‘I spent over 50 years as a physician and educator at Penn Med. Now I’m using civil rights legislation to protect the profession—and American patients.’
What this tells me is that the rot started quite a while ago. That is, it's not just some recent capture by the Long Marchers, even the alumni are infected which shows that the tumor was growing undetected for decades.
A friend of mine was at a recent conference in New Mexico for medical school deans from across the US and the entire focus of the weekend conference was to discuss strategies for getting around the fact that affirmative action was ruled out by the supreme Court last year. They discussed how to craft questions and conduct interviews to still select minority students but not get caught for doing so.
Since blacks are clamoring for segregation I'd say the best thing is to swim with the current and give it to them. Let's have all black hospitals with all black staff who were trained in schools where one's commitment to SJ is what got you your diploma and where Different Ways Of Knowing are taught. Whitey, on the other hand, should quarantine himself in all white schools and then practice White Medicine in all white hospitals where he has no blacks to oppress. Liberation!
The Best and The Brightest. I have always felt that our Medical Schools should be and would be above all this culture upheaval, the DEI infiltration, the woke mentality. That when it comes to our Medical Schools this is who they accepted. Very competitive for a reason because who do you want treating your sick child or your ill wife. The physician who is now standing before you fully credentialed because it was the fair equitable inclusive thing to do.
The Oath >> First Do No Harm. Well apparently they are now doing just that !!!
This is why I have white and asian doctors only, particularly if they are under 40 and trained in the last 10 years. I want the best doctor, not an affirmative action hire.
Once again those "in charge" miss the point. As Dr. Goldfarb pointed out, the focus needs to be on getting early and quality care to those who are disadvantaged. Instead these DEI warriors focus all their energies on what color of skin your doctor should have...in the end everyone suffers the effects of bad policies except the elitists who lecture us from their gated ivory palaces.
"… we push for better access for minority patients and encourage healthcare institutions to improve outreach to minority communities. We believe that focusing on racial identity will harm healthcare … ."
Looks like the author and most, if not all, posters here (including me) are "anti-DEI". But can our opinions make any impact on the minds of "pro-DEI" wokesters, who seem to be growing in number and power? Or are we mostly just "preaching to the choir", i.e. making arguments that are likely to appeal primarily to those who already agree with us. By playing "Devil's Advocate" and summoning up my inner (fake) progressive, I tried to cobble together a plausible basis for DEI ideology, in hopes of facilitating a constructive engagement with it. So, speaking in the voice of my conjured woke persona, here is the result:
The main driver of DEI is the problem of "disparate outcomes". Non-wokesters often say things like "people deserve equal opportunity, but are not guaranteed equal outcomes". But DEI thinks that equal opportunity for different demographic groups must imply roughly equal outcomes for those groups, and that any statistically significant lower socio-economic status of historically underprivileged racial, ethnic, gender, etc. groups must be due to oppression by the privileged (white and "white-adjacent") ruling class. Because if people really had equal opportunity, why wouldn't they take advantage of it? Why would they choose to remain mired in poverty, crime, poor health, crummy jobs, low educational achievement, etc.? Could it be that they are in some way culturally or genetically inferior, and that some groups are just innately on the wrong side of "The Bell Curve" (referring to the 1994 book by Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray)? Speaking in religious terms, why would the Creator construct a perverse world in which that would be possible? It seems much more plausible, based on centuries of history, that external oppression is the culprit. So if the fault is external to the people suffering the oppression, so too must be the solution. And since the problems of the oppressed are acute and severe, they constitute a dire emergency that society is obligated to address immediately and vigorously.
But society seems reluctant to take on the responsibility of righting these grievous wrongs. The reason is not just that segments of society remain racist, sexist, etc. Social justice warriors also face a vast wall of ignorance and indifference among large sections of the population, for whom it is just too costly, time-consuming, and perhaps even dangerous to get involved in struggles on behalf of people they don't know or can't relate to. It's much easier to invent excuses for not acting, including blaming the victims for their own misfortune. So gaining the attention of so many indifferent people whose participation is essential to the struggle for justice requires militancy, direct action, and hyperbole. The sound of every skirmish must be amplified to maximum level. For example, any use of the "N-word" by an unauthorized person must be characterized in apocalyptic terms. The speaker must be canceled and/or fired and required to sincerely confess, repent, and atone before being allowed back into "polite society". The writer George Orwell understood these concepts. In his novel "1984", "thought criminals" were cured of their delusions in not very pleasant fashion in Room 101 of the Ministry of Love.
Applying these ideas to medical school admissions, the relatively small percentage of students from "marginalized groups" (including Blacks) is a clear indicator of unfair and irrational bias, and must be cured forthwith, even with quotas if necessary. One could try to object that even if these groups have suffered bias that has impeded their success in medical school, it would still be unfair to them, other students, and their future patients to reduce standards to accommodate them, and that remediation of their "deficiencies" must start earlier, in college. But colleges say that the problem dates back to K-12 schooling, the K-12 schools say it's too late by then and pass the buck to the parent(s), but what are the parents to do? They too have been victimized by society and deprived of the time, resources, and knowledge needed to prepare their offspring for the rigors of our system of education. So the DEI way is militant protest: "No more excuses! No more passing the buck and kicking the can down the road! Just fix it, now, and if anything goes wrong blame the white racist sexist power structure!".
