couple who won £5.3million on the lotto are brother and
sister.

George and Alice Wass share the same mother from different
relationships.

The couple, who live in a caravan on an East London tip, met in 1983
when she traced her family roots. But the pair insist they had been
told at the time they were not related.

Alice, 61, said last night: "I showed my mother photos of George and
she said she'd never seen him before in her life."

They were introduced as long-lost brother and sister 25 years ago -
and ended up as husband and wife.

George and Alice Wass insisted they had disproved claims they were
related when they fell for each other at an emotional meeting in 1983.
But the £5.3million lottery winners' tangled love life was unravelled
when the Mirror yesterday confronted them with records that showed
they shared the same mum, Margaret Wass.

Alice, 61, who lives in a caravan on a rubbish tip with George said:
"This is all coming out now. What am I supposed to do?
"If I'm getting you right, we've got the same mother but different
fathers. You have learnt a lot more than I have." George, 63, walked
out on his wife Mabel and their three children after he met widowed
Alice.

Mabel said last night: "He was always nicknamed Crazy George so it was
no real surprise when he did something like this."

Alice was introduced to George after she asked the Salvation Army to
look into her childhood history when her 19-year-old daughter Valerie
was murdered in 1983.

She said she never knew her mum - by then wed to Frederick Holding -
was married before and was shocked to learn she had a half-brother.
But her mother's marriage certificate shows she was previously known
as Margaret Wass.

Alice added: "The Salvation Army came back with the name George Wass.
We met and George thought I was his sister and I thought George was my
brother." They soon fell head over heels for each other and five
months later he moved into her house in Stratford, East London.
Alice said: "We started having feelings for one another so I told
George we had to part and never see each other again."

But she showed Margaret a load of photos he had given her of him and
his dad Lionel Wass with brother Joseph. She denied knowing them.
Alice added: "I said 'Mum, is that my father?' It was an elderly man.
She said, 'Alice, where have you got this from?'

"I replied 'I've been made to believe that is my father and if he is,
this man here, George, is my brother.'

"She said, 'I've never seen that man in my life before.'" George
added: "I don't know what my mother was and frankly I don't give a
damn. If that was my mother, my old man would have told me."

The couple, who won the lotto jackpot last Saturday, wed in 1987.
George was born in India where Lionel was in the Army. After his birth
the family moved back to England but his parents split. He was brought
up by Lionel and lost touch with Margaret. Two years later, she gave
birth to Alice in Ireland.

Nine years after that, in 1955, Margaret married Frederick, who Alice
lists as her father on official documents. No birth certificate exists
for George, who was born in a military hospital. And there appears to
be no record of Alice's birth. It is possible, in the absence of these
papers, that Alice was adopted which means they do not have the same
biological mother. But Alice said the only mum she has ever known was
Margaret.

Mabel, of Grays, Essex, confirmed he and Alice were introduced as
brother and sister.

She said: "The Salvation Army wrote to him in 1983, saying they had
tracked down a half-sister of his and asking if he would like to meet
her.

"She came down to visit us. They had a connection but I had kind of
expected that because they were brother and sister after all.
"Then she kept inviting him round to hers, asking him to help her do
little things.

"That's when I thought they were a bit too close."

George and Alice, of Barking, East London, were thought to be staying
in a hotel last night.

DAUGHTER MURDERED
Alice Wass is still grieving for daughter Valerie, who was murdered by
her dad before he committed suicide.

Heartbroken Alice told the Mirror: "I might have won £5.3m but it will
not give me back the one thing I want - Valerie."

Valerie, 19, was strangled and hidden under her bed in the family home
in East London in October 1983.

The gruesome discovery only came after Aubrey Playfair, Alice's first
husband, was found decapitated at a nearby railway line

Alice, who met George two months after the tragedy, said: "This money
will do me no good because the one thing I want is dead. Since Valerie
was murdered I've lived on tablets. I do not live the high life."

FORBIDDEN SEX APPEAL
By Tom Pettifor
Half the people separated from relatives at a young age experience
strong sexual feelings when they are reunited.

Psychiatrists believe the natural repulsion brothers and sisters
experience for each other as children acts as a barrier to incest.
But those who miss out on this process can develop obsessive feelings
for their sibling in adulthood.

Research published in the British Medical Journal in 1995 found 50 per
cent of people seeking post-adoption counselling "experienced strong
sexual feelings in reunions" with their real family.

One example was Nick Cameron, 28, and his half-sister Danielle Heaney,
22, who were found guilty of incest.

