A conservative medical advocacy group filed a lawsuit against Penn alleging that Penn Medicine’s Black Doctors Directory violates the discrimination clauses of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Affordable Care Act.
The March 18 complaint — which the Do No Harm advocacy group filed with the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania — described the Black Doctors Directory, an online index designed to help patients locate Black doctors, as “racially discriminatory.” Do No Harm alleged violations of Pennsylvania law and Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act, in addition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
“The Black Doctors Directory is illegal,” the suit read. “Congress enacted Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to root out racial discrimination by entities that accept federal financial assistance.”
The directory was developed by the Health System, the Consortium of DEI Health Educators, and WURD Radio — all of which were named as defendants in the suit.
A request for comment was left with a Penn Med spokesperson.
Co-founded by former Penn Medicine Associate Dean of Curriculum Stanley Goldfarb, Do No Harm is seeking “declaratory relief, injunctive relief, and nominal damages.” According to its website, the advocacy group aims to keep “identity politics out of medical education, research, and clinical practice.”
“The Black Doctors Directory is yet another example of Penn Medicine and other institutions prioritizing identity politics over care,” Goldfarb wrote in a statement published the same day as the suit.
Do No Harm launched the lawsuit on behalf of “at least one member” of the group who was “excluded from the Directory based on race.” Referred to as “Member A” in the case, the doctor allegedly treated their patients equally and “regardless of race.”
“Member A finds it hurtful and disappointing that Defendants consider him to be less equipped or less capable of providing empathy and depth to black patients,” the suit read.
Do No Harm argued that the doctor is “competitively disadvantaged” compared to those included in the directory. According to the lawsuit, Penn Med is “well-known and prestigious” and being on the directory “would help him reach many additional potential patients.”
The complaint contended that Penn’s endorsement of “racial concordance” — which occurs when a patient shares a race or ethnicity with their doctor — caused “the deprivation of valuable economic benefit for non-black doctors.” The suit also alleged that the reasoning behind the exclusion “sows distrust” into the relationship between patients and doctors who are not of the same race.
On April 9, WURD Radio responded to the lawsuit in a statement that noted its commitment to “tirelessly” addressing gaps within health care. The company emphasized its continued support of the directory, writing that it is an “important and needed contribution” to the health of Philadelphia residents.
The Daily Pennsylvanian is an independent, student-run newspaper. Please consider making a donation to support the coverage that shapes the University. Your generosity ensures a future of strong journalism at Penn.
Donate
