Last year, the CBC asked me to gaze into my crystal ball and predict what would or would not happen in some of the most intense bioethical controversies roiling society.

Here were my 8 predictions.

1. The Bush policy on federal funding of ESCR would be overturned: WRONG
2. More states will fund ESCR and human cloning research: RIGHT
3. Impasse at federal level to outlaw or legalizing human cloning would continue: RIGHT
4. More states and countries will outlaw the selling of human eggs: RIGHT
5. No new states or countries will legalize Physician Assisted Suicide: RIGHT
6. Texas law permitting futile care impositions will not be rescinded : RIGHT
7. Existing 10 days allowed to patients and families to find a new hospital will be extended as a compromise, probably to around 30 days: WRONG
8. The Supreme Court of the United States will overturn the partial birth abortion federal ban : WRONG

Well, a year has come and gone, and with 2007 drawing to a close, the time has come to look back and see whether I have a future as a prognosticator.

All in all, I didn't do too badly: 5 for 8. I was clearly right in four, both right and wrong in one, and I was dead wrong in two. Not great, but more than 50% correct.

Let's start with my greatest prophetic failure, in which I wrote: I predict that the Supreme Court of the United States will overturn the partial birth abortion federal ban . Wrong. I believed that Justice Anthony Kennedy would reverse his earlier vote in support of state bans now being seen by all as the swing vote on the Court. But I was too cynical by half. Not only did Kennedy support the ban ( Gonzales v. Carhart ), but he wrote the majority opinion upholding the federal law! (more detailed analysis of the decision.)

I also predicted that the Democratic Congress would overturn President George W. Bush's embryonic stem cell federal funding policy. I suggested that Congress would eventually override Bush's vetoes against ESCR funding by placing the legislation in an omnibus bill covering many subjects. This would sufficiently cover the issue, and encourage nervous Republicans to vote for an override. Here, I wasn't cynical enough. The Democrats have the House votes to do this whenever they choose, but they haven't yet. Apparently party leaders believe that it is more important to keep the stem cell funding controversy alive as a campaign issue than to actually overturn the President's policy.

I was right in the following predictions:

• More states will fund ESCR and human cloning research. This is precisely what is happening as an “Oklahoma Land Race” mentality is increasingly gripping many state governments. The most egregious example is Question 2 that appeared on the New Jersey November 2006 ballot, asking voters to borrow $450 million for the research. (As of this writing, the measure is enjoying a 58% voter approval.)
• The existing federal impasse between legislation to outlaw all human cloning, and a rival bill legalizing cloning for research will continue. There was no movement on either bill during the year, and this is unlikely to change in the election year of 2008.
• That no state or country would legalize assisted suicide. Despite concerted efforts in California, Arizona, Hawaii, and Vermont, as well as in the UK, France, and a few other countries, the assisted suicide agenda made no legislative progress in 2007.
• More states and countries would outlaw the buying and selling of human eggs for use in research. On this front, there has been plenty of talk and very little action. However, California's Institute of Regenerative Medicine instituted internal regulations that now prohibit its grant recipients from being involved in the buying and selling of human eggs. South Korea, in the wake of the Hwang Wu-suk cloning scandal, has legally prohibited egg markets. Next year, as I will discuss in next month's predictions for 2008, things might begin to go in the opposite direction.

I predicted that the then, expected legislative attempt to rescind Texas' Futile Care Law, which permits hospital ethics committees to order withdrawal of wanted life sustaining treatment, would fail. Alas! In that, I was right. But I never expected the culprit in defeating the bill would be the Texas Conference of Catholic Bishops!

But I was wrong when I predicted that the current 10-day waiting period to give families time to find another hospital to provide medical care would be extended to 30 days. That was the compromise position on the matter that passed the Texas House of Representatives. But the bill never got through the Texas Senate, so the law remains on the books unchanged.

Overall, 2007 was not a great year for those who believe in the equality and sanctity of all human life. On the other hand, it wasn't a total disaster either, leaving the glass both half full and half empty—depending on which side of the debate you're on.

Next month, I will again play the augur and make my predictions for 2008. In the meantime, to keep up on all the news about these and other issues in near-real time, check out my blog, “Secondhand Smoke,” which can be found at www.wesleyjsmith.com .

Wesley J. Smith is a special consultant to the CBC. He is also a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute and an attorney for the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide.

Was this article helpful? Send us your comments.

---

About the CBC network:

CBC's mission is to shed light on the bioethics issues within our culture that most profoundly affect our humanity -- especially among the most vulnerable. We are increasingly aware that to accomplish this we need to challenge those who influence our culture to advance a morally responsible science that respects the inherent value of humanity and that celebrates its beauty and complexity.

And how is this done? How can we protect those among us who are most vulnerable? We engage these issues from every perspective. We educate and mobilize people like you who can make a difference. We connect our work with those who can shape and influence culture, policy and ideas.