New England Journal of Medicine promotes medical students who are taught in racially segregated environments

The New England Journal of Medicine has been strongly criticized for publishing an academic paper calling for the teaching of medical students in racially segregated groups, condemning the idea as “morally repugnant.”

The article, written by seven academics, doctors and students at the University of California, San Francisco, was published by the esteemed magazine on April 27.

It calls for “new approaches” to teaching, namely classifying students according to their skin color.

“The approach tailors areas of focus to each identity group to complement and differentiate the education received in racially integrated spaces, enabling participants to more effectively progress through subsequent stages of learning,” the authors write.

They argue that segregating students – “as part of a broader anti-racism and anti-oppression curriculum” – allows different groups to discuss their own experiences without fear.

The authors argued that medical school classes should be segregated by race

“Based on legacies of colonialism and racism, medical education has historically centered white students and continues to perpetuate structural racism,” they write.

“Educational approaches often focus on white learners and ignore the differential impact of content on BIPOC learners (black, Native, or people of color) with personal experiences of racism that are nuanced and informed by interactions and observations throughout their lives.”

They claim that studying with white fellow students can be “re-traumatizing for black people and others, resulting in imposter syndrome, increased anxiety, and a decreased sense of belonging.”

The authors argue that black medical students may have been “socialized to care for white people’s egos, to express their emotions only in a way that is palatable to a white audience, and to deal lightly with ‘white fragility’ (the discomfort and the defense of white people). regarding their legacy of racism and complicity in systems of inequality) to maintain their relationships, professional status and security.”

White people, in turn, can “be held accountable without burdening or re-traumatizing BIPOC colleagues affected by racism.”

The author says that by having white-only classes, white people “learn to be thoughtful allies who are less dominant in integrated spaces,” and can “reevaluate their own internalized racism and sense of superiority that can hinder anti-racist commitment and action.”

The paper was immediately seized by Dr Stanley Goldfarb, who heads the activist group Do No Harm – set up to ‘protect health care from a radical, divisive and discriminatory ideology’.

Dr. Stanley Goldfarb, founder of Do No Harm, called the idea of ​​segregated classes “morally repugnant”

Goldfarb has launched a petition calling on the Journal to “apologize for publishing such an illiberal and extremist article.”

Goldfarb writes, “It is difficult to understand how such abusive language got past the gatekeepers of this prestigious institution.

In the same pages, authors and editors have reported on the unprecedented exodus of physicians and other personnel leaving the clinical profession because of demoralization, burnout and toxic work environments.

“Have you considered the possibility that divisive and highly politicized pieces like this could exacerbate this crisis, in addition to medical education moving toward segregation?”

He said the “morally repugnant” idea would likely face federal challenges.