Kimberly S. G. Chang, MD, MPH

Advocacy

Dr. Kimberly S.G. Chang, MD, MPH, a family physician at Asian Health Services in Oakland, California, and vice speaker of the house on the board of directors for the National Association of Community Health Centers.

I’m a family doctor at Asian Health Services [AHS], and have been working here since I finished residency in 2002. I was born and raised in Honolulu, Hawai’i. Right now I’m seeing patients part time and part time as a healthcare policy fellow at AHS – a position that we created so I could continue my policy work.

I focus on human trafficking and the healthcare intersections of that…but the broader issue is health equity and fighting for marginalized, disenfranchised populations, for their healthcare, for their equitable ability to prosper and succeed in our society. Health is a symptom of larger social problems and dislocations, and how social problems present in people’s lives is at the core of health equity and public health.

When I first started at AHS, one of my clinical responsibilities was at the Teen Clinic. We were seeing a lot of commercially sexually exploited minors – teenagers – in the Teen Clinic in 2003. And we didn’t really know what to do about these issues, what to do about these kids who were being sold for sexual services in Oakland. We didn’t have the terminology or the language. And societally, we didn’t really know what to do with it either. There was no definition for this – we used to call it “child prostitution.” Now we know that there is no such thing as “child prostitution” – anyone under the age of 18 years exchanging sexual acts for something of value is a victim of human trafficking.

Federal legislation to define human trafficking passed only 2 years before, in 2000, and policy can take a while to translate into practice. So we were seeing this on the frontline – seeing drug use, mental health problems – but… there was really nothing we could do except through the criminal justice system. We tried reporting to Child Protective Services, but because it wasn’t a caregiver perpetrating the abuse, there wasn’t anything they could do, and they referred us to the police. But the police would ask…do these kids want to report it, and they didn’t. So there was really no space where this was being addressed… What you see is a disconnect between federal and state legislation, about these definitions – of these kids as victims.

AHS started Banteay Srei as a youth development program for these youth- we were saying this is not just a medical issue. But we also needed providers to be aware, so we created a screening protocol to make sure we were catching these patients, so we could intervene, hopefully early, or even prevent exploitation and trauma.

There was a patient I saw in 2008 who ended up being really really sick and she was hospitalized for 2 months, but she really didn’t want to go to the hospital – she said she would rather die than go back to jail. That was really an “aha” moment for me, because I realized we could do all the services, all the screenings, but that was all just clinical… what were we really doing for these kids, what were they facing? How could we change the way the structures were built, change the way the systems operated, so that the youth were not afraid of systems that care and protection. I ended up getting introduced to the Director of the National Center on the Prosectution of Child Abuse from the National District Attorneys Association in Washington, D.C., and I presented all these case studies of patients I saw, saying “these kids are terrified of law enforcement, what’s going on, what can we do?”

Advocacy is a lot of media advocacy, communication, building awareness… in 2011, we got the New York Times interested in this and they did an article, looking at our programs, and how we’re seeing this as abuse, not sex work, and this is a problem for youth in our community.

So all of this really comes out of my clinical work, and based out of real people and their life experiences – patients we’ve cared for at AHS.

I mean think about it – who has eyes on what’s really going on in the community? A mentor told me this: it’s teachers because kids come to school and repeat what parents are saying in the home, pastors because they take these confessionals, and clinicians because people are sharing all of their vulnerabilities, issues, barriers affecting them and their health. If we really pay attention to our patients, not just the really narrow medical piece – but what’s really going on in their lives, the conditions creating illness and disease, you have a whole, fertile ground on which you can provide information to influence policy. That’s very powerful.

I work at Asian Health Services so I see everything through the lens of AAPI identity and experiences. I grew up in Honolulu, a majority minority state, and I didn’t really get that this was different, I was different – I just thought I was normal. I went to college in New York, at Columbia, and that was a bit more eye opening. People have ideas about who you are and how you should be, and cultural stereotypes. And that kind of opened my eyes. I went back to the University of Hawai’i for medical school, so I went back home, back to a majority AAPI location, and it was comfortable – easier to be just myself without having to worry about how people think of me. You know, there’s a tax when you’re a minority – you have to filter information through this lens, and it takes a lot of energy, and that energy could be better used and spent solving problems than trying to figure out how people see you. It’s the same thing with UCSF, where I went to residency – there’s a lot more awareness, and the mission was to serve vulnerable patients, which resonated with me.

