Antisemitism in American Healthcare: A Survey Study of Reported Experiences

INTRODUCTION

Antisemitic incidents in the United States (US) increased 140% in 2023 from 2022, mostly resulting from incidents after the Hamas invasion of Israel on October 7, 2023. Nearly three-fourths of Americans consider antisemitism a serious problem.¹ Media reports suggest that antisemitism affects Jewish students and physicians in US medical schools and hospitals, but empirical data validating reports are lacking.¹ This study estimates the current degree of exposure of US healthcare professionals to antisemitism based on self-report, and assesses opportunities to incorporate antisemitism training into anti-bias curricula.

METHODS

This survey of self-identifying Jewish healthcare professionals was deemed exempt by the Yeshiva University (New York, NY) Institutional Review Board. The survey, developed by physicians, and survey design and data analytics experts, was administered via Qualtrics and addressed demographics, experiences of antisemitism, and existing anti-bias training. From April 14 through May 15, 2024, participants were recruited using a non-probability-based snowball sampling approach² whereby a survey link was sent to healthcare professionals (N = 2136 in total) via email listservs (N = 625 people) and group chats with Jewish healthcare providers throughout the US (N = 1511 people) along with instructions for inviting other healthcare professionals’ participation. Groups that shared the survey link included the American Jewish Medical Association (AJMA, New York, NY, theajma.org); the Jewish Physicians Network (JPN, Brooklyn, NY, https://jewishphysicansnetwork.squarespace.com); the Jewish Orthodox Women’s Medical Association (JOWMA, Passaic, NJ, https://www.jowma.org); Orthodocs Discussion Group (New York, NY); and email listservs and WhatsApp groups of Jewish-identifying individuals collated by people known to the study team. Data were assessed for duplicate responses or robots and kept on a secure password-protected server. Participants received no compensation.

Results

In total, 645 self-identifying Jewish healthcare professionals responded to the survey (30.2%, 645/2136, response rate). Qualtrics identified seven returned surveys as possible “bots” (98.9% response quality, one deemed suspicious). Table 1 shows respondents’ demographics. A total of 39.2% (N = 253) reported exposure to antisemitism within their professional or academic environment, and 26.4% (N = 170) felt unsafe or threatened “somewhat” or “to a great extent” (Table 2). Antisemitism experienced or witnessed by medical colleagues and patients was reported from 29.9% (N = 193) and 13.8% (N = 89) of respondents, respectively. While 73.5% (N = 474) reported that their organization requires anti-bias training, only 1.9% (N = 12) noted inclusion of antisemitism.

Table 1.

Participant Characteristics

Survey item and response options	No. (%)
Please describe your position
Physician	477 (74.0)
Advanced practice practitioner	20 (3.1)
Mental health practitioner	37 (5.7)
Resident or fellow	30 (4.7)
Medical student	24 (3.7)
Registered nurse	11 (1.7)
Other*	35 (5.4)
Missing	11 (1.7)
What is your primary place of work?
Academic hospital or medical center	336 (52.1)
Community hospital or clinic	82 (12.7)
Private practice	153 (23.7)
Government	7 (1.1)
Industry	3 (0.5)
Other†	25 (3.9)
Missing	39 (6.1)
Which age group do you fit into?
18–24	5 (0.8)
25–34	100 (15.5)
35–44	140 (21.7)
45–54	139 (21.6)
55–64	131 (20.3)
65 +	94 (14.6)
Missing	36 (5.6)
How long have you been working in the field?‡
0–5 years	104 (16.1)
6–10 years	95 (14.7)
11–15 years	79 (12.3)
16–20 years	63 (9.8)
21–25 years	64 (9.9)
26–30 years	70 (10.9)
31–35 years	57 (8.8)
36–40 years	35 (5.4)
41–45 years	20 (3.1)
46–50 years	13 (2.0)
> 50 years	7 (1.1)
Missing	38 (5.9)
In which state do you study/practice medicine?§
Arizona	4 (0.6)
California	59 (9.2)
Colorado	14 (2.2)
Connecticut	14 (2.2)
DC	2 (0.3)
Delaware	2 (0.3)
Florida	28 (4.3)
Georgia	11 (1.7)
Illinois	213 (33.0)
Indiana	1 (0.2)
Kansas	1 (0.2)
Massachusetts	16 (2.5)
Maryland	10 (1.6)
Michigan	12 (1.9)
Minnesota	12 (1.9)
Missouri	4 (0.6)
North Carolina	6 (0.9)
New Jersey	27 (4.2)
New York	114 (17.7)
New Hampshire	1 (0.2)
Nevada	1 (0.2)
Ohio	15 (2.3)
Oklahoma	1 (0.2)
Oregon	2 (0.3)
Pennsylvania	34 (5.3)
Rhode Island	1 (0.2)
South Carolina	2 (0.3)
Tennessee	1 (0.2)
Texas	1 (0.2)
Virginia	6 (0.9)
Washington	7 (1.1)
Wisconsin	1 (0.2)
Other‖	5 (0.8)
Missing	17 (2.6)

