Census 2022 question on religion

ohnonotgmail

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118714975#Comment_118714975

Anybody who provided data for the 1901 and 1911 census is dead. I'm not sure of the procedures back then but where people told it was collected in confidence? The concept of personal data is much more recent than 1911. some families "might" be upset but it isn't their data.

mrslancaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118715001#Comment_118715001

There is nothing recent about privacy and keeping personal information confidential. The only thing recent is the regulations compelling private companies to keep customer information safe and not disclose it to anyone unauthorised to have it. AFAIK, there was always an onus on public bodies to keep citizens information confidential - don't public servants have to sign up to that?

I know a very elderly lady (youngest of her family) and she was shocked that information about her parents, siblings and the family home is online. Anybody who knows her now would know what her and her kids/grandkids religion is, but she's not happy that her birth family religion is online because she says it's nobody else's business that she changed her religion when she married. TBH, I can see where she's coming from, it might not matter to me or to many others, but it does matter to some families.

Agree her parents might be dead and she is very old, but it is data that she, and her decendants, can be identified from. Does it not matter because she is old?

ohnonotgmail

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118715123#Comment_118715123

It doesn't matter because it isn't her data. It is her ancestors data.

smacl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118715211#Comment_118715211

It is an interesting point, if we're talking about data relating to personal privacy, it is hardly inheritable. The question then becomes whether any personal data which could be considered private should fall into the public domain at any point in the future as a matter of historical record? Perhaps this is a preference that should be stated on the census form as it is clearly a matter for the person more so than their next of kin.

Peregrinus

Well, there is an interesting issue here. We recognise the notion of personal data which the individual has an interest in keeping private, and we recognise the concept of data which is, or should be, publicly available. But is there an intermediate concept of, e.g., "family data" where an interest in/right to privacy survives the death of the individual to whom the data refers, and can still be asserted by their family?

smacl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118717531#Comment_118717531

I'm not sure there is any such concept and we'd probably need to examine the reasons why it might be necessary. Rights to personal privacy are there to protect the person, extending those rights to others seems dubious unless there are very well defined reasons for doing so. More specifically, what protection would such a right bring that is not available elsewhere. Personally in my opinion, being a bit embarrassed that uncle Ted was a left footer doesn't warrant this. Again, just my opinion, but unless we're talking about a minor, I think this should come down to the expressed will of the individual rather than family should such rights become available.

Bannasidhe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118718281#Comment_118718281

As a rule of thumb the aphorism "you can't libel the dead" would appear to apply, at least in the regions where Common Law applied. The dead have no 'right' to privacy although the Law society made recommendations back in 2004:

"In terms of protecting the privacy of the deceased, the question should be asked whether it is intended to publish details of what a deceased person has done within what could be defined as their personal sphere? Is it really in the public interest to know? Even if we believe that rights expire on death, we should accept that the sensitivities of innocent related parties still exist, a concern this paper recognises in not naming suicide victims out of consideration for their families."

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/protecting-the-reputation-and-personality-after-death-1.1163497

The example they give of protecting a person who committed suicide is interesting - firstly dead people do not appear on census returns nor is cause of death recorded so it has zero to do with the available of census records.

However, every death is recorded by the State and these records are available to the public. In some instances these are available on-line once a certain number of years have passed and the relevant authority have gotten around to scanning them.

It is also a matter of knowledge that given the stigma around suicide- and refusal to bury on consecrated ground - Irish coroners were reluctant to put it down as cause of death. It just so happens my Mother's 1st cousin committed suicide in the mid 1950s. We searched on-line and found his death certificate, and it has suicide listed as cause of death. She wasn't upset. She knew how he died. It actually gave her solace that the record gave the real cause of death even if she will never know why he made that choice.

Should all of these records now be withdrawn and added to the already large pile of redacted information sitting in Irish archives and govt departments? Birth records? Baptismal records? Sources such as Guy's Postal Directory (I found my paternal GGG-Grandfather's address in that)? Passenger manifest for the Titanic? Ordinance surveys?

In order to protect the sensitivities of some of the currently living do we cut off all access to information about the past? Do we deny people the right to know who they are and where they come from to afford privacy to the dead?

Ask those fighting to get information about their adoptions, and birth parents who has more rights to the information and how it feels to be denied your family history.

ohnonotgmail

In terms of the information collected in the census is there anything that could be considered defamation?