The story of their bizarre relationship will be told in full in a
Channel 4 documentary next week - Sleeping With My Sister.

Heaney, who has one child, was raised by her mother while Cameron was
brought up in foster care. They had sex weeks after meeting in the
summer of 2006.

The pair, from Kirkcaldy, Fife, were each put on probation for a year.
But the court allowed them to continue their relationship as long as
they didn't have sex.

Link to article

GERMANY: Sibling Sex Prosecutable in Germany, March 13, 2008

DER SPIEGEL March 13, 2008

Sibling Sex Remains Prosecutable in Germany


Germany's high court ruled on Thursday that laws against incest do not violate the constitution. The ruling means that a man in a high-profile national incest case will soon be sent to prison for siring four children with his sister.

Siblings Patrick und Susan K. have had four children together. Patrick now faces an extended prison sentence.

Germany's Constitutional Court, the country's highest judicial body, ruled on Thursday that incest in Germany violates the country's Basic Law. The judges rejected a petition by Patrick K. to overturn previous incest convictions

According to paragraph 173 of the German Criminal Code, sexual relations between siblings is punishable by a fine or up to two years in prison. That law, the Karlsruhe court ruled on Thursday, is in accordance with the federal constitution.

In its ruling, the court stated legislators had not overreached their jurisdiction with laws that "protect the family order by punishing the damaging effects of incest." The inferior partner in such cases, the court said, must be protected. The court also stated that children spawned through incest had an increased risk of suffering from severe genetic damage.

The court's vice president, Winfred Hassemer, offered the sole dissent -- saying he felt the punishment must be commensurate with the offense, and that this went too far. "Much speaks for the fact that the regulation in its current state is based exclusively on moral beliefs rather than with the objective of legal protection."

Thursday's decision marks the end of an appeal by 30-year-old Patrick K., a resident of the eastern German city of Leipzig who fathered four children together with his sister. With the ruling, he will now have to serve a two-and-a-half year prison sentence.

Patrick S. and his 23-year-old sister Susan K. grew up in separate households. Patrick, seven years her senior, grew up in orphanages and foster homes, and the two first became acquainted after he had sought out his birth mother in 2000. At the time, Patrick was 23 and Susan 16. Susan would later give birth to the pair's four children, sparking investigations that resulted in several incest convictions.

Link to article

THE GUARDIAN
January 15, 2008

Did a pair of twins really get married by mistake?
by Jon Henley

So you're sitting in the pub and your nice-but-naive friend says: "Hey, I heard the most amazing story the other day. There were these twins, right, a boy and a girl, who were separated at birth and adopted by different families. And, like, years later, by an amazing coincidence, they meet. And fall madly in love, and get married. Straight up! Then, obviously, they find out they're actually brother and sister. And it all has to be annulled, and they're just devastated. It's the ultimate nightmare. Can you imagine?"

Assuming your brain is still functioning like the well-oiled piece of precision engineering it is, your response would, I trust, be: "That's a wind-up if ever I heard one. Think about it for a minute - you mean these two meet by accident, discover not only that they were both adopted but were born on exactly the same day in exactly the same town, and still never pause to wonder whether they might be related? Pull the other one. What did it say on their birth certificates?"

Last week it was reported that this unlikely scenario had actually taken place - and news outlets the world over went bananas. Biologists and psychotherapists came forward to confirm the "genetic inevitability" of the pair's attraction and lamented the "cruelty of fate" and "trauma of forced separation".

The tabloids screamed: "Are YOU one of the twins - or do you know them? Get in touch NOW on 020 ..."

Here's the thing: it all came from a single remark more than a month ago by the vehemently anti-abortion Roman Catholic peer and father of four, Lord Alton, in favour of all children having the right to know the identity of their biological parents.

He had heard about this particular case, he said, from the judge who handled the annulment. Or perhaps (he later admitted) a judge who was "familiar with the case". Britain's top family judge, Sir Mark Potter, has never heard of the story. And, as the excellent Heresy Corner blog notes, the whole thing is statistically improbable, procedurally implausible (for 40 years, adoption practice has been to keep twins together) and based on the equivalent of a friend in the pub saying, "Hey, I heard the most amazing story the other day."

Still, stranger things have happened.


LINK TO ARTICLE

ENGLAND: Children Cheated of an Identity, January 13, 2008

SUNDAY LONDON TIMES
January 13, 2008

Children cheated of an identity
David Alton

The heartrending story of twins who were separated and adopted at birth, only to meet later in life and marry, could easily be dismissed as a Greek tragedy, a one in a million coincidence. That would be a mistake.

