Consanguineous marriage—defined as unions between biologically related individuals, typically first or second cousins—has been a culturally embedded practice across diverse societies for millennia. Drawing on publicly available sources, the study seeks to review both regional and global perspectives of consanguineous marriage across time and space. Rooted in anthropological traditions of kinship and alliance, these unions historically served functions such as preserving lineage, consolidating property, ensuring social trust, and reinforcing group identity. Anthropological scholarship, from Morgan’s kinship classifications to Lévi-Strauss’s alliance theory, situates cousin marriage as a structured and rational social strategy rather than a random or anomalous choice. Contemporary practices, however, are shaped by complex intersections of tradition, religion, gender, and modernity. While biomedical research consistently associates consanguinity with increased risks of congenital disorders, pregnancy wastage, and mental health conditions, many communities continue to view it as beneficial for kin solidarity, economic security, and marital stability. Global prevalence remains heterogeneous: highly normative in South Asia, the Middle East, and North Africa, declining in parts of India and North Africa, and largely absent in Western societies except among diasporas. Recent transformations—including urbanization, women’s education, migration, digital matchmaking, and premarital genetic screening—have shifted perceptions, particularly among youth. Ethnographic accounts highlight tensions between generational expectations and individual autonomy, revealing ambivalence and negotiation rather than outright rejection. This review underscores consanguinity as a dynamic institution at the intersection of anthropology, genetics, religion, and public health. Rather than framing it solely as a biomedical risk or a cultural relic, it should be understood as a multifaceted practice continually redefined in response to social, economic, and political change.
Museum collections are essential for scientific research and are diverse in nature. They include human remains and associated information. Many experience discomfort due to historical legacies and procurement practices that are often not openly discussed, which, in an age that advocates Open Science, need open discussion. Within Open Science, open Data Sharing and the FAIR principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) are key guidelines for research data decisions—emphasizing “as open as possible, as closed as necessary”. This manuscript explores how data management and Open Science practices may impact on human ancestral remains, risking perpetuating practices of human remains objectification, reinforcing historical violence through digital means, if not balanced with restrictive access protocols. There is a growing concern for data care and stewardship amongst museums and allied institutions, and although the argument is based on the fairness of sharing and conscious, ethical sharing, source collection and associated data need to be questioned at its origins. Hence, the emphasis is placed on CARE principles (Collective Benefit, Authority to Control, Responsibility, Ethics) prioritising dignity, sovereignty, relationality, and ethics, moving from data accumulation and universal openness toward context-driven, community-controlled, and ethically reflexive stewardship. This approach advocates restraint, challenging museums, researchers, and funders to reconsider the objectification of ancestors and the ethical responsibilities surrounding their digital and material legacies. Ethical issues no longer relate solely to ancestral remains; they extend to their data and metadata across matters related to governance, circulation, “ownership?”, and repatriation. Alongside FAIR, one must practice CARE, and above all, allow for detachment and critical thinking.
