IRS Audits Targeted People Making Under $200,000 Per Year in Not So Shocking...
Insane: Justin Trudeau's Proposed Hate Speech Law for Canada Could Be Applied RETROACTIVEL...
'Look at His Face'! Biden STUNNED (and Furious) As CNN Host Rattles Off...
Anti-Trump US Prosecutor Says We the People Have the Right to a Speedy...
Bill Melugin Takes an Illegal Immigration Apologist to Task and it is Glorious
Flint Has Entered the Chat: Biden Promises Clean Water for All Americans, Gets...
President Joe Biden Says He's Literally 'Gone Around the World' Meeting with AI...
Time for Another Episode of 'Joe Biden vs. Teleprompter'
BUSTED: Mayor Bowser Flew to Masters Tourney on Jet Paid by Developers With...
Rep. Adam Schiff Has a Meltdown as Another Donald Trump Trial Faces a...
Corrupt UNRWA Caught STEALING and SELLING Humanitarian Aid Meant for Gaza
Fulton County Vindication, Master Plan Falling Apart, Democrats in Shambles!
'Remember This Beauty?' James Woods Flashes Back to Worst Moments From 'The Party...
CA Finds Solution to Minimum Wage Hike Layoffs: Ban Self-Checkouts
Absolute Turnip: Nina Turner Gets SCHOOLED After Saying Israel's War on Hamas Is...

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