College Republicans Table-Flipping Professor Identified and Reported
WATCH: Highlights from Wednesday's Nintendo Direct Showcasing the Switch 2
Charlamagne tha Clod: Radio Host Defends Jasmine Crockett Making Fun of Texas Gov’s...
Georgia Dems Stage Walkout Because They Want Taxpayers to Cover Sex Changes for...
Frank Luntz is Flipping His Wig Over Dem Cory Booker’s 25-Hour ‘History Changing’...
Targeted Tesla Owner Seeks Whopping $1 Million in Lawsuit Against Man Who Allegedly...
Skin Over Skills: Jasmine Crockett Landed a Public Defender Job by Pushing that...
Sen. Cory Booker Explains His Training Regimen to Avoid Bathroom Breaks
WATCH: John Boyega Trashes Star Wars Fans
NPR Interviews ‘Fascism Expert’ Fleeing to Canada Over Trump and DEI
Judge Orders Trump Administration to Restore Legal Aid to Migrant ‘Children’
CNN Scare Quotes: Elon Musk Shocked by Hatred ‘From the Left’
Here Are the Number of Illegals Released Into the US During Biden's First...
Trans Woman Inducted Into National 'Women’s' Hall of Fame
Boston DA Considering Contempt of Court Charges Against ICE Agent Doing His Job

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