Krystal Ball Says It's a GOOD THING There Are Fewer White Peeps Posting...
Seems IMPORTANT: Brown Classroom Where Gunman Opened Fire Belongs to THIS Teacher Teaching...
Liz Warren ALREADY Exploiting Brown Shooting to Push Gun Control and Dana Loesch...
Rashida Tlaib Claims Congress Has ALL THE MONEY to Feed and Give FREE...
Sexist, Racist Newsom Press Office TOOL DRAGGED for Literally Trashing Nicki Minaj for...
ABC Hypes Up Scary Polar Bears Study Complete With Climate Alarmism Tropes
Here's Further Proof That 'Jingle Bells' Is Racist
Sen. Patty Murray Wants Immediate Release of 'Constituent' Mauled by DHS K9
Illegal Who Entered 7 Times and Sexually Assaulted Woman Praised by Judge for...
ABC News: Sen. Mark Warner Says Type of Ammo Used in Drug Boat...
All Black Coaches Will Pay: Jemele Hill Predictably Drops a Race Card on...
MS NOW's Senior Legal Reporter Goes All-In With Narrative of Trump With Minors...
White Guilt Over Accountability: Minneapolis Shrugs at $250M Stolen from Hungry Kids
Questions Surround Mass Shooting at Brown University; Several Reported Injured
Jasmine Crockett Claims She Gets the Struggles of Farmers and Ranchers, Knows the...

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