The American Academy of Dermatology’s annual meeting in San Diego next month will include sessions like “Biopsies in Challenging Locations” and “Critical Gaps and Controversies in Laser Treatment of Port Wine Birthmarks and Other Vascular Abnormalities.” But the real heat in those super-chilled convention rooms is likely to be a passion-filled topic that has caused agita from universities to C-suites to cable news to millions of social feeds: Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI).
On March 8, the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD) will discuss a proposal put forth by AAD members earlier this month to eliminate all of the academy’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs and “adopt a more inclusive and unifying ideology in its place,” per the resolution’s language. With several dozen AAD members initially listed as coauthors, Resolution AAD/A 003, titled “Sunsetting All Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Programs,” was published on the AAD member website on February 15. It immediately inspired emotional discussion — both privately and on social media — within this community of 20,000 skin doctors. By February 18, the AAD had issued a statement to its members about the “intense debate…and unwanted public division,” and warned them that “public admonitions or personal attacks on social media platforms are inappropriate and may be considered ethical violations.”
The resolution, introduced by Brian Raphael, MD, a board-certified dermatologist in East Syracuse, NY, and at one point listing about 100 dermatologist coauthors, calls for the AAD to remove its current DEI initiatives. The goals of those initiatives, according to the AAD, include increasing the representation of skin-of-color patients in academic research, improving dermatological services for underserved populations, and boosting the number of dermatologists who are Underrepresented in Medicine (URiM), as well as providing development and leadership opportunities for them. (URiM is defined by the Association of American Medical Colleges as “those racial and ethnic populations that are underrepresented in the medical profession relative to their numbers in the general population.”)
Resolution AAD/A 003, reviewed by Allure, says that, since October 7, there have been “instances where the DEI movement has been perceived as being filled with antisemitism, weaponizing the concept against Jews by labeling them as ‘oppressors,’ and allegedly justifying extreme hate speech and violence.” It reads, “the role of DEI has evolved in recent months into a political movement that categorizes certain groups as oppressors and others as oppressed, creating a binary system of ‘racist’ or ‘anti-racist’ without allowance for neutrality.” The document goes on to say that “while initially well-intentioned, [DEI] is now believed to hinder rather than help the diversity in our specialty and the broader health care field,” and the evolution of DEI as a framework has “seemingly led to the control of speech and the stifling of diversity of thought and professional conversations regarding difficult issues.” The resolution claims that DEI programs in general are “believed to contribute to a decrease in the ability to provide unbiased and equal medical care for everyone, as it is seen to foster division rather than unity.”
