Commentary

DEI Sentiments Dominate In U.S. Hospitals

  • By Do No Harm Staff
  • February 7, 2024

A recent report published by the American Hospital Association (AHA)’s Institute for Diversity and Health Equity (IFDHE) highlights that DEI attitudes are widespread in American hospitals.

The report includes the findings of a June 2022 survey which was administered to over 6,000 hospitals with more than 1,300 responses. According to the survey results:

  • 96% of respondents believe diversity is extremely or very important to the future of U.S. health care;
  • 97% believe equity is extremely or very important to the future of U.S. health care; and
  • 97% believe inclusion is extremely or very important to the future of U.S. health care.

Many of these hospitals have acted on their pro-DEI attitudes by signing a so-called “equity pledge” or “anti-racist” statement, such as the AHA’s #123forEquity Pledge. This pledge asks signatories to “increase the collection, stratification and use of race, ethnicity, language preference and other sociodemographic data to improve quality and safety,” among other commitments.

Figure 1. From the American Hospital Association #123for Equity Pledge to Act.

The AHA pledge has been signed by more than 1,700 hospitals, despite a concerning lack of evidence that these commitments will produce improvements in health outcomes for any minority community. The states with the highest concentration of hospitals signing onto the pledge are:

  1. Oregon (40%)
  2. Maryland (39%)
  3. North Carolina (34%)
  4. Connecticut (33%)
  5. New Mexico (33%)
  6. South Dakota (29%)
  7. South Carolina (28%)
  8. Colorado (26%)
  9. Utah (25%)
  10. Alaska (23%)
Figure 2. Map of signers of the AHA #123forEquity Pledge.

West Virginia is the only state with no hospitals reported as joining the AHA’s pledge.

But these actions don’t end with simply signing pledges. According to the report, DEI is increasingly prevalent in both budgeting and medical decisions at U.S. hospitals. Not only do a majority of hospitals report a budgeted department dedicated to advancing DEI goals, but nearly one-third of hospitals indicate these departments have annual budgets in excess of $125,000.

Figure 3. From the IFDHE/AHA “DEI Data Insights” report, page 6.

The report notes that, while some hospitals may not yet have budgets dedicated to advancing DEI, in the future “it will be important to track how hospitals are allocating resources towards DEI and advancing health equity.” This is a sure-sign that the AHA will be pushing hospitals to ramp up their DEI-related spending moving forward.

Nearly 85 percent of hospitals also indicate their use of “race, ethnicity and language data;

sexual orientation and gender identity; and social needs data” to inform clinical and operational functions. Put another way, unspecified and unclear “data” on concepts related to race, gender, and more are influencing hospital functions at these medical institutions. Since this statement is used by the AHA to gauge a hospital’s commitment to “health equity”, it can reasonably be assumed that this variety of DEI is driving medical decisions under the guise of data-informed policies.

The AHA’s advocacy for DEI in medicine is of no surprise—nor is the organization’s efforts to track hospitals’ verbal commitments, financial obligations, and medical decisions that relate to diversity, equity, inclusion, gender identity, and “anti-racism”. In fact, as Do No Harm has previously uncovered, America’s hospitals are increasingly fed by a talent pool of medical universities that seemingly prioritize being “woke” above all else. From California to Florida to Tennessee and more, these colleges and universities have not only implemented DEI and woke curriculum and trainings, but have also begun screening applicants before they even set foot on campus.

As a result, America’s institutions of higher education have greatly influenced its institutions of medicine to incorporate these non-medical factors into operational and financial decisions. These sentiments are no doubt reinforced by the AHA which has both jumped on the woke bandwagon and attempted to steer it further into identity politics and divisive concepts.

As the AHA and hospitals across the country continue to dive into the muddy waters of radical ideologies and political activism, patients will bear the consequences. Prospective doctors and nurses who are interested in delivering quality medical care will be crowded out by providers calling for more and bigger woke medical bureaucracies.

The silver lining? In a dozen states, fewer than ten percent of hospitals have signed onto the AHA’s equity pledge. These hospitals should continue to stand strong against the AHA and those pushing extreme ideologies, and instead focus their efforts on ensuring their patients receive the best medical care possible. The future of high-quality medicine is depending on it.