Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation,” was issued in January, just days after he took office. The order aims to restrict access to gender-affirming care for individuals under 19 years of age and directs federal agencies to potentially withhold funding from institutions that continue to provide this care to minors. Kaiser Permanente, which is the largest healthcare provider in the Bay Area, was caught in the crosshairs. In July, KP announced it would pause gender affirming surgical treatment beginning Aug. 29. In a written statement provided by Lena Howland, KP’s senior media relations and public relations representative, the healthcare giant said “Kaiser Permanente was founded on the simple idea that everyone deserves a chance to live a healthy life. For us, health equity is strongly linked to our mission to provide high-quality, affordable health care services and to improve the health of the communities we serve. By being inclusive, we respect the differences among our members and address health disparities as we strive to improve the health of everyone.” KP’s decision to pause gender affirming surgical treatment for patients under 19 was made “only after significant deliberation and consultation with internal and external experts, including our physicians,” the statement explains, adding that it is “an extremely challenging and stressful time for our patients seeking gender affirming care, as well as for our clinicians whose mission is to care for them.” The statement notes that KP has been “guided by our mission for more than 80 years, and it will continue to be our North Star. Our longstanding commitments to inclusion, community health, evidence- based care, innovation and quality outcomes for all remain unwavering and steadfast.” KP says it always is actively engaged with policymakers as an advocate for greater health care access, affordability and outcomes for every American. Despite current political pressure, its commitment to DEI remains strong, according to the KP website, and applies to what KP calls its five pillars: care, workplace, marketplace, supplier diversity/community partnerships and diversity and inclusion compliance. Creeping impact Anti-DEI policies—and other government directives, such as deportation efforts—are
Why the concepts of diversity, equity and inclusion have become a flashpoint
Diversity, equity and inclusion has a rich history that dates back to passage of the American Civil Rights Act, which passed in 1964 during the Lyndon B. Johnson Administration. Other key legislation impacting DEI includes the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the Fair Housing Act of 1968, both of which passed during Johnson’s tenure. Key Supreme Court cases supporting DEI go back even further, including Brown v. Board of Education (1954) which ruled school segregation was unconstitutional. Over decades, DEI, which includes affirmative action, same-sex marriage, interracial marriage and other such efforts, became part of the fabric of America, evolving as the nation grew and changed. More recently, however, DEI has become a flashpoint—a rallying cry for people unhappy with the changes in U.S. demographics. Among them, there is a serious backlash that’s playing out in real time. “As a society, we are becoming more racially and ethnically diverse,” says Willie Gin, associate professor of political science at Sonoma State University. “Lots of projections say that by 2050, whites will no longer be a majority of the population, so the fact that society is becoming increasingly diverse is in the back of a lot of people’s minds. You might think one response would be, ‘OK, maybe we should embrace that.’ But the other possible reaction is: ‘Let’s try to reverse that. Let’s try to keep what we had or preserve what we used to be.’” Gin continues, “The fact that if you’re a majority and you’re comfortable in your position, then you might not worry about minorities. But if you’re a majority and you might become a minority population in the next few decades, then you might become a little more anxious.” There are many reasons why diversity has become a political flashpoint, Gin says. “There’s the demographic change. And then, in the legal sphere, conservatives have been successful in rolling back affirmative action,” working with a Supreme Court that is now has a 6-3 conservative majority. “So now [conservatives] are moving their efforts to the private sector.” Social media has played an important role in fueling the backlash, Gin believes. Stories and videos that confirm a person’s particular political world view—whatever it may be—are plentiful, whether they are true or not. Agenda-based “journalism,” with talking heads promoting political positions instead of providing unbiased reporting, flood radio, TV and the Internet. And then there’s the “unusual period in American politics” in which we currently operate. “Competition between the two political parties is fairly even. Obama won eight years, then Trump won four, then Biden won four and now we’re back to Trump. That’s really flipping back and forth a lot. It’s not like one party is winning by landslides in presidential elections. The funny thing is that the norm in American politics, if you look at the full 200-plus years, is that one party usually dominates for decades,” Gin explains. The result is more intense political conflict, which can turn any issue—like DEI— into a flashpoint and practically negates any attempt to reconcile differences out of fear that it might give the other party an edge in the next election. — Jane Hodges Young
November 2025
NorthBaybiz 27
Made with FlippingBook. PDF to flipbook with ease