Bannasidhe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118719172#Comment_118719172

The Census is a self declaration form filled out by the head of the household where specific questions are answered.

It would be hard to see how a defamation case could be made tbh - say HOH puts down "XXX is a Roman Catholic" where XXX is actually an atheist. The information is incorrect - XXX might be very angry if/ they find out - but is it defamation?

How does XXX know the incorrect answer was given? If they see the form prior to collection they can speak to the enumerator and request it be corrected. If they don't see the form prior to collection it will be 100 years before they can have a look.

ohnonotgmail

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118719206#Comment_118719206

They only arguments presented against releasing the census data seem to amount to it possibly causing embarrassment for living descendants. For me that is a very poor reason.

Bannasidhe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118719233#Comment_118719233

It's an appalling reason.

Should records relating to the Holocaust be hidden as living descendants might get embarrassed?

Peregrinus

The "you can't libel the dead" point is an interesting one.

There was a case back in the early twentieth century in which, after the death of British Prime Minister W E Gladstone, an author suggested that that his (well-known, during his life) involvement with attempts to support and reform "fallen women" had been a cover for consorting with prostitutes and, for good measure, that he kept a mistress in a house on Grosvenor Square, and that he had an illegitimate son. His family were hurt and appalled, but seemed to have limited legal recourse because the author couldn't be sued for libel, Gladstone being dead. So his sons went around publicly calling the author a liar, a fraud, etc, and succeeded in getting him expelled from his club, whereupon the author sued them for libel. In the ensuing court action he was unable to produce any evidence that Gladstone had consorted with prostitutes or kept a mistress; "Gladstone's illegitimate son" turned out to be Gladstone's entirely legitimate nephew. The author was torn to shred by the Gladstone sons' lawyers, and he lost the case.

The point is that there was a lot of public sympathy for the Gladstone sons at the time. The author was making fairly scurrilous - and, it turned out, baseless - allegations against a man who wasn't around to defend himself against them, and this was causing foreseeable pain and distress to his family. There was a sense that they should have some way of vindicating their father's reputation. But, if the author hadn't been stupid enough to sue them, they wouldn't have. And it does raise the question of whether my reputation isn't just mine, and if you injure it you don't harm just me.

Having said that, it's a big leap from there to arguing that I should be able to suppress census data that show that my grandmother was born out of wedlock, or my great-grandfather was a brothel-keeper, or whatever. Whatever the arguments about my interest in data that is reasonably current and is personal to someone very close to me, I don't think it can be extended to data that is more than a century old, relates to someone removed from me by a couple of generations, and is mostly innocuous.

db

When given check-boxes, they all increased in 2002. Methodist doubled when given the check-box in 2002, then halved when it was taken away in 2011.

My father when filing out the form would enter Christian in the religion question because he was Christian first and Methodist second. That would not be an unusual mindset of Methodists.

smacl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118723979#Comment_118723979

Surely being a Methodist already implies being a Christian though? Not to fault your father, the census question should probably say Christian (other) following on from the listing of specific denominations.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118724131#Comment_118724131

I don't think that really addresses the issue. The practice in the census form is to offer seven check boxes - a "no religion" check box, check boxes labelled with the five most popular religious identities claimed in the last census, in order , and finally an "other - please fill in" check box. The issue is that Methodists are apparently much more likely to identify as such if that's one of the labelled check boxes; otherwise they (or many of them) tick the seventh box and fill in "Christian" (rather than "Methodist"). Grouping together those of the labelled check boxes that are Christian won't change the fact that there isn't a "Methodist" check box, and won't make the Methodists any more likely to fill in "Methodist" in the panel at box seven. (If anything, the reverse, I would have thought.)

It would also have the result that all the Christian denominations would be elevated above Islam, which is not a big thing, but if religious identities are being separately counted then there is some merit in ordering them denominations by size; that is neutral. Putting all the Christian denominations ahead of Islam and any other non-Christian denomination that might make the top 5 at some point might imply to the sensitive a hierarchy of Christianity over Islam, or something of the kind. That's the sort of thing you want to avoid.

ohnonotgmail

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118724261#Comment_118724261

That's the sort of thing you want to avoid.

that sounds an awful lot like pandering to me.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118724293#Comment_118724293

Pandering to whom, exactly?

And would grouping all the Christian denominations together, when there is no statistical reason to do this, also be pandering, in your view?

