What changes will we see in addressing racial/ethnic disparities?
- Thread starter Bennett
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2003
Call me a naive conservative, but I truly believe that the inequalities stem not from race but from a difference in the socioeconomic status. It's far more than just how much money a family earns. For example, I like the following explanation for explaining the achievement gap between white and black pupils of a similar income - a white family with little income is more likely to be one that has only recently fallen on hard times and therefore still retains things such as a tradition of education; OTOH, a black family with a decent income may be one that is the first generation of those who "made it", and thus may still lack those traditions. In any case, I do believe in socioeconomic affirmative action, but not racial/ ethnic based. There are a few exceptions to the latter statement, though, such as I think it's reasonable to give preferential treatment to minority applicants to law schools because the society's need for minority lawyers outweighs fairness/ competence considerations.
The data I've seen indicate that race/ethnicity is not a determinant of health outcomes, but it is a significant effect modifier. If you control for SES in your analyses, the apparent race/ethnicity effect is attenuated. But it does not disappear or even come close to disappearing.
Outcomes studies (well controlled for confounders) have shown repeatedly that black and white patients with the same symptoms just do not receive the same treatment. Whites are more likely to be treated per protocol than black people.
I work in substance abuse. The prof down the hall recently found that blacks were more likely than whites to be denied pain medication in the ED, even when he accounted for the exact illness/injury involved and the degree of severity. In fact, the prescribing gap increases with severity. That's right the opposite of what should happen if race actually plays no role. This is not a local project (which I feel compelled to mention because I live in the South). It's a study using a nationwide database.
And here's the real kicker. Misuse of prescription opiates is a predominantely white problem. Like 75% white. And higher income is a risk factor, not a protective factor.
Susan
Other contributing factors may include racial (residential) segregation that leads to differential neighborhood resources and differential exposures to various risk factors, a paucity of outreach programs for racial/ethnic minority communities, language barriers for those with limited English skills, mutual mistrust between institutions and minority communities and/or individuals, cultural insensitivity on the part of institutions that prevents their programs to reach & effectively work for minorities etc.
The phenomenon is very complex and needs focused efforts. But the thing is that the current government has been cutting such budgets because of the war. I wonder if Obama would make it more a priority.
The phenomenon is very complex and needs focused efforts. But the thing is that the current government has been cutting such budgets because of the war. I wonder if Obama would make it more a priority.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
^ About affirmative action, I am waiting with interest to see what happens in California with respect to college admissions. A while back the people of California voted to do away with all affirmative action programs. The argument was that black students were getting places in the prestigious universities over white students who had higher SAT scores, etc.
Now that racial quotas have been eliminated, Asian students have taken over. I wonder how long it will be before white students and their parents start lobbying for the reinstatement of some kind of quota system.
BTW, in higher education, the quota system was instituted in the Ivy league and their peer colleges not to let blacks in, but to keep Jews out. Everybody knew if you just go by merit very few gentiles could ever get into Harvard or Yale (except, of course, "legacy" students like George Bush whose father was a contributing alumnus.)
Now that racial quotas have been eliminated, Asian students have taken over. I wonder how long it will be before white students and their parents start lobbying for the reinstatement of some kind of quota system.
BTW, in higher education, the quota system was instituted in the Ivy league and their peer colleges not to let blacks in, but to keep Jews out. Everybody knew if you just go by merit very few gentiles could ever get into Harvard or Yale (except, of course, "legacy" students like George Bush whose father was a contributing alumnus.)
Last edited:
That would be silly.
Although poverty, racial discrimination, and racial/ethnic disparities in educational achievement are deeply intertwined with each other, the quota system may be too simplistic to address the issue given the diversity in personal backgrounds within each racial/ethnic group. These social science data that shows the relationship between race/ethnicity and educational attainment usually statistically control for a number of possible confounders such as parental educational attainment, income, residential areas etc that may affect the relationship between race/ethnicity and educational achievement. But perhaps you can't weigh such parameters too well in an admission process that has the quota system.
ETA
What does Mr. Obama say about the affirmative action?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
My impression is that he has been deliberately vague about this question. He has said the usual things about the importance of providing every person with the opportunity to realize his/her full potential and that removing the vestiges of past discrimination is a desireable goal, etc., etc.
I think this was one of the issues -- like abortion and gay marriage -- that he hoped would not come to the fore during the campaign -- and it didn't.
Huh, interesting!
I know abortion and gay marriage are also big issues. Since Obama attracts diverse groups who support him for various reasons, it might be perhaps a smart move for him not to say anything strong and decisive about very controversial issues like these.
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2003
New Yorker ran a piece about David Axelrod, Obama's campaign manger (who also helped Deval Patrick get elected as Massachusetts governor 2 yeas ago). His whole point is to avoid anything that can alienate voters as much as possible. "The candidate is the message" is Axelrod's principle. Also, it makes good common sense for the candidate with bigger momentum going in (i.e. candidate not affiliated with the party of one of the worst presidents in the nation's history) to be more careful as it is more likely that a specific statement on a contentious issue will disappoint more people than it will attract.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
- Country
-
He was obviously correct, but I would like to vote for a candidate some time in my life. It hasn't happened yet, due to exactly this philosophy. I am still stuck with voting against instead.
