- Joined
- Oct 2, 2007
- Messages
- 85
- Reaction score
- 0
Okay sorry, I know this thread was closed, but I had to respond to the post because I felt it was important.
Believe it or not, in 2002, the APIAHF (Asian and Pacific Islander American Health Forum) appealed to the AAMC to change their definition of a "URM" to encompass southeast asians. I excerpted some of the reasons below, and I feel there is legitimate reason for some of these nationalities to be considered in the URM category. I hope some of you take the time to read this, the full version is here:
http://www.apiahf.org/policy/research/20020515_comments_to_AAMC.htm
I'm impressed a school (Jefferson) actually acknowledges these factors and tries to take action! Bravo to them 🙂
Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders are an extremely heterogeneous group, encompassing more than a hundred different languages and dialects, diverse cultural backgrounds, and unique immigration experiences. Many of these groups suffer from high rates of poverty and low rates of education, yet are not now considered Underrepresented Minorities. As an example, for many of the groups, college graduation rates are far below the national average. Overall in the U.S., 20.3% of the population in 1990 held a bachelor's degree or higher. However, only 17.4% of Vietnamese, 5.7% of Cambodians, 5.4% of Laotians, 4.9% of Hmong, 11.8% of Hawaiians, 10.0% of Guamanians, 8.0% of Samoans, 7.5% of Melanesians, and 5.8% of Tongans held a bachelor's degree or higher.
Poverty rates for the various groups also differ greatly. While nationally, 10.0% of all families lived below the poverty level in 1990, rates of poverty were significantly higher for most Asian American and Pacific Islander groups.
Families Below Poverty Level
in the United States United States
Country of Origin Percent Families
Below Poverty Level All persons10.0%
Asian
Hmong 61.8
Cambodian 42.1
Laotian 32.2
Vietnamese 23.8
Indonesian 19.6
Korean 14.7
Pakistani 12.2
Thai 10.8
Pacific Islander
Samoan24.5
Tongan 20.6
Polynesian 15.3
Hawaiian 12.7
Guamanian 12.3
Given these low rates of education, high rates of poverty and the wide range of cultural, socioeconomic, and linguistic backgrounds, it becomes clear that the category of "Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders" is extremely heterogeneous. The failure to view AAPIs as separate and distinct communities has resulted in an inaccurate reflection of whether the provider needs of these communities are being met. By viewing AAPIs as a single, homogenous group, the implicit assumption is that a third generation Chinese American physician will be able to provide culturally and linguistically appropriate care to a first generation Cambodian refugee. After all, they are both classified as "Asian American and Pacific Islander".
Lack of Southeast Asian and Pacific Islander Providers
Currently, many AAPI communities are experiencing a drastic shortage of providers who are able to understand and treat their respective community's health needs. According to an analysis of the most recent Census data available on the U.S. labor force (1990), Southeast Asian (Vietnamese, Cambodian and Laotian), Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander groups demonstrated lower physician representation compared to the non-Hispanic White ratio.
In 1995, the Asian & Pacific Islander American Health Forum produced a report entitled, "A Feasibility Study on the Establishment of an Asian & Pacific Islander Mentorship Recruitment Network Program". This report contains, to the best of our knowledge, the most comprehensive analysis of underrepresentation among AAPI groups in the medical profession to date. The study identified the 1990 Census data as the most comprehensive source for obtaining AAPI physician data. Note: Occupational data for the 2000 Census has not been released at this time. Twelve Asian and Pacific Islander ethnic groups and a residual "Other Asian & Pacific Islander" are detailed in the analysis. The twelve groups were: Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Asian Indian, Korean, Vietnamese, Laotian, Cambodian, Thai, Hawaiian, Samoan, and Guamanian.
In calculating physician to population representation, of the twelve groups, the following groups were identified as underrepresented: Vietnamese, Hawaiian, Guamanian, Samoan, Cambodian, and Laotian.
It is important to note that, while information for these six groups clearly shows a high level of underrepresentation, data for the many other AAPI groups was not available for the study. It is expected that many more AAPI groups are likely to have equally high or higher rates of underrepresentation.
