Warning: This post was published more than 11 years ago.
I keep old posts on the site because sometimes it's interesting to read old content. Not everything that is old is bad. Also, I think people might be interested to track how my views have changed over time: for example, how my strident teenage views have mellowed and matured!
But given the age of this post, please bear in mind:
- My views might have changed in the 11 years since I wrote this post.
- This post might use language in ways which I would now consider inappropriate or offensive.
- Factual information might be outdated.
- Links might be broken; embedded material might not appear properly.
Many thanks for your understanding.
Gideons International recently asked Leicester NHS Trust if it could put Bibles into patients’ bedside lockers. The hospital responded that they would like some time to investigate whether or not there was a possibility that having the same Bible there for each occupant might pose an MRSA risk. To me, that seems a sensible request.
Iain Mair, executive director of Gideons International UK doesn’t think it’s sensible:
They are saying there’s a potential MRSA risk, and we say that is nonsense
I’m not sure what expertise Mr Mair has in the field of infection control, but I’m fairly convinced that he doesn’t have quite the same qualifications as the Trust’s Infections Control team. He claims that Gideons International have commissioned reports from consultants to disprove the theory. Surely there would be little point in commissioning such research if he is not then going to allow the Trust to examine the research prior to reaching a decision on the matter?
The tabloids have become (predictably) become angry about a ” hospital plan to ban Bibles” recently. Despite the fact that there is, as yet, no such plan. But that’s not the kind of thing that’s stopped them before. Other papers called it ‘tantamount to banning the Bible from NHS wards’. That’s obviously not true either.
The Leicester NHS Trust also wish to take time to consider whether allowing the provision of these Bibles would appear as the Trust favouring one religion over another. Which is a fair enough thing to consider. Unless you’re Iain Mair, in which case…
It’s political correctness gone mad.
It would clearly be impractical to have a whole library of religious books supplied to each patient. And yet, I wonder if Mr Mair would think it ‘PC gone mad’ if all patients were to be supplied with copies of the Koran, and, along with his plan, given advice that ‘other religious texts are available’.
The Trust wants to investigate the possibility of tracking which patients have come into contact with which texts, so that potentially infectious ones could be removed from circulation. That seems fair, if something of an invasion of privacy. The best solution, as I see it, would be to make patients aware that religious texts were freely available to take away and take home. That way, the religious texts get further than just being something to read when you’re bored in hospital, and the infection problem is essentially overcome.
I’m sure the Trust will come up with a solution that will be appropriate to all parties. Although, frankly, I’d be rather less inclined to help when Gideons International want to make such a fuss over such a small issue. But that’s probably just me.