Promoting Equity When Using the SNOT-22 Score: A Scoping Review and Literature Review

It is established that non-white people experience worse health outcomes than white people within the same population. Equity addresses differences between patient subgroups, allowing needs-based distribution of resources. The use of quality-of-life (QoL) tools to assist clinical decision making such as the SNOT-22 for chronic rhinosinusitis promotes equality, not equity, as quality-of-life (QoL) tools provide the same criteria of symptom scoring across diverse populations. We considered the effects of ethnicity and race on SNOT-22 scores and whether these scores should be adjusted to improve equity. PubMed and MEDLINE provided papers for a scoping review. A combination of the following search terms was used: patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) (OR) quality of life; (AND) race (OR) ethnicity (OR) disparities; (AND) otolaryngology (OR) SNOT-22 (OR) sinusitis. The first study identified no evidence of ethnic variability in SNOT-22 scores. However, the study did not represent the local population, including 86% white people. Other studies identified baseline SNOT-22 disparities with respect to population demographics, gender, and age. Ethnic differences appear to exist in acute sinusitis symptomatology. In other fields both within and outside of otorhinolaryngology, ethnic differences exist with regard to QoL tools. This scoping review identified a paucity of data in rhinology. However, evidence implies some form of correction to QoL scores could help promote equity for non-white patients.

Introduction to the Special Issue: Far from Colorblind. Reflections on Racialization in Contemporary Europe

European history is to a significant extent also a history about racialization and racism. Since the colonizers of past centuries defined boundaries between “civilized” and “savages” by applying value standards in which the notions of race, ethnicity, culture, and religion were interwoven and imposed on human beings perceived as fundamentally different from themselves, racialization became deeply inherent in how (white) Europeans viewed the world, themselves, and others. In this Special Issue, we assume that colonialist racialization constitutes the base of a persistent and often unreflective and indirect racism. Implicit value systems according to which white people are automatically considered as more competent, more desirable, preferable in general terms, and more “European” translate into patterns of everyday racism affecting the self-image and life chances of white and non-white Europeans. In this introductory article, which defines the conceptual framework for the special issue, we contest the idea of a “post-racial” condition and discuss the consequences of ethno-racial differentiation and stigmatization for racialized groups such as Black Europeans, European Roma, and non-white migrants in general. Finally, we argue for the need to further problematize and critically examine whiteness.

Au « DEAR WHITE PEOPLE » : Lovecraft Country, une série contre Lovecraft ?

Que ce soit dans la série de romans young adult « Le collège Lovecraft », ou le show Lovecraft Country, tout se passe comme si le nom même du fantastiqueur américain était devenu une sorte de « franchise », dont la simple mention assure le « branding » de l’objet en question. Mais il s’agit plus d’allusions aux légendes véhiculées autour de l’auteur que d’actualisations fines de son oeuvre ; oui, le défilé des horreurs, plus ou moins modélisées sur le principe du monster of the week, évoque davantage Supernatural (compendium de tous les standards de l’horror)… En s’inspirant d’un des écrivains les plus ouvertement racistes du premier vingtième siècle, la série de Misha Green parvient paradoxalement à rassembler les genres cinématographiques appréciés de la planète geek. Cette étude souligne en effet les « jump scares » liés au Livre vivant, héritage gnosique, métemsomatose. Cette réexploitation offre un pas de côté à l’oeuvre princeps, en déjouant par l’humour et l’horreur les solennités toxiques du modèle.

“Sincere White people, work in conjunction with us”: Racial minorities’ perceptions of White ally sincerity and perceptions of ally efforts

Social justice movements often consist of both targets of bias (e.g., Black people) and nontarget allies (e.g., White people). However, little is known about what factors shape minorities’ perceptions of allies and their ally behaviors. Across four studies, we investigated Black participants’ perceptions of Whites’ motives to engage in ally behaviors. In Study 1, we found that Black participants perceived nontarget allies as both highly internally and externally motivated, suggesting ally motives may be ambiguous to Black perceivers. Studies 2–4 examined the effect of Black participants’ suspicion of Whites’ motives on perceptions of White allies’ sincerity and support for their ally efforts. As predicted, suspicious Black participants perceived White ally protestors, confronters, and political candidates as less sincere than similar Black targets and, in turn, were less supportive of White allies’ efforts. Discussion focuses on how perceived motives of White allies impact perceptions of allies and their ally efforts.

In the wake of the hostile environment: migration, reproduction and the Windrush scandal

This article examines the place of reproduction in the UK migration policy popularly known as ‘the hostile environment’, introduced in 2012 by the Conservative–Lib Dem Coalition government, and the ‘Windrush scandal’ that followed. In order to think through how the reproductive sphere comes in to play in this policy and its consequences, I draw on theoretical insights from the work of Christina Sharpe and Saidiya Hartman, both of whom invite us to reflect on the ways in which the afterlife of enslavement and empire continues to impinge on the status of Black subjects, and the ways in which our notions of the maternal, reproduction, kinship and belonging are entangled in this process. I begin by examining the place of the reproductive sphere in the hostile environment policy itself, before moving on to discuss the Windrush scandal and the ways in which it can be seen as an attack on the reproductive needs of its victims. I then consider these findings further through an engagement with the work of Sharpe and Hartman, arguing that the scandal reveals ways in which we continue to live ‘in the wake’ of racialised understandings of the reproductive that mean that some people are refused the possibilities of attachment and affiliation, so that, in Hartman's words, theirs is ‘the perilous condition of existing in a world in which you have no investment’. In the final section, I respond to Sharpe's call for white people to ‘rend the fabric of the kinship narrative’ that produces these exclusionary terms of belonging and permits the repetition of such brutalities as the hostile environment.

An Invitation to Civic Dialogue

Those of us who have benefited from the climate of injustice need an invitation from others to join with them in changing our social climate to a climate of justice. The controversaries over national monuments opens the door to explore the question of who needs an invitation from whom and what white people need to learn in order to respond to the civilian invitation from others. The others include future generations, Syrian refugees, migrants at our Southern border, and personal invitations from People of Color. Personal invitations depend on our aptitude in engaging in dialogue, as is illustrated by an imaginary dialogue involving a white man and a black woman. Such dialogues can create the conditions for good conversations, and these conversation can move us toward a climate of justice—an ethical foundation for developing policies to protect our habitat for future generations.

White People Problems? White Privilege Beliefs Predict Attitudes Toward Confederate Symbols

Building upon Intergroup Threat Theory and research on group-level empathy, we tested the relationship between White privilege beliefs and White Americans’ attitudes toward Confederate symbols. In three experiments, participants induced to think about White privilege exhibited more opposition to Confederate symbols, perceived less realistic threat to their group’s power/resources and symbolic threat to their group’s values/identity from the prospect of these symbols being removed, and (in Study 2) felt more empathetic toward racial/ethnic minorities who may view these symbols. Further, a meta-analytic path analysis across studies demonstrated that the effect of White privilege reminders on opposition to Confederate symbols was driven by reduced realistic and symbolic threat, as well as greater outgroup empathy.