Paul L. Caron
Dean


Sunday, September 29, 2019

California To Require Mandatory Implicit Bias Training For All Attorneys By 2022

Los Angeles Times, California May Soon Push Doctors and Lawyers to Confront Their Biases:

Doctors, nurses, lawyers and court workers in California may soon be asked to confront their prejudices under a trio of legislative proposals that are headed to the desk of Gov. Gavin Newsom.

The Legislature passed the final bill on Thursday, one of two approved this week that would mandate implicit bias training as a continuing education requirement for many medical professionals and court workers.

AB 242:

Summary. Requires the State Bar to establish a curriculum for all attorneys on the implicit bias against certain protected groups that is common in society, and authorizes the Judicial Council to develop training for all judges, subordinate judicial officers, trial court managers, supervisors, and other court staff who routinely interact with the public on implicit bias.

  1. Requires the State Bar to adopt regulations as of January 1, 2022 for the continuing mandatory legal education (MCLE) curriculum for all licensees to include training on implicit bias and bias-reducing strategies to address how unintended biases regarding race, ethnicity, gender identity, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, or other characteristics undermine confidence in the legal system.

Bloomberg Law, Implicit Bias Training May Be Required for Calif. Judges, Lawyers

https://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2019/09/california-to-require-mandatory-implicit-bias-training-for-all-attorneys-by-2022.html

Legal Ed News, Legal Education | Permalink

Comments

Next: California to require physicians to be trained in phrenology. Junk legislation promoting junk science.

Posted by: AMTbuff | Sep 29, 2019 7:12:42 AM

Mandatory implicit bias training is no different than mandatory sexual orientation conversion therapy. They are both coerced.

Did you know that you can get a huge fine in NYC for saying "illegal alien?" We live in a totaletarian state. Don't kind yourself.

Posted by: Anon | Sep 29, 2019 11:28:52 AM

Mandatory implicit bias training has been thoroughly debunked. “Almost everything about implicit bias is controversial in scientific circles. It is not clear what most implicit methods actually measure; their ability to predict discrimination is modest at best, their reliability is low; early claims about their power and immutability have proven unjustified. And yet colleges and corporations have been rushing to institute "implicit bias trainings" in (misguided and unlikely to be effective) attempts to reduce discrimination.” https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/rabble-rouser/201712/mandatory-implicit-bias-training-is-bad-idea

“My own view is that the research framed on implicit bias has been wildly oversold, and its proponents have often leaped to conclusions not justified by the data. And I am not alone. Banaji and I both attended a recent National Science Foundation-supported conference on implicit bias, and one of the other presenters there declared, “I think the sexy story that the public has received is irresponsible."

“But if it was just a case of oversold science, the issue would be primarily restricted to the scientific community to resolve what is and is not justified. Instead, however, implicit bias training has been instituted at numerous colleges and universities, as well as some corporations, around the country. My view is that this is wildly premature—and potentially even dangerous. The overselling of implicit bias has, in my view, along with several other wildly oversold concepts (microaggressions, stereotype threat, white privilege), contributed to the toxic environment on many campuses and in some corporations in which speech is considered “violence,” and in which if you say the wrong thing, you can be denounced, ostracized, and even fired. And by “wrong thing,” I am not talking physical threats or sexual harassment. I am talking about making intellectual arguments against affirmative action, acknowledging the evidence that biology contributes to some demographic group differences, or even simply showing a debate regarding Canadian speech laws.”

“the most interesting, to me, is that even Dr. Banaji (coi-creator of the test), one of the country’s foremost proponents of the concept of implicit bias, comes out here against mandatory implicit bias training.”

.....

“When I first took the implicit association test a few years ago, I was happy with my results: The test found that I had no automatic preference against white or black people. According to this test, I was a person free of racism, even at the subconscious level.

I took the IAT again a few days later. This time, I wasn’t so happy with my results: It turns out I had a slight automatic preference for white people. According to this, I was a little racist at the subconscious level — against black people.

Then I took the test again later on. This time, my results genuinely surprised me: It found once again that I had a slight automatic preference — only now it was in favor of black people. I was racist, but against white people, according to the test.

At this point, I was at a loss as to what this test was telling me.” https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/3/7/14637626/implicit-association-test-racism

.....

“But the link between unconscious bias, as measured by the test, and biased behavior has long been debated among scholars, and a new analysis casts doubt on the supposed connection.” https://www.chronicle.com/article/Can-We-Really-Measure-Implicit/238807

.....

“The problem, as I showed in a lengthy rundown of the many, many problems with the test published this past January, is that there’s very little evidence to support that claim that the IAT meaningfully predicts anything. In fact, the test is riddled with statistical problems — problems severe enough that it’s fair to ask whether it is effectively “misdiagnosing” the millions of people who have taken it, the vast majority of whom are likely unaware of its very serious shortcomings. There’s now solid research published in a top journal strongly suggesting the test cannot even meaningfully predict individual behavior.” http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/12/iat-behavior-problem.html

There are lots of other articles that agree:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/01/implicit-bias-debunked-study-disputes-effects-unconscious-prejudice/
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-false-science-of-implicit-bias-1507590908
https://www.apa.org/monitor/2008/07-08/psychometric

Note that the above are articles are mostly not from right-wing journals

Posted by: Anonymous | Sep 29, 2019 12:01:42 PM

The mandatory cultural "reeducation" begins. Where do we board the cattle cars?

Posted by: ruralcounsel | Sep 30, 2019 5:20:21 AM