CBS Is Being Absolutely Dragged Over Battleground State Comments, and It's Glorious
Trump’s Stint as a Fry Cook Made Young Men Like Him More
The Left Can't Meme: Planned Parenthood Action Deletes Its Attempt
New Republic: Trump Cancels All Events in Favor of One of the Worst...
Brutal Bruce: Springsteen's Singing Has Listeners Plugging Their Bleeding Ears
Washington Post Confirms That Trump Is Not Literally Hitler
Kamala Harris Assures Us We Will Work Together, Convening Together to Work
Jimmy Kimmel Is Afraid He's On Donald Trump's Enemies List
Woke Doctor Sacrifices Children on the Altar of Trans Activism
Atlantic Staff Writer Says Blacks and Latinos Are Moving Toward Trump Because They’re...
Defenders of Democracy Won't Like THIS! Gallup Poll Shows VAST MAJORITY Back Voter...
Brian Stelter: The Bigger Question Is Would Americans Prefer a Dictatorial Approach
Orwell to the White Courtesy Phone! U.K. Will Arrest, Fine People for Pro-Life...
George Santos Trolls the Democrats Using their Own Tactics Against Them
THIS Is Why Dems Are Pivoting to Hitler: Trump Gets RECORD Support With...

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