Bannasidhe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118724261#Comment_118724261

Just to stir the pot a bit. why should different Christian denominations be listed when other religions, e.g. Islam, are all lumped in together?

Why are there no separate boxes for Sunni and Shi'a?

Or Reform, Orthodox, and Conservative Jews?

Would it not be better if there was a general heading as a tickbox and then a space to right denomination?

"Christian

Insert details here: ------------"

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118724406#Comment_118724406

There would be separate Sunni and/or Shi'a boxes if enough people wrote "Sunni" or "Shia" in the fill-in box to promote one or both of those identities to the top 5. Same goes for different varieties of Judaism. In fact most Muslims just identify as "Muslim" and most Jews as "Jewish".

Similarly, if enough Christians just wrote "Christian" in the box then to put that identity would in the top 5 then presumably there would be a "Christian" box next time round.

The point is not to tell people how they ought to identify or to impose some scheme or classification on them. The point is to find out how they do identify. It's not really a surprise in the Irish context that most Irish Christians identify by denomination, and most members of minority religions don't. I don't think the census should be trying to conceal this.

smacl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118724406#Comment_118724406

Guessing any group that is of sufficiently significant size probably merits their own check box, though from the point of view of comparative analysis over time we don't want to be changing existing items too often either.

Bannasidhe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118724487#Comment_118724487

It wouldn't be concealing it.

People could identify as they wish.

Tick box for the 'umbrella' term i.e Christian, Muslim, Hindu, etc etc

Space for the respondent to write in further clarification should they wish :Roman Catholic, Sunni, etc etc.

It could remain the same formula going forward, no need to base it on 'the top 5'.

crossman47

I think its time to drop the religion question now. Its meaningless. Comparisons over time will no longer work after the change this year and many of those who say "Catholic" are anything but. They just attend for weddings and funerals.

smacl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118725030#Comment_118725030

I disagree, how people identify from a religious perspective is important, as is the documented change in this figure over time. Say we didn't ask this question now, the publicly available statistic for percentage of people who identify as Catholic would stagnate at the 2016 value of 78%. This was 88% in the previous census and, at a guess, is likely to be less than 70% in the upcoming census, possibly low 60s. Not sure why you would want to hide this trend. Religious observance is something entirely different, falling at a much higher rate.

crossman47

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118725316#Comment_118725316

The trend will be meaningless. The number saying no religion will jump because of the way the question has been changed. It may well be the new number will be more correct but it still means the trend has no meaning. I don't see why religious affiliation is useful as a number either. The churches have lost all authority so leave them all to themselves.

smacl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118726791#Comment_118726791

Given the entrenched position the church hold within state funded education and healthcare, I think the trend is very far from meaningless. Nominal religious affiliation is still very much part of who we are and how we are changing as a society.

Bannasidhe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118726791#Comment_118726791

Hmmmmm... the Church that has free reign to promulgate itself across the education system on the taxpayers cent and is getting a maternity hospital built for it? That Church?

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118724519#Comment_118724519

I think certain Catholics might have an issue with having to tick a Christian box! "We are a catholic country etc etc etc"...

FWIW the answers to the religion question shouldn't matter in a secular country. But I've heard the 78% being trotted out so many times over the last few years (As a justification for 90% of schools, among other things - how does 78% get bumped up to justify 90%?) that we have to keep measuring this trend as it declines.

It would be interesting if they separated out the religious choices of parents of children of school-going age...

They do provide a religious question breakdown by age though, and under-18s identified as "no religion" got a very large boost last time out.

I'm sorry, just got my form, but it's bloody simple to read and understand.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118725316#Comment_118725316

This. The census data over time is powerful, difficult-to-refute evidence of the growth of unbelief, and of the willingness to identify as an unbeliever, in Ireland. Anyone interested in advancing the rights or status of unbelievers in Ireland would be made to try to suppress that data, or to stop collecting it.

robindch

[Peregrinus] But is there an intermediate concept of, e.g., "family data" where an interest in/right to privacy survives the death of the individual to whom the data refers, and can still be asserted by their family?

Not so far as I'm aware.

