Government Forcing Ideology Into Medicine Vs. Doctors’ Right To Think And Speak Freely

A doctor asked the Supreme Court to intervene in her battle against woke California medical education requirements she says stifle her free speech.

Dr. Azadeh Khatibi and the medical watchdog organization Do No Harm filed a petition on Tuesday asking the Supreme Court to take up a case challenging continuing medical education requirements that mandate instructors teach doctors about “implicit bias,” which is the claim that a person can unconsciously discriminate against another. Khatibi argues that the requirements, which were signed into law by California Gov. Gavin Newsom, force medical professionals to push politically charged ideas.

“By mandating ideologically charged racial theories be taught in continuing medical education courses, California infringes on physicians’ free speech rights,” Do No Harm Chair Stanley Goldfarb told The Daily Wire. “We are asking the Supreme Court to intervene to protect these critical rights in the field of medicine. Doctors do not need lawmakers telling them what to think when providing medical advice to patients.”

The petition filed Tuesday wants the court to address the question of whether a state can “compel private professionals to convey a contested ideological message as a condition of teaching courses required for a professional license.” Khatibi and Do No Harm are both represented by the Pacific Legal Foundation.

The requirements being challenged say that those giving continuing medical education must give examples of “how implicit bias affects perceptions and treatment decisions of physicians and surgeons, leading to disparities in health outcomes,” or suggest strategies to address how “unintended biases in decision-making may contribute to health care disparities by shaping behavior and producing differences in medical treatment.”

Previous attempts to challenge the requirement at the federal district and appeals court levels have been unsuccessful. Those courts have said the requirements are part of the state’s prerogative to regulate medical practice.

The petition filed with the Supreme Court argues that the implicit bias mandate exceeds the state’s regulatory power.

“That sweeping ruling erases the constitutional boundary between government and private speech, threatens the speech rights of countless professionals, and directly conflicts with this Court’s precedents limiting the government speech doctrine and protecting against compelled speech,” the petition said.

Goldfarb said that there is no evidence of implicit bias in health care and that doctors should be trained to address each patient’s unique needs rather than focusing on race.

“There is no evidence so-called systemic implicit bias exists in health care, and propagating such debunked pseudoscience only deepens suspicion between patients and providers,” he said. “We urge the Court to take up our case and resolve California’s overreach once and for all.”