Believe it or not, in 2002, the APIAHF (Asian and Pacific Islander American Health Forum) appealed to the AAMC to change their definition of a "URM" to encompass southeast asians. I excerpted some of the reasons below, and I feel there is legitimate reason for some of these nationalities to be considered in the URM category. I hope some of you take the time to read this, the full version is here:
http://www.apiahf.org/policy/research/20020515_comments_to_AAMC.htm
I'm impressed a school (Jefferson) actually acknowledges these factors and tries to take action! Bravo to them 🙂
Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders are an extremely heterogeneous group, encompassing more than a hundred different languages and dialects, diverse cultural backgrounds, and unique immigration experiences. Many of these groups suffer from high rates of poverty and low rates of education, yet are not now considered Underrepresented Minorities. As an example, for many of the groups, college graduation rates are far below the national average. Overall in the U.S., 20.3% of the population in 1990 held a bachelor's degree or higher. However, only 17.4% of Vietnamese, 5.7% of Cambodians, 5.4% of Laotians, 4.9% of Hmong, 11.8% of Hawaiians, 10.0% of Guamanians, 8.0% of Samoans, 7.5% of Melanesians, and 5.8% of Tongans held a bachelor's degree or higher.
Poverty rates for the various groups also differ greatly. While nationally, 10.0% of all families lived below the poverty level in 1990, rates of poverty were significantly higher for most Asian American and Pacific Islander groups.
Families Below Poverty Level
in the United States United States
Country of Origin Percent Families
Below Poverty Level All persons10.0%
Asian
Hmong 61.8
Cambodian 42.1
Laotian 32.2
Vietnamese 23.8
Indonesian 19.6
Korean 14.7
Pakistani 12.2
Thai 10.8
Pacific Islander
Samoan24.5
Tongan 20.6
Polynesian 15.3
Hawaiian 12.7
Guamanian 12.3
Given these low rates of education, high rates of poverty and the wide range of cultural, socioeconomic, and linguistic backgrounds, it becomes clear that the category of "Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders" is extremely heterogeneous. The failure to view AAPIs as separate and distinct communities has resulted in an inaccurate reflection of whether the provider needs of these communities are being met. By viewing AAPIs as a single, homogenous group, the implicit assumption is that a third generation Chinese American physician will be able to provide culturally and linguistically appropriate care to a first generation Cambodian refugee. After all, they are both classified as "Asian American and Pacific Islander".
Lack of Southeast Asian and Pacific Islander Providers
Currently, many AAPI communities are experiencing a drastic shortage of providers who are able to understand and treat their respective community's health needs. According to an analysis of the most recent Census data available on the U.S. labor force (1990), Southeast Asian (Vietnamese, Cambodian and Laotian), Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander groups demonstrated lower physician representation compared to the non-Hispanic White ratio.
In 1995, the Asian & Pacific Islander American Health Forum produced a report entitled, "A Feasibility Study on the Establishment of an Asian & Pacific Islander Mentorship Recruitment Network Program". This report contains, to the best of our knowledge, the most comprehensive analysis of underrepresentation among AAPI groups in the medical profession to date. The study identified the 1990 Census data as the most comprehensive source for obtaining AAPI physician data. Note: Occupational data for the 2000 Census has not been released at this time. Twelve Asian and Pacific Islander ethnic groups and a residual "Other Asian & Pacific Islander" are detailed in the analysis. The twelve groups were: Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Asian Indian, Korean, Vietnamese, Laotian, Cambodian, Thai, Hawaiian, Samoan, and Guamanian.
In calculating physician to population representation, of the twelve groups, the following groups were identified as underrepresented: Vietnamese, Hawaiian, Guamanian, Samoan, Cambodian, and Laotian.
- Non-Hispanic White 251 physicians per 100,000 persons
- Vietnamese 231 physicians per 100,000 persons
- Hawaiian 63 physicians per 100,000 persons
- Guamanian 37 physicians per 100,000 persons
- Samoan 34 physicians per 100,000 persons
- Cambodian 23 physicians per 100,000 persons
- Laotian 16 physicians per 100,000 persons
It is important to note that, while information for these six groups clearly shows a high level of underrepresentation, data for the many other AAPI groups was not available for the study. It is expected that many more AAPI groups are likely to have equally high or higher rates of underrepresentation.
