What is the confusion about diversity, equity, and inclusion?
Words are important, and their meaning should be consistent for communication to work. Young people invent new words. “Great” becomes “sick”, “dope,” or “dank.” As time passes, one must not use antiquated words like “fab” or “groovy” lest they be branded “mid” or “cheugy.” My grandchildren admonish me not to use those words and not to be confused by them. I will try not to. My confusion is about old-fashioned words and their antonyms and how their meaning is misinterpreted. Three words I always considered honorable are being redefined instead as dishonorable. Take “diversity” – the opposite of sameness or lack of variety. The United States is made up of diverse elements including men and women and many different cultures. Diversity is a fact of our existence and addressing it is constructive for endeavors that affect the whole population, such as healthcare. “Equity” seems to be a clear one, and everyone says they are for this bedrock of our Constitution. The opposite is also easy to reject, i.e. inequity, injustice, bias, and unfairness. No one wants that. What is meant by “inclusion”? Again, we can gain insight by looking at the opposites. Non-inclusion and restriction come to mind. Inclusion carries the implication that there may have been exclusion in the past, not very far-fetched when considering healthcare. My medical school class of 100 had four women and no minority students.