Powered by Topple

Doctors at Boston hospital call for ‘preferential care based on race,’ say Biden’s equity order makes it legal

Powered by Topple

Op-ed views and opinions expressed are solely those of the author.

Today’s radical Democratic Party was highly successful in exploiting the death of George Floyd to establish as fact the toxic doctrine of critical race theory. The party arrived at this coveted station with a big assist from corporate America, the sports industry, along with their traditional allies, the largely corrupt liberal media.

A residual effect of establishing that all white people are inherently racist is that it sets the stage for retributions, which goes along with the desired end result: reparations.

Since white people have behaved so badly over the years, according to the left — aside from the hundreds of thousands who fought and died to end slavery, and the countless others who have endeavored for a just society — it’s become acceptable to ostracize them or otherwise discriminate against them. Just ask U.S. Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., who recently vowed publicly that she would not vote to confirm white nominees unless they check off a preferred diversity box.

Or look to the actions of a Boston hospital, where two doctors announced support this week for “preferential care based on race” and “race-explicit interventions.”

The goal of the Brigham and Women’s Hospital doctors is to set an “antiracist agenda for medicine.”

In other words, in order to not make health care decisions based on the color of one’s skin, they must look to the color of one’s skin to offer preferred care.

“Colorblind solutions have failed to achieve racial equity in health care,” the doctors declared.

Stealing directly from the pages of critical race theory, the plan is to “comprehensively confront structural racism” with a “reparations framework.”

In addition to financial reparations at the federal level, which the doctors back, they are calling for “medical restitution.”

“Federally paid reparations—urgent and long overdue—would help to mitigate racial health inequities (including those seen in COVID-19), but they would not, on their own, end institutional and structural racism,” Dr. Bram Wispelwey and Dr, Michelle Morse wrote. “We believe we must pursue restitution programs at the institutional level while also advocating for federal reparations.”

“Offering preferential care based on race or ethnicity may elicit legal challenges from our system of colorblind law … We encourage other institutions to proceed confidently on behalf of equity and racial justice, with backing provided by recent White House executive orders,” they explain.

This being a good example of the long-term implications of President Biden signing whatever his progressive handlers place in front of him.

Brigham and Women’s Hospital distanced itself from the controversial stance, telling the Washington Examiner in a statement that the article is an “opinion piece written by two physicians, not a formal position of the hospital.”

“The Brigham is committed to examining and eliminating the many impacts that racism has on the health and wellbeing of our patients,” the release added. “As part of our system’s United Against Racism campaign, we support efforts focused on improving both the access and the experience of our patients, focusing on community health and advocacy, and increasing the diversity of leadership.”

Here’s a quick sampling of responses to the story from Twitter:

Tom Tillison

Comments

Latest Articles