One Year, One Enrollment: Continuous Medicaid Eligibility Matters for Kids’ Health
New Findings Highlight the Value of 12-Month Eligibility in Reducing Care Gaps and Paperwork Burdens
News | Video
How SCOTUS Ruling Threatens Diversity and Inclusion in Health Care
The First in the New Penn LDI “Voices” Video Series Highlighting Thought Leaders in Health Services Research
Print:
In this six-minute video, University of Pennsylvania researcher Harald Schmidt, PhD, discusses the latest paper he co-authored in the Journal of the American Medical Association. He outlines how the U.S. Supreme Court ruling striking down affirmative action in higher education may establish the groundwork for similar legal and legislative attacks on diversity and inclusion programs throughout the health care field.
Schmidt, a Senior Fellow at the Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics (LDI) and Assistant Professor in Perelman School of Medicine’s Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, characterized the justices’ ruling based on a new interpretation of the concept of “race neutrality” as “myopic and twisted.” The Supreme Court based its decision on the Civil Rights Act of 1964–the law originally passed to address the social, educational, financial, and health-related disadvantages systematically suffered by non-white people throughout nearly 400 years of American history.
In the video, Schmidt notes that the higher education ruling will halt the affirmative action programs that are key to recruiting and training more Black doctors. He also warns that the ruling will embolden the political forces now working to roll back anti-discrimination initiatives throughout society to seek legislation or court actions against a wide range of health care diversity and inclusion programs. These include the current measures being taken to have clinical trial cohorts represent the overall racial and ethnic makeup of the U.S. population, Federal anti-discrimination programs administrated by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the use of the scientific tools known as “disadvantage indices” that can serve as proxy measures of structural racism.
More LDI News
Incarcerated Patients May Not Receive the Surgical Care They Need
The Prison System Often Fails to Meet Even Basic Standards for Pre- and Post-Operative Health, Experts Say
Integrated Medicare Advantage Plans Cut Dropout Rates for Dual-Eligible Individuals
Chart of the Day: Fully Integrated D-SNPs Kept These Vulnerable Patients Enrolled, a New Study Finds
Penn Medicine’s LeadIN Program Trains Philly Teens to Green Their Neighborhoods
Photo & Text Story of an Urban Health Lab Initiative to Improve Health and Community Stability
Safe Nurse Staffing Saves Lives and Money Across the World
Mandated Nurse-to-Patient Ratios Have Cut Deaths, Eased Burnout, and Saved Millions. Policymakers Must Act Now to Protect Patients
Policy Talk Isn’t Cheap; It Can Affect Your Health
Just Discussing Punitive or Supportive Policies—Even Before They’re Enacted—Can Impact Physical and Mental Health, Especially for Marginalized Groups, LDI Fellow Says