Returning now to my regularly-scheduled anti-DEI self:
So, readers, how was my wokester impression? Does it contain any valid ideas, and in any case how accurately does it represent actual woke ideology so it might serve as a credible sparring partner for testing counter arguments?
Legal ethics professor in law school: be wary of cause lawyers. They end up
loving the cause more than the individual.
I can see this happening in the medical profession with even greater resultant harms than the legal profession. These med schools are churning out the activist SJW doctors.
I recently had back surgery. My surgeon happened to be black. However I did not have to worry whether he was qualified to do the surgery because he became a doctor before all the nonsense started about not having minority medical school students not take the MCAT or not being challenged by professors and not having to meet high standards to graduate became a thing. In the future I will be asking any doctor who treats me whether they took the MCAT and which medical school they attended.
Getting docs to stand together is like trying to herd cats, but that’s what it will take to resist this administrative fiat. The doctor-patient relationship is built on trust, and the DEI interventions are eroding it. These administrative mandates are like the tail wagging the dog! They cannot do what we do; they will not be the ones operating on a perforated ulcer at two in the morning, or the emergency craniotomy for trauma...as physicians and surgeons we have leverage to resist this hijacking of our profession, but we have to stand together! Chuck Harris, MD, FACS
Honest question: Are there any feminists, bipoc, lgbtq+, or other quote unquote marginalized folks out there who don't support DEI initiatives?
I feel like the most vocal proponents and critics against DEI (and other similar agendas) are those who stand to gain [proponents] and lose [critics] the most from the initiative.
I'm curious to hear viewpoints from people who are proponents but who will not benefit from DEI initiatives, as well as critics who would benefit. (You may have already comment in the comment section, but it's hard to tell ;-p)
Ironically, while the DIE activists are hard at work infiltrating the STEM systems. their comrades the CRT crowd are crowing about how racism and White Supremacy spawned science and math, and that traits like punctuality, conscientiousness, hard work and educational excellence are the result of the White European patriarchal hegemony. Meanwhile, non-Europeans like Indians and Asians continue to excel in the STEM fields. You can't make this stuff up.
Can you imagine the attitude? "I'm sorry ma'am, I know your appendix is about to burst, but punctuality is White Supremacy, so you'll just have to wait."
> After my drubbing by the Penn med school alumni
What this tells me is that the rot started quite a while ago. That is, it's not just some recent capture by the Long Marchers, even the alumni are infected which shows that the tumor was growing undetected for decades.
A friend of mine was at a recent conference in New Mexico for medical school deans from across the US and the entire focus of the weekend conference was to discuss strategies for getting around the fact that affirmative action was ruled out by the supreme Court last year. They discussed how to craft questions and conduct interviews to still select minority students but not get caught for doing so.
Since blacks are clamoring for segregation I'd say the best thing is to swim with the current and give it to them. Let's have all black hospitals with all black staff who were trained in schools where one's commitment to SJ is what got you your diploma and where Different Ways Of Knowing are taught. Whitey, on the other hand, should quarantine himself in all white schools and then practice White Medicine in all white hospitals where he has no blacks to oppress. Liberation!
Pretty son we will be forced to demand a white, cisgender, heterosexual doctor in every instance. How does that favor the "DEI" crew?
The Best and The Brightest. I have always felt that our Medical Schools should be and would be above all this culture upheaval, the DEI infiltration, the woke mentality. That when it comes to our Medical Schools this is who they accepted. Very competitive for a reason because who do you want treating your sick child or your ill wife. The physician who is now standing before you fully credentialed because it was the fair equitable inclusive thing to do.
The Oath >> First Do No Harm. Well apparently they are now doing just that !!!
Thankful for people like Dr. Goldfarb!
This is why I have white and asian doctors only, particularly if they are under 40 and trained in the last 10 years. I want the best doctor, not an affirmative action hire.
Once again those "in charge" miss the point. As Dr. Goldfarb pointed out, the focus needs to be on getting early and quality care to those who are disadvantaged. Instead these DEI warriors focus all their energies on what color of skin your doctor should have...in the end everyone suffers the effects of bad policies except the elitists who lecture us from their gated ivory palaces.
I am not seeing any pictures of black or Hispanic professionals on this thread. I’d like to hear from them.
"… we push for better access for minority patients and encourage healthcare institutions to improve outreach to minority communities. We believe that focusing on racial identity will harm healthcare … ."
Doesn't the first sentence contradict the second?