My goal at the end of finishing residency was caring for disenfranchised patients, minorities, patients, who are vulnerable, so I wanted to see a wide variety of patients. I worked in a variety of settings after residency, and AHS was one of them. I felt like I could do more, and focus more on the patients, at Asian Health Services. Part of that was the cultural tax. AHS is very comfortable for me; even though I don’t speak fluently in another language, I think there’s an affinity with patients, of all Asian background, that we have with each other. And I think that helped with the healthcare.

I took a year off from 2014-2015 to do a Minority Health Policy Fellowship at Harvard, and this was kind of a mid career switch, and I had already worked for 10 years and directed the Frank Kiang Medical Center. Some of the personal challenges I’ve faced were coming to this awareness about systematic and structural and internalized barriers. I think for me, it was very easy to just focus on grades, school, and you’re supposed to succeed if you just follow the rules. But that’s not necessarily true – there’s a lot of Asian Americans in medicine, but if you look at the professors, deans, NIH research awards, grant awards and foundation leaders – it’s very small. Why is that?… it’s because you have to have these social connections, social capital, and it’s not just about following the rules and getting good grades. It’s about networking, lifting others up, having others lift you up, getting noticed – and sometimes, we don’t get noticed because there’s some stereotypes about Asians… A lot of times, culturally, we’re very community and family oriented – you have to make sure that everyone is doing well, not just yourself.

…The structures that we’re placed in, sometimes it’s not like that – it’s very competitive, it’s very “me or you,” and so those kinds of structures may not be conducive to promotions or things for Asians. And that’s important because these sorts of structural barriers mean less resources for underserved Asians, less opportunities, less attention to the problems faced by refugees, immigrants of Asian descent. So that’s how my personal challenges translate societally. If I am going to be a good advocate for my patients, if I can use my privilege and power effectively, I better know what the barriers are, because if I don’t at least recognize them, how would someone with much less privilege be able to overcome them?

Help each other, support each other – it’s not a “me vs. you,” it’s about you helping your colleagues and there’s an understanding that at some point they might be able to help you. The currency right now is how many groups or networks you’re a part of – information is the currency. So as many different types of groups that you’re a part of and you can get information from or contribute to, that adds to your work. Give opportunities to each other.

Look at community organizing. Advocacy is not about being the boss – it’s about the issue. What can you do to move the issue forward? Sometimes that means being the leader, and sometimes that means taking a backseat. Always keep the goal of moving the issue forward as the main priority, not your own position, not your own success. If you do this, then you will be successful.

Be intersectional – advocacy looking at other minority issues, other underserved/vulnerable populations issues – not just strictly AAPI issues. What other communities have faced and learned can be applicable to us and vice versa. Make allies.

I’m still doing human trafficking policy work – I was appointed to the National Advisory Committee on the Sex Trafficking of Children and Youth in the United States, and that’s a way to make recommendations to Congress, state Governors, and Child Welfare departments

and offices across the nation on this issue. I was elected as the vice speaker of the House for the National Association of Community Health Centers; it’s so eye opening to learn about the issues facing communities across the country – like the opioid crisis facing our partners in Kentucky and Ohio, and rural workforce challenges, among others – and I’m so proud to be working in the community health center movement.

I’m on LinkedIn and Twitter (though I’m not super active).


Statement on the Detainment of Iranians and Iranian Americans at the Washington-Canada Border

Over the weekend of January 4th, over 60 Iranians and Iranian Americans were detained at Washington State’s border with Canada and subjected to questions about their political views and allegiances, for up to 10 hours. Some were eventually refused entry. As an organization, APAMSA stands with our Iranian siblings and reaffirms our commitment to immigrant rights. The rights of all Americans and immigrants should be respected regardless of Iranian origin or descent.

