There will be no prohibition against cousins entering into sexual relationships with each other, and marrying, after all.

A joint select committee of Parliament decided last Wednesday not to include this relationship in the definition of prohibited incestuous relationships.

Instead, the new, expanded definition will include grandparents, parents, sons, daughters, uncles, aunts, nieces and nephews.

Initially, there had been sugges-tions that cousins, particularly first cousins, should also be included in the list of prohibited relationships. This position was mooted by the Jamaican Bar Association, and drew strong support from Senator Norman Grant, a Government member on the committee.

Senator Donna Scott-Mottley, another Government member, strongly disagreed. She argued that to do so would be to unnecessarily criminalise and stigmatise many relationships which, traditionally, were not considered unwholesome.

Her argument ultimately held sway with the committee. In explaining the rationale, chairman A.J Nicholson, told The Gleaner that it was felt that including cousins in the definition of incest would be too drastic a step.

?Of course, if one cousin is a guardian of another (a minor) or has some other position of influence, that would be something other than incest, but would be punishable nonetheless,? he explained.

To satisfy the concerns regarding those relationships not considered incestuous, the committee agreed to create three categories: incest; relationships involving a person in loco parentis (standing in the place of the parents) such as stepparents, foster parents; and the third, involving persons exercising positions of authority and influence over minors, such as teachers, coaches, and transport operators.

earl.moxam@gleanerjm.com