With many children now conceived by in vitro fertilisation (IVF), and having the same biological parent, the chances of this happening again have significantly increased.

The case illustrates the importance of providing every child - whether born naturally, as these twins were, or by IVF - with a true record of their identity. A law professor has been in touch with me to say how such a record averted a marriage between an adopted brother and sister.

The current debate in parliament about what appears on birth certificates could either make the situation worse – by allowing the true identity of biological parents to be removed – or provide greater transparency and truth. You only have to look at websites such as the Donor Sibling Registry to see why this matters.

This database enables parents to make contact with the anonymous donors who supplied half of the genes of their offspring; children can search for their unknown genetic parents; and families may make contact with genetic half-siblings with a donor in common.

Thousands of people have registered on that site looking for sperm donors, parents and for the children they helped to conceive. The site states that the largest match made so far has been between 26 half-siblings to a single donor, who is also listed.

One man, a Californian artist, is father to 25 babies by 18 women. In Britain, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) draws the line at 10 donor-conceived children.

In the case of sperm donation – since the sperm donations would probably be at the same IVF clinic or at least in the same city, and possibly all within a year or so, for example a student at university – there may well be a good chance that children born from these donations will grow up in the same city at around the same time, possibly some of them going to the same school, even in the same year group.

Without absolute knowledge of your genetic profile the possibility of unwitting incestuous relationships is obvious.

Three years ago I pressed the government to give British children the right to know the identity of their biological parents – and the donor anonymity that previously applied was lifted. But this tells only half the story. We gave the right to inquire but created no duty to tell.

The HFEA is the guardian of that information, and at 18 a person has the right to ask for those details – in law they might have been married for two years by then. More problematic still is that your inquiry will be dependent on second sight – some intuition that the parents bringing you up are not your natural parents. How many young people would call the HFEA, or even think of doing so?

Witnesses who gave evidence to parliament expressed anger and frustration and described the often frantic efforts they had made to discover their true identity. One woman said: “I was angry, I had been cheated, and discriminated against, and lumbered with a fake identity.”

We must also guard against undermining the dignity of human procreation and the human relationship between one generation and the next and turning children into accessories.

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child is clear: we must ensure that every child can “preserve his or her identity”.

For an adopted child we have increasingly moved towards telling them the truth at an early age. That good principle should apply to donor-conceived children. Don’t they have the same right to know the truth?

In a world that for security reasons wants to identify us by our DNA and test us for genetic disorders, it would be wrong not to provide this information. If a child discovers the information by accident, or as the consequence of a tragic scenario, they will despise those who kept it from them. We may also jeopardise their future health.

One of the deepest questions that we ask ourselves is “who am I?” The right to lineage affects us all – and uncertainty of parentage can be profoundly unsettling.

The guidance of the Oracle of Delphi to the Lydian king, Croesus, was that to be happy, he must know himself. The popularity of television programmes such as Who Do You Think You Are? shows that those ancient desires to know lineage, genealogy and identity are not confined to antiquity.

Baroness Ruth Deech – an expert in family law – is rightly asking parliament to reject the government’s proposal to allow the identity of fathers not to appear on birth certificates. “Mine is a plea not to include a deliberate biological lie on a birth certificate,” she says.

So what should we do instead? When a child comes into the world, parents would get two birth certificates, a long and short version. These should accurately tell the child’s true story.

One certificate could contain the basic facts of your birth while the longer version could record the fact of conception by donor. When using the certificate to obtain a passport or driving licence it would thus be possible to sustain family privacy while also allowing for truthfulness.

Crucially, this legal document would be a guarantee that every citizen would be able to establish privately the details of their true identity.

That, in turn, might lessen the chances of tragic outcomes in the future.

David Alton is an independent crossbench peer


Link to article

ENGLAND: Foetal Attraction, January 13, 2008

SUNDAY LONDON TIMES
January 13, 2008

Foetal Attraction


The revelation that a pair of twins had inadvertently married raises questions about the attraction of siblings who suffer separation and how the IVF explosion could lead to more such cases
Richard Woods and Claire Newell

Imagine what they thought, imagine the turmoil they endured. They are the twins who, it emerged on Friday, were separated at birth and given up for adoption only to meet by chance years later - and marry.

