PA Supreme Court Justice David Wecht Leaves Democratic Party Over Rise in Antisemitism
Dem Katie Porter Says Fellow Gubernatorial Candidate Leaked Video of Her Verbally Abusing...
Politico ‘Journo’ Warns Republicans They’ll Be Called ‘Racists’ for Umpteenth Time If VRA...
Dem FCC Official Tells Jimmy Kimmel Bestie Jake Tapper About Trump's Effort to...
Spanish Police Fear Islamist Terrorists Taking Advantage of Massive Grant of Legal Status
WaPo: Immigrants Are Giving Up Their Cases and Leaving In Soaring Numbers
Hantavirus Cruise Ship Scare Hits Nebraska; Experts Say No Pandemic Risk — Lockdown...
Chris Van Hollen: If You’re Mad Trump’s Trying to Muzzle Jimmy Kimmel, Be...
D'OH! The Left's Redistricting Efforts in the Courts Continue to Backfire (Cue MORE...
Backfire: Family Demands Answers in Police Shooting, Gets Them in Bodycam Footage
Shuttering Chicago Walgreens Says It Lost $1 Million, Mostly Due to Theft
Just When You Thought California Couldn't Get Worse: Arcadia Mayor Busted as Chinese...
Chelsea Handler’s 'Brutal' Draft Roast Implodes: Ma’am, Men Have Been Registering at 18...
White TN State Rep Mobbed by Racists in Scene Reminiscent of Little Rock...
The Bulwark's Sam Stein Spins His Latest Fiction: Turns Duffy's Weekend Drives Into...

Doctors advocate for 'a proactively antiracist agenda for medicine' even though offering preferential care based on race may elicit legal challenges

There’s an interesting piece in Boston Review in which two doctors, Bram Wispelwey and Michelle Morse, advocate for a “proactively antiracist agenda for medicine.” A study that showed disparities in referrals to the hospital’s cardiology service showed that “patient self-advocacy may play a role in these disparities: white patients were perceived to advocate for cardiology admission more often and more intensely, and providers acknowledged such behavior impacted their decision making.” “Alarmed by these findings, we sought an immediate solution,” they write.

Advertisement

That solution, they believe, is “a proactively antiracist agenda for medicine.” “Our path to this realization, as with nearly all advancements in social medicine, took us outside our discipline—through the field of critical race theory (CRT), in particular,” they say. “What effect would reparations have on systemic inequities in the health care system?” they ask.

That highlighted bit reads:

Offering preferential care based on race or ethnicity may elicit legal challenges from our system of colorblind law. But given the ample current evidence that our health, judicial, and other systems already unfairly preference people who are white, we believe—following the ethical framework of [philosopher Naomi] Zack and others—that our approach is corrective and therefore mandated. We encourage other institutions to proceed confidently on behalf of equity and racial justice, with backing provided by recent White House executive orders.

Advertisement

Critical race theory driving health care decisions … what could go wrong?

Advertisement

https://twitter.com/radfugee/status/1375902421096882176

Advertisement


Related:

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement