We Found More Discriminatory Scholarships at the University of Kansas School of Medicine

The University of Kansas School of Medicine at the KU Medical Center (KUMC) continues to violate civil rights laws with two more discriminatory scholarships.

We previously reported about the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights’ investigation of KUSM for its Urban Scholars Program for Students Underrepresented in Medicine. In response the school quietly changed the eligibility requirements by removing the race/ethnicity criteria that originally created the violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

But KUMC has more scrubbing to do.

The KUMC Department of Plastic, Burn, and Wound Surgery offers the Summer Diversity Research Scholarship for First and Second Year Medical Students. According to the department’s informational document, “To be considered for a scholarship through the KU Department of Plastic Surgery Scholarship Program, the student must be a member of a population that is underrepresented in Plastic Surgery; i.e. African American/Black, American Indian, Native Hawaiian, Alaska Native and/or Hispanic/Latino.”

Figure 1. KUMC Dept. of Plastic, Burn, and Wound Surgery’s “Summer Diversity Research Scholarship for First and Second Year Medical Students.”

The application for this scholarship requires applicants to list their “Racial Identification/Ethnicity:”

Figure 2. Application for the Summer Diversity Research Scholarship for First and Second Year Medical Students at KUMC.

Under these requirements, medical students who are white, Asian, Pacific Islander, or Middle Eastern/North African are illegally excluded from this scholarship on the basis of their race, color, or national origin.

The school also offers the Department of Plastic Surgery Sub-Internship in Plastic Surgery Diversity Scholarship:

Figure 3. Department of Plastic, Burn, and Wound Surgery “Educational Resources for Medical Students” at KUMC.

The informational document is available for download from this page, which lists the same racially discriminatory eligibility criteria:

Figure 4. Eligibility criteria for the Sub-Internship in Plastic Surgery Diversity Scholarship at KUMC.

The application for this scholarship also collects the student’s “Racial Identification/Ethnicity:”

Figure 5. Application for the Diversity Sub-Internship in Plastic Surgery Scholarship at KUMC.

Both scholarships at KUMC cover the awardee’s travel costs and provide stipends of $1,500 and $500, respectively.

Do No Harm senior fellow Mark Perry filed a federal civil rights complaint against KUMC for these two scholarships. Perry requested the Kansas City OCR investigate KUMC for violations of Title VI, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race/ethnicity.

Do No Harm Lawsuit Charges Arkansas Minority Health Commission with Discrimination against Students Based on Skin Color

Today, Do No Harm, an organization working to protect healthcare from discriminatory, divisive ideologies, filed a lawsuit on behalf of a member against Kenya L. Eddings, the Executive Director of the Arkansas Minority Health Commission. The suit asserts Ms. Eddings, in her official capacity as head of the AMHC, is responsible for a scholarship – the Minority Healthcare Workforce Diversity Scholarship – that discriminates against students based on their skin color.

“This scholarship clearly violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, said Dr. Stanley Goldfarb, Board Chair of Do No Harm. “The Arkansas Minority Health Commission is illegally excluding and discriminating against certain medical students and denying them opportunities based on their race, color, or national origin – the scholarship should be declared unconstitutional and promptly enjoined.”

The Do No Harm suit, filed in the Eastern District of Arkansas, maintains that the scholarship is blatantly illegal. The Equal Protection Clause requires racial classifications to satisfy strict scrutiny, and the scholarship’s gross racial exclusion obviously fails to meet those standards. 

To be eligible for the scholarship, an applicant must “confirm that [he is] a racial minority,” meaning “African American, Hispanic, Native American/American Indian, Asian American or Marshallese.” In other words, Arkansas’s white and Arab-American students need not apply.

Do No Harm seeks the following:

  • A declaratory judgment that the Arkansas Minority Health Commission’s Minority Healthcare Workforce Diversity Scholarship violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
  • A permanent injunction barring Defendant from selecting student applicants based on race and from enforcing any and all racially discriminatory eligibility criteria when awarding the Arkansas Minority Health Commission’s Minority Healthcare Workforce Diversity Scholarship.
  • A preliminary injunction granting the above relief throughout the pendency of this case and a temporary restraining order preventing Defendant from selecting any scholarship recipients until the Court resolves the preliminary injunction.

ABOUT DO NO HARM: 

Do No Harm is a diverse group of physicians, healthcare professionals, medical students, patients, and policymakers united by an ethical mission: Protect healthcare from a radical, divisive, and discriminatory ideology. They believe in making healthcare better for all – not undermining it in pursuit of a political agenda. Learn more at www.donoharmmedicine.org.

Legislative Update: Kansas

, ,

The Do No Harm team has been busy crisscrossing the country this spring, hard at work partnering with policymakers and allies to champion our ideas in the states. One of those states is Kansas, where the Do No Harm team made significant headway pushing back on the woke takeover of healthcare.

After Do No Harm Board Chairman Dr. Stanley Goldfarb testified in front of the Kansas state legislature on February 1, legislators advanced three important reforms that are headed to Governor Laura Kelly’s desk in the form of two bills. Here is a short summary of each:

SB 26: Thanks to significant work by Senator Beverly Gossage and Representative Susan Humphries, this bill creates the Kansas Child Mutilation Prevention Act aimed at protecting children from the harmful, life-changing impacts of sex reassignment surgeries.

The bill would:

  • Permit an individual who had sex reassignment procedures performed as a child to bring a civil lawsuit against the physician who performed the procedure
  • Define the medically verifiable disorders that would not qualify for civil litigation
  • Establish the cap on monetary damages that could be sought and awarded

In addition, SB 26 would require the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts to revoke the license of a physician who performed a childhood sex reassignment service.

HB 2184: Thanks to the strong leadership by Senate President Ty Masterson, Speaker Dan Hawkins, and Majority Leader Chris Croft, and tireless efforts from Rep. Steven Howe and Senator J.R. Claeys, two important provisions were included in the state’s general budget bill.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) reforms to the Behavioral Sciences Regulatory Board:

  • This bill mandates that no fiscal expenditures will be allowed by the agency to require any training, education, or instructional program that includes DEI, Critical Race Theory, or related content as a condition of licensure or permits.
    • The Behavioral Sciences Regulatory Board was headed in the opposite direction, and testified that they had ”voted to request statutory language to decrease the required number of continuing education hours in diagnosis and treatment from 6 hours to 3 hours and to add language for a new requirement of 3 hours in diversity training for all licensees.”
  • Other medical boards testified that they do not currently (a do not plan to) require DEI training for licensees–they know the legislature is now watching.
  • This reform is applicable for fiscal years ending June 30, 2024 and June 30, 2025 (any policies included in general budgets are not considered permanent but are active for the following two fiscal years after the budget is approved).
  • Visit page 10 for more information on this specific provision).

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) reforms for the Board of Regents at any publicly funded Kansas institution of higher education:

  • This bill mandates that no publicly funded fiscal expenditures will be allowed by any postsecondary educational institution to:
    • “Compel, require, induce or solicit, encourage or coerce any applicant, employee, student or contractor” to:
      • Endorse or oppose any ideology
      • Provide a statement detailing their experience, commitment to, or expertise in DEI or any ideology
      • Provide preferential consideration to an applicant, employee, student, or contractor because of such a commitment, endorsement, or statement
    • It also mandates that each Institution’s Office of General Counsel provide a compliance report on these provisions to the Director of Legislative Research and the Attorney General.
  • These statements were required for positions such as a Professor of Practice for Clinical Child Psychology at University of Kansas, Assistant Professor of Biology Forensics at Washburn University, and Professor of Pharmacology at Kansas State University.
  • This reform is applicable for fiscal years ending June 30, 2024 and June 30, 2025 (any policies included in general budgets are not considered permanent but are active for the following two fiscal years after the budget is approved).
  • Visit page 257 (h) (1) for more information on this specific provision.

These reforms are tremendous strides forward in the effort to keep discrimination out of medicine and to protect children. While SB 26 and HB 2184 successfully passed the Kansas House and Senate, they could still be vetoed by Governor Kelly. Stay tuned for more information on potential legislative veto overrides should this occur.

S1E12: The Dangerous Influence of the Anti-Racism Movement on Society

Dr. Stanley Goldfarb and Benita Cotton-Orr discuss how the woke movement towards anti-Racism has transformed how Americans view one another, shifting from a perspective of opportunity to one of oppression.

The University of Kansas School of Medicine Partners with California School to Promote Far-Left Anti-Racism Program

,

The KU Medical Center (KUMC) at the University of Kansas School of Medicine (KUSOM) has teamed up with UC San Francisco (UCSF) in a program that promotes radical, discriminatory, and divisive concepts – all in the name of research.

A source let us know about the REPAIR Project at KUMC, which is an “anti-racism collaboration” the school is taking part in with UCSF, as well as engaging with “communities of color” in the geographic areas surrounding the KUMC campuses.

Figure 1. The REPAIR Project at KUMC.

KUMC’s Office for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (ODEI) is involved in recruiting participants for the REPAIR Project, citing it as a framework of “anti-racism initiatives” to integrate into the MD program’s curriculum and continuing medical education. The goal is “addressing unequal outcomes in our clinics” and “anti-Black racism” by using “a social justice and anti-racism curriculum throughout the medical center.” The structure claims that racial inequities in the healthcare industry and academic medicine are caused by “systemic race-based structural violence and racism in society as a whole.”

Figure 2. Framework of the REPAIR Project at KUMC.

The ODEI’s website has a short recruitment video that invites area residents to take part in “an oral history research project” and have their stories heard if they have “received substandard medical care.”

Figure 3. REPAIR Project recruitment video on the KUMC ODEI website.

Participants will be asked:

  • What are the harms suffered at the hands of the medical profession that local community members carry with them?
  • What are their inherited memories and lived experiences of harm at the hands of biomedicine?
  • What restorative actions would it take to repair those harms?
  • How should KU Medical Center and other area institutions work with communities to design and implement its restorative work?

The site also lists several resources from UCSF:

Figure 4. REPAIR Project resources listed on the KUMC ODEI website.

At UCSF, where the program originated, “REPAIR” is an acronym for “REParations and Anti-Institutional Racism, which provides the unifying theme behind this project.” The three-year initiative, backed by the Regents of the University of California, aims to “address Anti-Black Racism and augment Black, Indigenous, People of Color voices and presence” in the fields of science, healthcare, and medicine. The divisive rhetoric of the REPAIR Project is outlined in the “strategic annual themes:”

Year One: Medical Reparations: Addressing the Ongoing Legacies of Slavery in American Medicine

The premise for the first phase is “an exploration of the legacies of slavery that are intertwined with both histories and ongoing forms of medical racism.” UCSF states that black enrollment in medical education programs has been impeded by “not-so-hidden racism admission practices,” and asks, “What would it mean to rectify and repair these harms in the form of reparations?”

Year Two: Medical Abolitionism

This phase seeks to define how the health sciences can “untangle the current interdependencies between medicine and carceral regimes,” and warns of how physicians may be “unwittingly criminalizing and pathologizing those already marginalized” in the course of their clinical practice. The REPAIR Project suggests that healthcare providers must play a role in “rethinking systems of community safety” that do not include police or security personnel, as well as the development of “emancipatory models of care.”

Figure 5. Information on a 2022 discussion on the REPAIR Project at UCSF.

Year Three: Decolonizing the Health Sciences

The topic for the project’s third year is to investigate “how racism can get coded into biomedicine and social sciences of health.” UCSF defines “decolonization” as “the global reach of white supremacy as an entrenched and invisible ideological system” that has produced “unequal exposures to harm” and discrimination that is both implicit and explicit. The goal? “Craft a decolonized, race-sensitive science of medicine health, and then to consider how that knowledge and knowledge production are best translated for clinical care.”

    The University of Kansas School of Medicine and the KU Medical Center is already under investigation by the Office for Civil Rights for a racially discriminatory scholars’ program. Why is the institution also participating in this far-left, California-sponsored project?

    Patients shouldn’t be frightened into believing that their doctors don’t have their best interests in mind when seeking treatment at KU Health. Kansas policymakers must act now to remove the REPAIR Project and other destructive ideologies from further degrading the quality of medical education in “the region’s premier academic health center.”

    Do No Harm Files Amicus Brief in Florida Court

    Do No Harm submitted an amicus, or “friend of the court,” brief on Friday in federal court to support the State of Florida’s decision to refuse providing Medicaid reimbursement for “gender affirming care” for minors. The case is Dekker v. Weida, No. 4:22-cv-325, and is being litigated in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida. The outcome of the case turns on whether the State of Florida could have reasonably concluded that “gender-affirming care” is an experimental treatment without an adequate scientific basis. Do No Harm’s amicus brief explains that the State of Florida’s decision was eminently reasonable with respect to minors given the extent of the known harms, unknown risks, and lack of benefit from these treatments. A decision is expected in the coming months.

    Click here to read the full amicus brief.

    Dr. Stanley Goldfarb Joins The Howie Carr Show

    Talk show host Howie Carr welcomes Dr. Stanley Goldfarb to discuss how DEI is dismantling quality healthcare in the United States.

    Medical Reparations Have Arrived

    Changes designed to increase black patients’ access to kidney transplants pervert good medicine and punish white patients to right nonexistent wrongs.

    The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) and the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) are implementing new policies to make skin color a crucial factor in who receives life-saving kidney transplants. The shift is perhaps the most dangerous victory for wokeness in health care to date.

    In the name of “equity,” UNOS and OPTN purport to be expanding black patients’ access to kidney transplants. They essentially claim that the longstanding system for such transplants is racist, pointing to how black patients make up 30 percent of the dialysis population and transplant wait list but receive a smaller fraction of kidney transplants.

    Read more at City Journal.

    UCSD Maintains Its Woke Ways With a Top Tier DICE Inventory Score

    Just how woke is California’s UC San Diego School of Medicine (UCSD SOM)? Very woke indeed, as it reported the AAMC.

    Here’s the background. In November 2022, the Association of American Medical Colleges released a report showing that the vast majority of medical schools have embraced identity politics, despite their divisive and even discriminatory nature. The report was based on surveys of specific medical schools, which the AAMC didn’t name.

    For the sake of transparency and accountability, Do No Harm submitted freedom of information requests to public medical schools nationwide, including the UCSD School of Medicine. We asked for a copy of its survey response, so that California taxpayers and policymakers could learn the truth about this institution.

    Here’s what the UCSD School of Medicine has self-reported:

    • It has adopted racially discriminatory admissions practices under the guise of “affirmative action.” This means it’s potentially lowering standards in the name of diversity, thereby threatening patient health. UCSD SOM has a “holistic admissions policy,” and puts its DEI efforts front and center on the Admissions landing page.
    Figure 1. UCSD School of Medicine Admissions page: This Is Us.
    Figure 2. Anti-Racism Coalition Day of Action at UCSD SOM on June 8, 2020.
    • It lobbies for woke policies at the federal, state, and/or local levels. This means it’s wading into toxic public debates instead of fully focusing on educating future physicians. UCSD SOM says its “Financial Aid Director sits on local and state committees that address financial aid inequities. California Association of Student Financial Aid Administration – State Issues Committee to provide approval or disapproval of possible assembly and senate bills related to financial aid and other student insecurities.”
    • It offers tenure and promotion to faculty who prove their commitment to extreme identity politics and woke priorities. This is a litmus test that requires faculty to toe the party line instead of teaching medicine at the highest level. The SOM cited the University of California academic policy on this topic from the Office of the President, stating, “Per APM 210-1-d – The University of California is committed to excellence and equity in every facet of its mission. Contributions in all areas of faculty achievement that promote equal opportunity and diversity should be given due recognition in the academic personnel process, and they should be evaluated and credited in the same way as other faculty achievements.”
    • Its administrators are active within local, regional, and national forums to promote equity, diversity, and inclusion. This means it’s wasting resources that would be better spent on real medical education. The UCSD SOM told the AAMC it participates in the Advisory Council for NIH’s National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities, with the chancellor and vice chancellor being involved in other DEI-related issues on the national level.
    Figure 3. UCSD SOM overall DICE Inventory score.

    All told, the UCSD SOM has instituted 95.4% of the divisive and discriminatory woke policies listed by the AAMC. And you can bet it is feeling pressure from activists and outside groups to go even further down the radical rabbit hole – doing even more damage to faculty, medical students, and ultimately, the millions of patients they’ll see.

    California taxpayers help fund the UCSD School of Medicine. They, and the policymakers who represent them, should ask why they’re giving so much money to an institution that’s putting divisive and discriminatory ideology at the heart of medical education. More importantly, they should ensure the UCSD SOM stops, and soon.

    The Office for Civil Rights is Investigating the University of Minnesota Department of Medicine for a Title IX Violation

    The Department of Medicine in the University of Minnesota Medical School is under investigation by the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR).

    Mark Perry, senior fellow at Do No Harm, filed a complaint with the OCR in March for the Dr. Anne Joseph Women’s Early Research Career (WERC) Award. This award provides funding to supplement the research productivity of junior faculty researchers, but eligibility is exclusively limited to women. Sex-based discrimination is prohibited under Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972.

    “Over the past four years, the University of Minnesota has been subject to no fewer than 25 federal civil rights complaints,” Perry said. “This illustrates just how widespread violations of Title VI and Title IX violations are in higher education.”

    The Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the Department of Medicine sponsors the WERC and other research awards “that support the career development of women and those who are under-represented in medicine and sciences (URiM).”

    The Chicago OCR opened the investigation on April 6.

    Children’s Hospitals Need Doctors, Not Social Workers and Political Activists

    Some things should be obvious, like the idea that children’s hospitals should focus on children’s health. Not so fast, say the experts at the Children’s Hospital Association. They want doctors at these critical institutions to be more like social workers and political activists than medical professionals.

    The CHA made that clear in March when discussing “a creative way to make time for DEI training.” It wants doctors to spend more time learning about the “social determinants of health,” a clever phrase that woke activists use to describe things that aren’t in the domain of health care. That includes everything from homelessness to poverty to food insecurity and beyond.

    Figure 1. From the March 30, 2023 edition of “Children’s Hospitals Today” by the Children’s Hospital Association.

    These are serious problems that need real solutions, without question. But doctors – including those at children’s hospitals – aren’t suited to tackle them. A doctor’s job is to treat patients’ individual medical needs. Making them focus on things like homelessness and poverty turns them into political activists. For the people pushing this, that’s a feature, not a bug.

    Proponents of DEI want doctors to be activists because it helps them achieve their goal of transforming society along divisive ideological lines. They want doctors to get behind things like a bigger welfare state, more government intervention in the economy, and a federal bureaucracy that picks winners and losers based on skin color. Apparently, sacrificing the mission of health care is an acceptable cost to achieving this vision.

    Doctors should stick to treating individual patients’ medical needs. We already have social workers who help people address other challenges in life. We also already have plenty of activists who can advocate for the policies they want. Medical professionals should focus on medicine, at children’s hospitals and everywhere else.

    The Medical College of Wisconsin Scrubs Discriminatory Language From a Student Elective Program

    The Medical College of Wisconsin (MCW) has removed specific race/ethnicity eligibility criteria from one of its programs.

    Last year we reported that Do No Harm had filed a complaint with the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) against MCW for its 2022 Visiting Underrepresented in Medicine (URiM) Student Elective Program (archived page). Acceptance into the program required applicants to “be a member of a group that is recognized as racially/ethnically URiM by MCW: Mexican American, Puerto Rican, Black/African American, Native American, and Hmong/Hmong American.” This requirement is a violation of Title VI of the civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibit discrimination based on race/ethnicity.

    Figure 1. Flyer for the 2022 Visiting URiM Student Elective program at the Medical College of Wisconsin.

    Fast forward to the 2023 version of this program, and MCW has quietly updated the eligibility criteria for applicants. The new target population is fourth-year med students “who are from or have lived experience engaging people in underserved communities in the United States.”

    Figure 2. Flyer for the 2023 Visiting URiM Student Elective program at the Medical College of Wisconsin.

    MCW took this action despite no formal investigation being opened by the OCR.

    If your college or university is offering or promoting discriminatory scholarships or programs in the health professions, Do No Harm wants to hear from you.

    A Physician’s Journey to Combat The Risk of Radical Politics in American Healthcare

    Dr. Stanley Goldfarb joined the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons:

    Florida Atlantic University Schmidt College of Medicine Making “Moderate” Efforts – DICE Inventory Score 71.6%

    Just how woke is the Florida Atlantic University (FAU) Schmidt College of Medicine? According to its Diversity, Inclusion, Culture, and Equity (DICE) Inventory, it is well on its way to woke, as it confirmed to Do No Harm.

    Here’s the background. In November 2022, the Association of American Medical Colleges released a report showing that the vast majority of medical schools have embraced identity politics, despite their divisive and even discriminatory nature. The report was based on surveys of specific medical schools, which the AAMC didn’t name.

    For the sake of transparency and accountability, Do No Harm submitted freedom of information requests to public medical schools nationwide, including the FAU Schmidt College of Medicine (SCOM). We asked for a copy of its survey response, so that Florida taxpayers and policymakers could learn the truth about this institution.

    Here’s what the FAU Schmidt College of Medicine has self-reported:

    • It has adopted racially discriminatory admissions practices under the guise of “affirmative action.” This means it’s potentially lowering standards in the name of diversity, thereby threatening patient health. FAU SCOM reports that it “utilizes a holistic admissions process,” and told AAMC that the Graduate Programs Admissions Committee acted in “waiving the GRE requirement to increase inclusiveness.”
    • It has a “dedicated office, staff, or resources” dedicated to DEI. This means there’s a permanent woke bureaucracy pushing ideology on faculty and students. The Office for Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (JEDI) supports programming and pathway programs with budget dollars “as well as donor funding.”
    • It lobbies for woke policies at the federal, state, and/or local levels. This means it’s wading into toxic public debates instead of fully focusing on educating future physicians.  “The College JEDI Officer participates on a DEI subcommittee of the Florida Medical Schools Council of Deans,” the DICE Inventory shows.
    • Its administrators are active within local, regional, and national forums to promote equity, diversity, and inclusion. This means it’s wasting resources that would be better spent on real medical education. This response on the DICE Inventory listed ten memberships, workgroups, and forums the FAU SCOM leadership is engaging in.
    Figure 1. FAU overall DICE Inventory score.

    All told, FAU SCOM has instituted 71.6% of the divisive and discriminatory woke policies listed by the AAMC. And you can bet it is feeling pressure from activists and outside groups to go even further down the radical rabbit hole – doing even more damage to faculty, medical students, and ultimately, the millions of patients they’ll see.

    Florida taxpayers help fund the Florida Atlantic University Schmidt College of Medicine. They, and the policymakers who represent them, should ask why they’re giving so much money to an institution that’s putting divisive and discriminatory ideology at the heart of medical education. More importantly, they should ensure FAU SCOM stops, and soon.

    S1E11: Pushing Back Implicit Bias Training With Professionalism

    Dr. Stanley Goldfarb explains the false premises behind Implicit Bias Training and details Do No Harm’s efforts in the states and Washington, D.C. to educate policymakers and leaders that this “training” should not be the basis for continuing medical education.

    Federal Judge Orders States Can Challenge HHS Anti-Racism Rule

    United States District Judge Halil Suleyman Ozerden ruled yesterday that eight states can continue a civil rights lawsuit against Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) Xavier Becerra and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator Chiquita Brooks-Lasure. The case challenges a Biden-era rule that enables higher compensation for doctors who adopt an “anti-racism” plan. The order indicates the plaintiffs have “plausibly alleged” that the anti-racism rule is illegal because it’s not authorized by the Medicare statute. 

    Background: In May 2022, with the support of Do No Harm, Dr. Amber Colville and the states of Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri and Montana sued the Biden administration. They argued that a HHS rule violates the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA) by encouraging doctors to consider race when making important medical decisions.  

