• Review of 2013 predictions

    I am wont to make predictions at new year. Here’s how I did last year.

    1 – The UK will lose its triple A credit rating.
    Got that one right – happened within weeks.

    2 – The Scottish Episcopal Church will have poor statistical returns this year prompting very quiet wailing and gnashing of teeth except in Argyll.
    Got that one right too – very poor statistical returns, particularly in Aberdeen and Orkney and Brechin. The wailing was all too quiet when we debated the statistics at General Synod though with the Primus seeming to indicate that either they didn’t matter or he didn’t care.

    3 – At least one Church of England bishop (and maybe a pair) will be outed. (Only time I’ve retained a prediction from one year to the next).
    Not yet. Not yet.

    4 – The Scottish Parliament will vote for new legislation allowing gay couples to get married. (But no such weddings this year). The details of the new category of “belief marriages” will be substantially changed and much more heavily regulated than is suggested in the recent consultation response from government.
    Basically another hit – Parliament did indeed vote for the new legislation though it isn’t completed yet. No weddings this year. Belief marriage proposals changed a bit, but not very much and there’s going to be a frightening amount of regulation which is not specified in the legislation.

    5 – Sadly, I expect renewed campaigning for straight people to be able to enter Civil Partnerships with preparations being made for a legal challenge for 2014.
    Yes – though the Scottish Parliament headed off the threat of legal challenge by promising a review. Another hit.

    6 – The Coalition will have lower public opinion ratings by end of year due to public concerns as austerity measures bite. It will record one of the lowest public opinion rating of any UK govenment in modern times.
    I think I got this wrong. There has certainly been a polarization in how the government is seen but they are holding up surprisingly well in opinion polls. My Liberal Democrat friends will be disappointed to hear that I think that this is because of the wiliness of Tories and not the power of the the Liberals in the coalition.

    7 – The Church of Scotland will have a difficult General Assembly, but one characterised by fine speeches. They will approve a report which suggests having a theological study into blessing civil partnerships but not actual marriages of gay people. (This will please no-one who has any opinions about the matter and will thus be regarded as a success by those who don’t).
    Well, I wasn’t far off with suggesting that they would not please anyone who has opinions about the matter but they dealt with it by saying that the Church of Scotland doesn’t approve of gay ministers but that local congregations could have them if they really wanted them. It was a foolish compromise that is already unravelling and a warning to us all.

    8 – The Church of England will be unable to agree a way forward on opening the Episcopate to Women.
    Well they’ve made some progress but they still are not there yet. Until they actually have a vote, I’m claiming this one as a hit.

    9 – Justin Welby won’t put a foot wrong.
    Well, he’s an impressive mover, far more so that Rowan Williams. I don’t like all he does but he has not come close to making the mistakes that his predecessor made. Appears to be wearing Teflon vestments.

    10 – The new Bishop of Durham will come from a relatively small congregation in London.
    Wrong – completely wrong.

    So how do you think I did?

9 responses to “Biobank – an ethical question”

  1. Rev Ruth Avatar

    I’ve been asked too. And I got so excited – you know how I love all things medical. My mind had already raced off into the realms of them finding that I had some mysterious disease… But now that you put it like that, I guess I’d better give it some more thought.

  2. Raspberry Rabbit Avatar

    I haven’t been asked. Radical foreign clerics must not be on the list.

    I’d be hesitant to do it anyway. Too much information is being stored about us in anticipation of the day when it might prove useful. Best to keep your head down.

    RR

  3. Tim Avatar

    Eeek. I saw the phrase “Do you want to do something good today? Not just for yourself, but for our children and our children’s children?” near the top of the page and instantly the thought occurred, “what’s the potential cost? Where are the privacy controls?” Not as though anyone’s asked me anyway, but that sort of thing worries me from the outset too.

    A little more investigation shows http://www.ukbiobank.ac.uk/faqs/confidentiality.php , particularly #5 etc; it seems too vague, just a gloss to placate the masses. I don’t want `computers unconnected to the internet’; I’d want a guarantee that they never will be, that no floppy disks or other methods will result in data coming off them, and that they’re well secured in a bunker somewhere.

  4. chris Avatar

    We’re involved. My sister-in-law first; she asked my husband; we discussed it and decided the potential for knowledge and research into – for example – the hereditary factor in clinical depression – made it something we wanted to do. Our sons have also expressed a willingness to participate. I personally don’t care about what happens to my DNA (other than its continuation in my family!) and if some good can come out of it then that’s just fine. I trust scientists every bit as much (or as little) as I trust anyone else.

  5. asphodeline Avatar
    asphodeline

    Have you seen Heroes???? Sounds like a sneaky plot to find more 🙂

  6. kelvin Avatar
    kelvin

    I have not seen Heroes. Is it about eugenics?

  7. asphodeline Avatar
    asphodeline

    Ah. It has a hint of eugenics. Part of the plotline involves some form of research into the DNA of people with supernatural powers!

  8. kelvin Avatar
    kelvin

    Ah, I see why you associated it with me.

  9. Andrew Avatar
    Andrew

    My wife I also each received one of the so called invitations today, my first reaction was anger over the wording of the invitation which by telling me I have a “provisional appointment” assuming I am gullible enough to fall for the use of false authority syndrome.

    I am really concerned a lot of less literate people will not fully understand the “invitation” and assume it something they have to do.

    What really makes my blood boil is the that even if you don’t want to take part you have to reply to get your name removed from the records, this raises real civil liberties issues.

    The thing is if I had been asked to participate in I a nice way I would have been very keen to do so, however the whole tone of the letter stinks of authoritarianism and reminds me of the kind of thing the Nazis were doing in the mid 1930s.

    If you get one of these invitation say no and tell them why — or better still rip it up.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • Nexus

    Here is a quick headsup for the Nexus event taking place at the SECC from Thursday to Saturday week. In their wisdom, they have changed the name of the Christian Resources Exhibition to Nexus Scotland. It makes it sound like a dating agency to me, but what would I know? (And anyway one might get…

  • Teenage Kicks

    I have to confess that I had never understood what John Peel was on about. However, on viewing this version of Teenage Kicks, it all fell into place.

  • It is our custom …

    The choir members are back from their holidays today, so Choral Evensong recommences at 6.30 tonight. Indeed, we have a treat today as we can listen to St Mary’s Cathedral in Edinburgh on Radio 3 first. (And they are not singing Kelly in C this year). My Presbyterian friends, (yes I do have Presbyterian friends,…