From Japanese American internment during World War II to hundreds of hate crimes against South Asians/SWANA (Southwest Asian and North African) folks after 9/11, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders are all too familiar with the othering, scapegoating, and violence that befalls our communities in times of international conflict. No matter who we are or how long our families have been in this country, we have been accused of being foreign, spies, or terrorists. Such accusations are ironic in that 1) they have never been effective for protecting national security – and indeed, are predicated more on racism than safety; 2) from farms to railroads, America was built with the support of our ancestors; and 3) although many of our families migrated here to seek better lives, many were also forced to do so by American interference in our countries of origin.

This is not the first time that immigration officials under the Trump administration have violated due process rights, and these recent actions further reinforce our understanding that despite the 14th Amendment, our citizenship does not protect us and any one of us could be targeted next. In this time of crisis, we encourage chapter leaders to support members who are personally impacted by the current environment, and all APAMSA members to familiarize themselves with the rights of themselves and their patients.

From the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) community advisory:

If you are visited by federal law enforcement agents, remember:

  • You have the legal right to have a lawyer present when speaking with federal law enforcement agencies. This is true even if you are not a citizen or have been arrested or detained… Refusing to answer questions cannot be held against you and does not imply that you have something to hide. Answering a question incorrectly can hurt you more than not answering at all. An attorney is best able to protect your rights.

  • You do not have to permit any law enforcement officer to enter your home or office if they do not have a warrant… If they say they have a warrant, politely ask to see it before allowing them to enter. If they have a warrant, be courteous and polite, but remember that you are under no obligation to answer questions without a lawyer present. You should tell the agents that you do not consent to the search so that they cannot go beyond what the warrant authorizes.

  • You should never lie or provide false information to any law enforcement agency. Lying to law enforcement agents under any circumstance is a federal crime.

While traveling, remember:

  • TSA/CBP cannot target you for additional screening or questions based on religious, racial, or ethnic profiling.

  • US citizens cannot be denied entry for refusing to answer questions. Green card holders cannot be refused entry, unless their travel was not brief and innocent per USC 1101(a)(14). However, invoking your rights may result in delays.

  • Non-citizen visa holders can be denied entry into the country for refusing to cooperate. If you have concerns, please speak to an attorney.

More legal resources can be found in CAIR’s “Know Your Rights” Guides (available in Arabic, Bengali, Bosnian, Farsi, Somali, and Urdu) and the Iranian American Bar Association’s Community Advisory.

APAMSA condemns the illegal detention of United States citizens, the ongoing threats against immigrant families, and the escalating xenophobia and racism that impacts the health and wellbeing of our communities.

In solidarity,

Your APAMSA National Board


Tung Nguyen, M.D.

Advocacy

Dr. Tung Nguyen, the Stephen J. McPhee, MD Endowed Chair in General Internal Medicine and Professor of Medicine at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF); director of the UCSF Asian American Research Center on Health; chair of the Progressive Vietnamese American Association (PIVOT); AAPI Progressive Action board member; and former Chair of President Obama’s Advisory Commission on AAPIs.

My name is Tung Nguyen, and I am a physician, researcher, teacher, and advocate.

Primarily, I am fighting for policies that will help the poor, immigrants, and minorities in the U.S. I do this through a combination of generating data, building coalitions, and working on infrastructure change.

I was born in Vietnam and came to the U.S. as a refugee at the end of the Vietnam War. My experience as a refugee and immigrant, particularly with my family’s tenuous situation, made me realize that systems are not designed to help people like us. As a result, I have been working on improving our systems, particularly in the area of health, for the populations above.

As a researcher and physician who believes in doing everything I can that the evidence indicates for my patients, it is clear that many of the factors that prevent individuals, families, and communities from having good health are driven by systematic problems. There is no way to address systematic barriers without engaging in policy and advocacy. To be true to my calling as a healthcare provider, activism is part of the work.