The man and woman, unaware that they were brother and sister, had grown up separately, perhaps far apart, in different families. Yet when fate brought them together again, they experienced an uncanny bond and a sexual attraction.

As Lord Alton, who revealed the case, said: “They were never told they were twins. They met later in life and felt an inevitable attraction.”

Did they sense some blood relationship? It certainly must have seemed odd: both had been born on the same day in the same year. Did they just take that as an incredible, happy coincidence? Did they not know they were adopted? Or did they suspect they were related, only for the power of their attraction to prove overwhelming?

According to Alton, who was told about the case by a judge, the couple married and only later discovered that they were twins. “The judge had to deal with the consequences of their marriage, and all the issues of their separation,” he said.

“For them it was a terrible tragedy. It was an incredibly heartrending experience.”

The marriage was annulled at a special hearing in the High Court last year with the judge ruling it had never been valid. Under the 1986 Marriage Act, it is illegal to marry your sibling, parent, grandparent, grandchild and various other blood relatives.

The identity of the twins has not been revealed, nor their ages or where they are from. Nor is it known how they met or how they found out that they are twins. Experts, however, suspect they must be at least 30 because the law on adoption changed in 1976, making it much easier for adopted children to discover their biological parents. Since then, too, every effort has been made to keep together siblings put up for adoption.

Alton raised the case in the House of Lords not for its own sake but to draw attention to a wider issue. He believes that the risk of siblings unwittingly marrying each other is rising fast because of the prevalence of IVF treatment.

Since 1991 more than 27,000 babies have been born from donated sperm, eggs and embryos. As a result there may be thousands of people who unwittingly share one parent - and who may one day meet and fall in love.

What are the risks? Do such unwitting siblings have a special attraction to each other? And does the law need to be changed so that birth certificates always make it clear who a child’s biological parents are?

THE extraordinary case of the twins who married is not the first time a brother and sister have been lovers without knowing their blood relationship. In one case in the US, a Polish couple had 13 children and gave up nine for adoption.

They were all placed with families in a fairly small geographical area. Some of the children were later told they had been adopted, others were not.

Gary Klahr grew up not knowing he was adopted and in 1979 he met and dated Micka Zeman. They had a relationship for six months - and only later found out they were brother and sister.

“My relationship with my sister is the kind of thing that could have you jumping out of the window,” he said later. “But we didn’t know. Thank God we didn’t get married.”

Klahr also learnt that his best friend, a man he had met by chance in a bar, was in fact one of his brothers.

In Britain, William and Annette Watch had their marriage annulled in 1971 after it turned out that they were half-brother and half-sister. Soon after William was born, his parents separated and William was put into care. Later he went to boarding school and joined the army.

He fell in love with Annette, whom he believed to be the daughter of Leslie Ingham, a married man who had also begun a relationship with William’s mother. In fact, Annette was the daughter of Ingham and William’s mother - making her William’s half-sister.

When a court declared their marriage incestuous, Annette said: “I dream of having children. But it’s Bill I want first. We’ve been so happy together and just can’t bear it.”

Yesterday a media scrum descended on the house of Bill and Anne Watch in Andover, believing them to be the couple. Neighbours said that they had lived there for decades and had brought up two boys. Whether they were adopted or not is unclear.

Alton also says he has been told by a law professor of another incident in Britain where a teenage couple, at least one of whom was adopted, planned to marry, but because of their ages detailed checks were made on their parentage. It turned out that they were brother and sister, and the marriage did not go ahead.

With identical twins, there are powerful reasons for a special relationship - even if they have been separated. Having come from a single egg and sperm, they have the same genetic make-up, which exerts a profound influence on their lives even if they have been brought up in different circumstances.

However, with fraternal twins - who come from two eggs - and ordinary siblings, fewer genes are shared and there is no obvious reason why there should be an innate powerful attraction. Yet researchers believe that a peculiar syndrome does exist in cases where close relatives meet after being separated in childhood.

Glenn Wilson, a reader in personality at the Institute of Psychiatry, said: “It’s now a widely recognised phenomenon that if you meet someone you have been separated from as a child you may find you are extremely attracted to them. It’s known as Genetic Sexual Attraction, but it’s genetic only in that you are closely related to that person - it is not necessarily caused by strictly genetic factors. It could be caused by a very early experience of close family, which sets up your blueprint of what would be a good mate later on.