Looks like the author and most, if not all, posters here (including me) are "anti-DEI". But can our opinions make any impact on the minds of "pro-DEI" wokesters, who seem to be growing in number and power? Or are we mostly just "preaching to the choir", i.e. making arguments that are likely to appeal primarily to those who already agree with us. By playing "Devil's Advocate" and summoning up my inner (fake) progressive, I tried to cobble together a plausible basis for DEI ideology, in hopes of facilitating a constructive engagement with it. So, speaking in the voice of my conjured woke persona, here is the result:
The main driver of DEI is the problem of "disparate outcomes". Non-wokesters often say things like "people deserve equal opportunity, but are not guaranteed equal outcomes". But DEI thinks that equal opportunity for different demographic groups must imply roughly equal outcomes for those groups, and that any statistically significant lower socio-economic status of historically underprivileged racial, ethnic, gender, etc. groups must be due to oppression by the privileged (white and "white-adjacent") ruling class. Because if people really had equal opportunity, why wouldn't they take advantage of it? Why would they choose to remain mired in poverty, crime, poor health, crummy jobs, low educational achievement, etc.? Could it be that they are in some way culturally or genetically inferior, and that some groups are just innately on the wrong side of "The Bell Curve" (referring to the 1994 book by Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray)? Speaking in religious terms, why would the Creator construct a perverse world in which that would be possible? It seems much more plausible, based on centuries of history, that external oppression is the culprit. So if the fault is external to the people suffering the oppression, so too must be the solution. And since the problems of the oppressed are acute and severe, they constitute a dire emergency that society is obligated to address immediately and vigorously.
But society seems reluctant to take on the responsibility of righting these grievous wrongs. The reason is not just that segments of society remain racist, sexist, etc. Social justice warriors also face a vast wall of ignorance and indifference among large sections of the population, for whom it is just too costly, time-consuming, and perhaps even dangerous to get involved in struggles on behalf of people they don't know or can't relate to. It's much easier to invent excuses for not acting, including blaming the victims for their own misfortune. So gaining the attention of so many indifferent people whose participation is essential to the struggle for justice requires militancy, direct action, and hyperbole. The sound of every skirmish must be amplified to maximum level. For example, any use of the "N-word" by an unauthorized person must be characterized in apocalyptic terms. The speaker must be canceled and/or fired and required to sincerely confess, repent, and atone before being allowed back into "polite society". The writer George Orwell understood these concepts. In his novel "1984", "thought criminals" were cured of their delusions in not very pleasant fashion in Room 101 of the Ministry of Love.
Applying these ideas to medical school admissions, the relatively small percentage of students from "marginalized groups" (including Blacks) is a clear indicator of unfair and irrational bias, and must be cured forthwith, even with quotas if necessary. One could try to object that even if these groups have suffered bias that has impeded their success in medical school, it would still be unfair to them, other students, and their future patients to reduce standards to accommodate them, and that remediation of their "deficiencies" must start earlier, in college. But colleges say that the problem dates back to K-12 schooling, the K-12 schools say it's too late by then and pass the buck to the parent(s), but what are the parents to do? They too have been victimized by society and deprived of the time, resources, and knowledge needed to prepare their offspring for the rigors of our system of education. So the DEI way is militant protest: "No more excuses! No more passing the buck and kicking the can down the road! Just fix it, now, and if anything goes wrong blame the white racist sexist power structure!".
Returning now to my regularly-scheduled anti-DEI self:
So, readers, how was my wokester impression? Does it contain any valid ideas, and in any case how accurately does it represent actual woke ideology so it might serve as a credible sparring partner for testing counter arguments?
Legal ethics professor in law school: be wary of cause lawyers. They end up
loving the cause more than the individual.
I can see this happening in the medical profession with even greater resultant harms than the legal profession. These med schools are churning out the activist SJW doctors.
I recently had back surgery. My surgeon happened to be black. However I did not have to worry whether he was qualified to do the surgery because he became a doctor before all the nonsense started about not having minority medical school students not take the MCAT or not being challenged by professors and not having to meet high standards to graduate became a thing. In the future I will be asking any doctor who treats me whether they took the MCAT and which medical school they attended.
Getting docs to stand together is like trying to herd cats, but that’s what it will take to resist this administrative fiat. The doctor-patient relationship is built on trust, and the DEI interventions are eroding it. These administrative mandates are like the tail wagging the dog! They cannot do what we do; they will not be the ones operating on a perforated ulcer at two in the morning, or the emergency craniotomy for trauma...as physicians and surgeons we have leverage to resist this hijacking of our profession, but we have to stand together! Chuck Harris, MD, FACS
Honest question: Are there any feminists, bipoc, lgbtq+, or other quote unquote marginalized folks out there who don't support DEI initiatives?
I feel like the most vocal proponents and critics against DEI (and other similar agendas) are those who stand to gain [proponents] and lose [critics] the most from the initiative.
I'm curious to hear viewpoints from people who are proponents but who will not benefit from DEI initiatives, as well as critics who would benefit. (You may have already comment in the comment section, but it's hard to tell ;-p)
All hail the conquering heroes.
Ironically, while the DIE activists are hard at work infiltrating the STEM systems. their comrades the CRT crowd are crowing about how racism and White Supremacy spawned science and math, and that traits like punctuality, conscientiousness, hard work and educational excellence are the result of the White European patriarchal hegemony. Meanwhile, non-Europeans like Indians and Asians continue to excel in the STEM fields. You can't make this stuff up.
Can you imagine the attitude? "I'm sorry ma'am, I know your appendix is about to burst, but punctuality is White Supremacy, so you'll just have to wait."