Justice for Trooper: DeSantis Presses Charges Against Man Who Abandoned Dog to Hurricane...
Politico: Federal Employees Are Sweating a Trump Comeback
Kamala Harris Tells Charlamagne tha God There's No Question Reparations Have to Be...
'You Have Lost Your Damn Mind' - Harris Campaign's Desperate Play for Black...
NYT: Donald Trump Spreads His Politics of Grievance to Nonwhite Voters
Bret Baier Should Ask Kamala Harris These Three Questions
Dana Loesch Destroys Tim Walz’s Elmer Fudd Hunting Photo Op
Kamala's Husband Offers a Really Strange Glimpse into Their Very Weird Marriage
WATCH: Tim Walz Makes an Absolute KNUCKLEHEAD of Himself Trying to Dunk on...
CNN: Kamala Harris Said She Might Prosecute Oil Companies for Climate Change
Joe Biden's Cognitive Health Is a Beam in the Left's Eye
One Tweet to Rule Them All! Zeek Arkham Destroys the Kamala Harris Agenda...
Golden Arch Rivals: Donald McDonald to One-Up the Kamburglar
Opportunity Economy: Walgreens to Close 1,200 Locations, Saying 25 Percent of Stores Are...
Michigan Senate Candidate Says Gun Violence Is Top Killer of ‘Children Under 21’

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