“People who meet family members later in life have described how they feel a ‘bolt of lightning’. ”

Ivor Lytton was one of those who experienced the thunderbolt. In 1998 Lytton, from Edinburgh, met Rita Meadows, who had grown up in South Africa, at a dinner party in Scotland. Lytton had organised the event after tracing Meadows, who had been adopted as a baby. She was his sister - but he had no idea how powerful the effect of meeting her would be.

“From the moment we met, I was smitten,” he said later. “She put a smile in my heart and a spring in my step.”

It nearly ruined his marriage and his life. “I didn’t choose to fall in love with her, or expect to feel sexual desire. It just happened,” he said. “Even in front of my wife, I made no attempt to hide my adoration.”

The danger is that siblings, unaware of their relationship, may marry and have children. The similarity in their DNA poses significant health risks.

“Siblings share half their genes just like a parent and offspring,” said Steve Jones, professor of genetics at University College London.

“So the problems which could arise from having a child with your brother and sister and having one with a parent are the same. There is little data for the implications of sibling marriage, but we know that whatever the childhood death rate is in a country, it is doubled if a child is born from two cousins.

“If a child is born from two siblings, the risks are likely to increase further. Many of us have recessive genes for genetic disorders like cystic fibrosis. Ifa person who has one of these genes has a child with a cousin or a sibling the chance of disability or death increases.”

UNDER current law, couples who conceive children using donor eggs or sperm do not have to tell the child or register the fact on the birth certificate.

People conceived since April 2005 from donated sperm or eggs have a right to know their biological parents’ identity once they reach 18 - but there is no requirement to tell them. They may not suspect that whoever brought them up is not their biological originator.

Alton and others are challenging the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill now going through parliament. They argue that in the age of IVF it is more important than ever for children to know their biological past.

“There needs to be more clarity in public records,” said Alton. “This is to prevent incestuous relationships, but also for reasons of genetics and disease prevention.”

Such is the scale of IVF now that in America one donor recently calculated that he could theoretically have fathered 4,960 children after 15 years of donating sperm. “That’s the top mathematical possibility,” he said. After taking into account failure rates and other variables, he put a more realistic estimate at 432.

In Britain, donors are restricted to 10 offspring. Nevertheless, it still means the risks of half-brothers and half-sisters meeting are rising fast.

However, some experts argue that forcing parents to record the full biological origins of children on birth certificates could sow even more confusion and family disruption. They point out that in an estimated 3%-10% of ordinary births, the husband or partner of the mother is not the true father of the child.

Stephen Hopwood, of Stowe Family Law in Harrogate, believes the current system gives sufficient protection. “You have to appreciate that [the case of the twins] is almost ludicrously farfetched, and a kneejerk reaction to difficult cases always makes bad law.”

He believes the laws on adoption have made such cases highly unlikely. “Prior to 1976, if you gave a child up for adoption, that was it, you never saw the child again. Since the 1976 Adoption Act, records are kept in a stricter way and it is easier for children to trace their biological parents.”

Mo O’Reilly, director of child placement for the British Association for Adoption & Fostering, said: “This situation is traumatic for the people involved, but incredibly rare. Today adopted children grow up with a greater knowledge of their birth families - and organisations try to place brothers and sisters together.”

But for anyone adopted before 1976, finding their biological parents is much more convoluted. And that may be why the twins who married did not discover their relationship until it was too late.

Additional reporting: Abul Taher

Interview with Paula Bernstein and Elyse Schein


Link to article

ENGLAND: Twins Marry, Unaware They're Related, Jaunary 13, 2008

NEW ZEALAND HERALD,
January 13, 2008

Twins Marry Unaware They're Related


Twins adopted by separate parents soon after birth later fell in love and married, unaware they were related, it has emerged.

The marriage was annulled by High Court judges, who ruled it had never been legally valid.

The case emerged during a debate in the House of Lords when pro-life campaigner Lord Alton of Liverpool raised the couple's plight to highlight what he said were deficiencies in the Human Embryology and Tissues Bill, making its way through Parliament.

The couple were adopted by different parents and separated soon after birth. They were never told they were twins and did not discover the truth until after their wedding.

Lord Alton, who learned of the case from a High Court judge, is concerned the bill, which makes it easier for lesbian and gay couples to have "test-tube" babies, weakens the rights of children to know their father.

He said: "[The brother and sister] met later in life and felt an inevitable attraction. I suspect that it will be a matter of litigation in the future if we do not make information of this kind available to children who have been donor-conceived."

The bill recognises same-sex couples as legal parents of children conceived through the use of donated sperm, eggs or embryos. Lord Alton said there would be nothing on birth certificates to let children know they had been donor-conceived, and raised concerns that IVF, through which one man can father up to 10 children, would lead to more such cases.

