Sen. Mark Warner Says 100,000 Virginians Have Been Kicked Off of SNAP Because...
Sunny Hostin Defended the Cornell 7 — and, Painfully, She’s Right
Rev. Suggests Lazarus Was Gay Because Jesus Called for Him to ‘Come Out’
Rep. LaMonica McIver Is Facing Prison for Touching ICE Officers — She Just...
Mamdani the Pied-À-Terrible: NYC Mayor Loses in Court on Tax-The-Rich Rollout
The Bulwark’s Focus Group Says Abdul El-Sayed Is Over-Performing With Trump Voters
Kyle Kulinski Has No Doubt Mossad Has Videos of Trump 'Doing Ungodly Things...
Cory Booker Thinks a Criminal Who Undermined One Election Is Very Likely to...
Tight Race, Tight Pants: James Talarico Victory Could Obliterate State Religion of Texas...
Venezuelan Shot by ICE Charged by DOJ With Assaulting a Federal Officer
El-Sayed Wants Money Out of Politics — Except the Soros Family That Hand-Selected...
Jack Smith Subpoenaed Checks From Thousands of Americans Who Donated As Little As...
The Cornell 7: Viral Outrage, Changing Statements, and Why Prosecutors May Have Walked...
Nikole Hannah-Jones and Her Daughter Did a Podcast. Only One of Them Truly...
CNN Doesn't Even Crack the Top 35 (Heck, Reruns on Other CHANNELS Are...

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