Somewhat relatedly, though, the license under which you use certain classes of data during your lifetime - for example, your priceless audio and video collections - expires with you, as it's a non-transferrable license. There were some moves a few years back to make data, acquired under license, transferrable in the case of death, but I don't imagine it's moved forward much:

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2012/sep/03/bruce-willis-apple-itunes-library

matthewsemple

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118724406#Comment_118724406

I agree - the question asks for Religion and then doesn't list 'Christianity' (instead opting for a series of Christian denominations) and one other religion. Many other large world religions, that must be well-represented in Ireland, are left out. I found the options very odd as they force people who consider themselves to be a Christian but who are not affiliated to a denomination, to select 'Other'.

I might put Jedi!

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118827606#Comment_118827606

If you put Jedi (and are atheist) then your answer will actually increase the reported number of those adhering to religion

railer201

If one selects Other and writes Christian, what does that mean ?

Umbrella term covering all types ?

Evangelical ?

Cultural ?

It doesn't convey a whole lot, without qualification.

smacl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118848528#Comment_118848528

If someone puts down Other Religion and writes Christian, it means that is as much as the person wants to put on the census. If they want to qualify it further, they obviously can. If they don't, that's their choice too. To be honest, if they put down Catholic, that doesn't say much about their religiosity either.

Peregrinus

Exactly. If a respondent doesn't want to identify with one of the five suggested designations (which are based on popularity of responses from the previous census) then it's up to them how much more detail they want to give. "Christian", without further qualification, could mean that they don't identify with any particular denomination (non-denominational Christianity is a thing) or it could mean that they don't want, or can't be bothered, to name their denomination, or it could mean they are uncertain to which denomination their church is affiliated.

Which means that you have to exercise a degree of care about interpreting the census data. But that's generally true of census data.

You might think you'd get better data by increasing the number of options offered. But experience suggests that increasing the number of options much beyond the 5-7 range results in worse data - respondents get bored, alienated or confused; they tick the first option that might apply to them rather than reading through the list to find the one which best applies to them; they tick more than one option; they tick no option; they tick a random option. And you have to reckon that from a policy and planning point of view, identifying the number of Catholics, Anglicans, nonreligious people, etc in the country has a relevance that identifying the number of Independent Millennial Baptists (Wesleyan Connexion) may not. So the fact that the religion question isn't good at identifying the number of Independent Millennial Baptists (Wesleyan Connexion) may not be a terribly trenchant criticism of it.

Quantum Erasure

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118725316#Comment_118725316

percentage of people who identify as Catholic ... is likely to be less than 70% in the upcoming census, possibly low 60s.

I reckon it'll still be above 70%, maybe not by much, but still..

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118715123#Comment_118715123

No one gives a sht what her families religion is. People spend way too much time thinking other people are interested in their business.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118827606#Comment_118827606

It lists the top ones according to previous census so the ones you think "must be well represented" must not be.

Hotblack Desiato

Should that be "it lists the top ones" ?

Quantum Erasure

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118869481#Comment_118869481

you say that, but wasn't there a kid recently who killed himself after being bullied because of his religion?

It'd be the talk of the town, something like that getting out

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118869481#Comment_118869481

The problem arises when some people expect their family religion to be imposed on everyone in school.

smacl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118869377#Comment_118869377

If you take straight line interpolation from 2016 to 2022, I'd tend to agree, as this leaves the figure at 70.67% currently. However, the rate of decline since 1971 is far greater than linear so if that trend continues, the figure will be in the 60s. That said, the number of data points is tiny so this is barely more than speculation.

mrslancaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118869481#Comment_118869481

LOL, you think people in ireland are not interested in other peoples business....

matthewsemple

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118869511#Comment_118869511

That's probably correct because the previous census form also confused denominations with religions.

BingCrosbee

There are people who make an issue where there is no issue. This thread represents that.

Saying something about the census.

Were I staying in someone else's house, tonight, the CSO could feck right off if I were to fill in some fairly personal info into someone else's form.

Questions 12, 15, 16, and 27 are no one else's business and no way would I be expecting people to fill them in on a friend's form

ohnonotgmail

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118875206#Comment_118875206

Are you part of a group of related or unrelated people living at that address with common housekeeping arrangements ? If not, and you are not if staying in someoneelse's house, then you complete the census at your regular address

Hotblack Desiato

I've got 1.2.3.4.5... census working overtime 😁

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrcemZpOmpI

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118875674#Comment_118875674

I'm talking about people spending a night at friends. They're meant to fill the census out in that house, no?

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNOTF-znQyw

Denver's private life was so out of whack with his public image it was unreal. By no means the choirboy he appeared to be. Cocaine, drunk driving, domestic violence.