He was worried that the biological identity of one parent could be removed from the birth certificate, and recommended that the child's genetic history should be kept on record to prevent further mix-ups.

"The state is colluding in a deception," he said. "One of the most fundamental things of all is to know who you are. "

Dr Allan Pacey, a lecturer in andrology at the University of Sheffield and secretary of the British Fertility Society, said: "Whether or not you know you are donor-conceived depends on whether or not you are told. But I don't think you need legislation."


LINK TO ARTICLE

ENGLAND: Parted-at-birth Twins "Married," January 11, 2008

BBC NEWS,
January 11, 2008

Parted-at-birth Twins 'Married'

A pair of twins who were adopted by separate families as babies got married without knowing they were brother and sister, a peer told the House of Lords.

A court annulled the British couple's union after they discovered their true relationship, Lord Alton said.

The peer - who was told of the case by a High Court judge involved - said the twins felt an "inevitable attraction".

He said the case showed how important it was for children to be able to find out about their biological parents.

Details of the identities of the twins involved have been kept secret, but Lord Alton said the pair did not realise they were related until after their marriage.

'Truth will out'

The former Liberal Democrat MP raised the couple's case during a House of Lords debate on the Human Fertility and Embryology Bill in December.

"They were never told that they were twins," he told the Lords.

"They met later in life and felt an inevitable attraction, and the judge had to deal with the consequences of the marriage that they entered into and all the issues of their separation."

He told the BBC News website that their story raises the wider issue of the importance of strengthening the rights of children to know the identities of their biological parents.

We are naturally drawn to people who are quite similar to ourselves
Pam Hodgkins, Adults Affected by Adoption

"If you start trying to conceal someone's identity, sooner or later the truth will out," he said.

"And if you don't know you are biologically related to someone, you may become attracted to them and tragedies like this may occur."

Pam Hodgkins, chief executive officer of the charity Adults Affected by Adoption (NORCAP) said there had been previous cases of separated siblings being attracted to each other.

"We have a resistance, a very strong incest taboo where we are aware that someone is a biological relative," she said.

"But when we are unaware of that relationship, we are naturally drawn to people who are quite similar to ourselves.

'Incredibly rare'

"And of course there is unlikely to be anyone more similar to any individual than their sibling."

Mo O'Reilly, director of child placement for the British Association for Adoption and Fostering, said the situation was traumatic for the people involved, but incredibly rare.

"Thirty or 40 years ago it would have been more likely that twins be separated and, brought up without knowledge of each other," she said.

Today, however, adopted children grow up with a greater knowledge of their birth families - and organisations try to place brothers and sisters together.

If that were not possible, the siblings would still have some form of contact with each other.

"This sad case illustrates why, over the last 20-30 years, the shift to openness in adoption was so important," Ms O'Reilly added.


Link to article

ENGLAND: Unknowing Twins Marry Each Other, February 11, 2008

CNN
January 11, 2008

Unknowing Twins Marry Each Other

LONDON, England -- A set of British twins who were separated at birth went on to marry each other without realizing they were related, the UK Press Association reported Friday.

Former British MP David Alton highlighted the case of the twins who unwittingly married each other.

The brother and sister, who were adopted by separate parents, were given an annulment after a High Court judge ruled that the marriage had never been valid.

Their identities and details of their relationship have been kept secret, but the Press Association reported that the duo did not find out that they were blood relatives until after they were married.

David Alton, a member of the House of Lords, revealed their situation as a way of highlighting perceived shortcomings in the Human Embryology and Tissues Bill which is now going through Britain's Parliament.

He first heard of the twins' marriage in a conversation with a High Court judge, and initially raised the case in a House of Lords debate on December 10.

Alton said: "(The brother and sister) met later in life and felt an inevitable attraction, and the judge had to deal with the consequences of the marriage that they entered into and all the issues of their separation.

"I suspect that it will be a matter of litigation in the future if we do not make information of this kind available to children who have been donor-conceived."

Alton is concerned that the new bill would allow the biological identity of one parent to be removed from the birth certificate, PA reported, and that there would be no way for the child to know if they had been donor-conceived.

He told PA on Friday: "The state is colluding in a deception. We are opening the door to more cases like this one. One of the most fundamental things of all is to know who you are. The issue here is about human rights.

"A birth certificate that omits any mention of your true origin falsifies your history in a very significant way."


Link to article