Being Asian American is integral to my advocacy. First, our communities are not as active as they could be in advocating for ourselves and for others. Thus, I can do more by working with AAPIs on empowering ourselves to advocate for issues that matter to us and to others. Second, my personal and professional experience as an Asian American informs what I see as the problems and solutions.

As usual, the main personal challenges are time and money. On a broader level, challenges include lack of engagement among our community members and lack of interest among policy makers.

I think that it is important to be an advocate, at least for our patients if not on a broader level. I find that many healthcare providers end up blaming their patients for things outside the control of both patients and providers. Advocacy enables the provider to understand the problems that patients face and provides an outlet for the provider to intervene and not feel so powerless. It is important, of course, not to overcommit, as we all need to take care of ourselves and our families. Pick an important topic, or an important community, to work on and with. Chances are as you go deeper into the issue, the solutions are similar to the solutions for other problems.

On the policy side, we have been fighting against the public charge rule. I have also been leading efforts to diversify the healthcare and health research workforce at UCSF as well as more community engagement between UCSF and our communities. For 2020, my work will be focused mostly on the elections. When we cannot change the policies because of the policy makers, we have to change the policy makers.

Thanks to Ninad Bhat (MS2, UCSF chapter member) for proofreading and editing!

Source: http://cancer.ucsf.edu/news/2018/11/15/get-to-know-tung-nguyen-md.9272


APAMSA Response to Alabama Abortion Law

APAMSA opposes recent political efforts in several states to undermine women’s ability to access necessary health care.

On Wednesday May 16th, Alabama’s governor signed into law a near-total ban on abortions from the time of conception, without exceptions for rape or incest. The law also allows doctors to be charged with up to a 99-year sentence for performing abortions in the state, if the mother’s life is not endangered.

A number of “heartbeat” bills have also passed in Iowa, Ohio, Kentucky, Mississippi, and Georgia, and there are efforts underway to pass such bills in Missouri, Louisiana, South Carolina, and West Virginia. These bills ban abortions after a fetal “heartbeat” can be detected, as early as six weeks into woman’s pregnancy. This is before many women are aware they are pregnant.

These laws pose a direct challenge to the standards established by the Supreme Court’s 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade regarding pregnant women’s liberty to choose to have an abortion, and threaten to severely limit access to what the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) recognizes as “an essential component of women’s health care” that should be discussed between patients and their health care providers “without undue interference by outside parties.” This recent wave of legislative actions by these states are clearly not just an infringement on a doctor’s ability to practice medicine but more importantly an encroachment on women’s Constitutionally protected reproductive rights.

For those who will be affected, please keep in mind that these bans have not taken effect yet. Specifically, the law in Alabama will not take effect for another six months. Additionally, the bill will likely be contested through the judicial system, so please get involved and make your voices heard through appropriate channels. Continue to stay informed on your local state laws and ensure that you have accurate information to help your patients navigate their healthcare. Our Advocacy Branch will post updates as more developments emerge and will list organizations working to combat the changes and/or to support patients.

We at APAMSA stand with healthcare providers in ensuring the best care for patients, and we stand with women in ensuring they have full access to medically indicated care.

In Solidarity,

Your APAMSA Leadership

The Asian Pacific American Medical Students Association (APAMSA) is a national organization of medical and pre-medical students committed to addressing the unique health challenges of Asian and Pacific Islander American (APIA) communities.



APAMSA, SNMA, LMSA, AMSA Respond to Texas Tech’s Decision to Eliminate Race from Medical School Admissions

On Tuesday April 9, 2019, Texas Tech University Health Center Sciences Center came to an agreement with the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights to cease using race or national origin as one of the many factors involved in their admission process. As organizations who support, encourage, and uplift students who are underrepresented minorities, we are concerned with the outcome of future admissions cycles for underrepresented minority applicants going forward and fear this decision could have damaging effects on the health of communities of color. Previous literature has estimated that programs that banned race-conscious admissions led to a 17% decline of underrepresented students of color enrolling in medical school at public institutions in those states, underlining the consequences that the Texas Tech decision and similar policies will have on the diversity of future in-coming medical school classes and the health of their surrounding communities.

View the full Joint Statement on SNMA’s website!