    As detailed in the lawsuit, the plaintiffs believe that racial discrimination of any kind has no place in medicine. They oppose the concepts of “anti-racism” and “equity” because they inject race-based decision making into our health care system without any medical justification.

    In response to the filing, the government moved to dismiss the case based on procedural technicalities and questioned whether or not the plaintiffs had legal standing to file the suit in the first place. 

    In yesterday’s Order, Judge Ozerden denied the government’s request to dismiss the case. Instead, he determined that while Dr. Colville does not have legal standing to sue at this time, the eight states have standing “due to injury to their sovereign interest in the enforcement of their laws.”

    The states will move forward, and in a solid sign for the future, the Court explained that the challengers have “plausibly alleged” that the anti-racism is illegal because it’s not authorized by the Medicare statute.

    “We are encouraged by Judge Ozerden’s order that the case can continue and our concerns have merit,” said Dr. Stanley Goldfarb, chairman of Do No Harm. “Discrimination has no place in the provision of Medicare services nor anywhere else in medical practice.”

    The case is being heard in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi Gulfport Division.

    About Do No Harm

    Do No Harm is a diverse group of physicians, healthcare professionals, medical students, patients, and policymakers united by an ethical mission: Protect healthcare from a radical, divisive, and discriminatory ideology. They believe in making healthcare better for all – not undermining it in pursuit of a political agenda. Learn more at www.donoharmmedicine.org.

    The Office for Civil Rights Declines to Investigate Harvard’s Racial Discrimination

    The US. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) has declined to investigate a complaint against Harvard Medical School (HMS), despite clear evidence of racial discrimination.

    In 2021, HMS introduced the Black Staff Caucus (BSC) at its Longwood campus to address “the national discourse on racial injustice.” Black staff members at HMS are invited to participate this affinity group, described as “a safe space where Black Staff in the Longwood Medical Area” can collaborate.  The Longwood Campus in Boston is the home of Harvard Medical School, Harvard School of Dental Medicine, the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, and the Wyss Institute.

    Figure 1.  Harvard Black Staff Caucus homepage.

    Laura Morgan, Do No Harm’s program manager, filed a federal civil rights complaint against HMS regarding the BCS in February 2023. The complaint asked the OCR to investigate the university for illegal race-based segregation and racial discrimination in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

    However, instead of investigating the discrimination complaint OCR referred the case to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), citing the complaint as an allegation of “employment discrimination” covered by Title VII (not Title VI) and notified HMS of the referral. OCR could have reviewed the complaint and either requested more information, opened a formal investigation, or dismissed the case outright if the review found no evidence of discrimination. A referral to EEOC is a departure from standard operating procedure.

    “In the last year OCR agreed to evaluate eight different Title VI complaints against universities sponsoring segregated race-based affinity groups for faculty and it opened three of those complaints for federal investigations,” said Mark Perry, senior fellow at Do No Harm. One of those federal civil rights investigations was for race-based affinity group sessions for students and employees at Harvard’s T.H. Cham School of Public Health. After the school agreed to discontinue the racially segregated sessions, OCR closed the investigation.  

    Under Title VII, complaints to EEOC generally require a complainant with legal standing, i.e., a Harvard employee who claims he or she was  personally discriminated against on the basis of race. “Referrals to EEOC is a recent departure from OCR’s past practices,” Perry stated, “and might be a strategy to derail a valid complaint.” The Black Staff Caucus is still an active affinity group at HMS, and recently affirmed that its purpose is “to provide a new model of engagement for Black staff members.” BSC members are expected to “promote the values of diversity and inclusion” and “support and uphold” the Harvard Medical School Diversity Statement. The BSC sponsors three “signature programs,” including “equity and social justice.”

