End Wokeness Shows How Fast the Copy and Paste Hijacking Spin Made the...
NYTimes' Defense of Hijacking Headline Is the 'Most Unintentionally Hilarious Tweet of All...
Iran's Hail Mary Plea Just Gave Trump Everything He Needed
Socialism Is Real. It's Dangerous. And They're Organizing.
Magills Lays Out Left’s Daily Planner: Condemn Cornell 7 at Noon, Defend the...
Federal Grand Jury Indicts Foreign Nationals for Doing the Thing Dems and Media...
'I Did It for Palestine': Kyrsten Sinema’s Ex Turns Her Pricey Art Collection...
MS NOW Journo Stresses That Motive Is Still Unknown After Attempt to Crash...
Mahmoud Khalil Says America Broke Its Promise — Deport Him Quick Since It's...
Find Someone Who Loves You the Way the Media Loves Terrorists: Sick Spin...
Court Halts Christa Pike’s Execution An Hour Before She Was Due to Die...
The 'Death to America' People in Iran Have Made a US Midterm Election...
Jasmine Crockett Won’t Endorse Talarico — So a Fellow Democrat Told Her to...
Kat Rosenfield Reminds Everyone the Cornell 7 Haven’t Been Proven Guilty — and...
Here's Abdul El-Sayed Getting the Money Out of Politics by Raking It in...

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