    • The Career Advancement and Mentoring Subcommittee addresses “the critical need to bridge the diversity gap in leadership roles” in alignment with Harvard’s “commitment to advancing diversity, inclusion, and belonging.” Among the Diversity and Inclusion Resources is a January 2023 article that claims “taking a stand around social justice is necessary to recruitment, retention, and even the viability of your brand.”
    • The Cultural Programming & Member Engagement subcommittee provides “safe and affirming spaces” for “Black staff” and “others from the African Diaspora.” (Archived link here.)
    • The Equity and Social Justice subcommittee’s purpose is to “advance social justice issued internally and externally by providing tools to elicit action.” The group states that Harvard Longwood Campus employees “often deal with challenges based on perceptions of race and/or ethnicity” that manifest as “micro-aggressions or implicit/overt bias.”

    Campus affinity groups that segregate faculty, students or staff based on race are examples of racial discrimination under Title VI that the Office for Civil Rights has investigated in the recent past. Why is Harvard apparently getting a pass for its Black Staff Caucus?

    Is your school sponsoring discriminatory affinity groups for faculty, staff, or students? Please let us know via our secure online portal.

    The University of Louisville Strives to Be More Woke In Its DICE Inventory Responses

    Just how woke is Kentucky’s University of Louisville School of Medicine (ULSOM)? Very woke indeed, as it just confirmed to Do No Harm.

    Here’s the background. In November 2022, the Association of American Medical Colleges released a report showing that the vast majority of medical schools have embraced identity politics, despite their divisive and even discriminatory nature. The report was based on surveys of specific medical schools, which the AAMC didn’t name.

    For the sake of transparency and accountability, Do No Harm submitted freedom of information requests to public medical schools nationwide, including ULSOM. We asked for a copy of its survey response, so that Kentucky taxpayers and policymakers could learn the truth about this institution.

    Here’s what the University of Louisville School of Medicine has self-reported:

    • It has adopted racially discriminatory admissions practices under the guise of “affirmative action.” This means it’s potentially lowering standards in the name of diversity, thereby threatening patient health. The HSC Office of Diversity and Inclusion — Health Sciences Center states the school “places a major emphasis on increasing the number of students from racial/ethnic groups designated as underrepresented into the health professions system.” And, the Office of Admissions encourages students to apply for a scholarship that asks them how they will contribute to U of L’s dedication “to becoming a premier anti-racist community.”
    Figure 1. U of L Woodford R. Porter scholarship essay questions.
    • It has a “dedicated office, staff, or resources” dedicated to DEI. This means there’s a permanent woke bureaucracy pushing ideology on faculty and students. In fact, the school told AAMC that its Office of Community Engagement and Diversity “would benefit from additional staff and resources to increase programming.” This is in addition to the initiatives promoted by the HSC Office of Diversity and Inclusion.
    • It lobbies for woke policies at the federal, state, and/or local levels. This means it’s wading into toxic public debates instead of fully focusing on educating future physicians. The DICE Inventory response says the school’s Government Relations Office “engages elected officials” on DEI-related issues. The link to this office’s page is broken.
    • It offers tenure and promotion to faculty who prove their commitment to extreme identity politics and woke priorities. This is a litmus test that requires faculty to toe the party line instead of teaching medicine at the highest level. As the ULSOM reported to AAMC, “Department Chairs’ performance review, salary support ($50K x 3 years) for URiM faculty,” and its promotion and tenure criteria are “under review for inclusion of DEI activities.” Even so, the school says it needs to conduct “DEI training for Search Committees” and “improve DEI participation in the hiring process schoolwide.”
    • Its administrators are active within local, regional, and national forums to promote equity, diversity, and inclusion. This means it’s wasting resources that would be better spent on real medical education.
    Figure 2. University of Louisville School of medicine DICE Inventory overall score.

    All told, ULSOM reported that it has instituted 78.7% of the divisive and discriminatory woke policies listed by the AAMC. And you can bet it is feeling pressure from activists and outside groups to go even further down the radical rabbit hole – doing even more damage to faculty, medical students, and ultimately, the millions of patients they’ll see.

    Kentucky taxpayers help fund the University of Louisville School of Medicine. They, and the policymakers who represent them, should ask why they’re giving so much money to an institution that’s putting divisive and discriminatory ideology at the heart of medical education. More importantly, they should ensure ULSOM stops, and soon.