^*Includes “Chief of Rheumatology” (N = 1), “Dentist” (N = 6), “Dr. of occupational therapy student” (N = 1), “Medical social worker” (N = 1), “Occupational therapist” (N = 3), “PA student” (N = 1), “Periodontist” (N = 1), “Physical therapist” (N = 1), “Registered Dietitian” (N = 1), “Sonographer” (N = 1), “Admin” (N = 1), not described (N = 17)

^†Includes “Academic Community Hospital” (N = 1), “Doctor’s office” (N = 1), “Home health” (N = 1), “Hospice” (N = 1), “Large national multi-specialty group” (N = 1), “Multispecialty practice” (N = 1), Retired (N = 2), Telehealth (N = 1), “Traditional Graduate Education University” (N = 1), “Traditional University” (N = 1), “college counseling center” (N = 1), “student” (N = 1)

^‡Participants asked to indicate a number. Data categorized based on responses

^§Adds to > 100% because some people reported working in multiple states

^‖Unclear response (N = 3), “Retired” (N = 1), “Telehealth” (N = 1)

Table 2.

Input on Antisemitism and Anti-bias Training

Survey item and response options	No. (%)
Have you been exposed directly to antisemitism within your professional or academic environment?
Yes	253 (39.2)
No	242 (37.5)
Not sure	40 (6.2)
Missing	110 (17.1)
Have you felt unsafe or threatened as a result of antisemitism in your professional or academic environment?
Not at all	208 (32.3)
Very little	152 (23.6)
Somewhat	125 (19.4)
To a great extent	45 (7.0)
Missing	115 (17.8)
Have you personally experienced or witnessed antisemitism by your medical colleagues?
Yes	193 (29.9)
No	322 (49.9)
Missing	130 (20.2)
Have you personally experienced or witnessed antisemitism by your patients?
Yes	89 (13.8)
No	426 (66.1)
Missing	130 (20.2)
Are you required to take anti-bias training?
Yes	474 (73.5)
No	99 (15.4)
Missing	72 (11.2)
Which of the following topics are included in anti-bias training you had received?*
Anti-Muslim sentiment	112 (17.4)
Antisemitism	12 (1.9)
Cultural sensitivity	415 (64.3)
Gender discrimination	424 (65.7)
Racism	411 (63.7)
Socio-economic disparity	256 (39.7)
Sexual harassment	451 (69.9)
Don’t know	53 (8.2)
Other†	57 (8.8)
Do you think that antisemitism should be included in anti-bias training?
Yes	462 (71.6)
No	12 (1.9)
Not sure	31 (4.8)
Missing	140 (21.7)

^*Adds to > 100% because respondents could select more than one option

^†Includes N/A, no training, none, or not required (N = 26), “Can’t remember exactly” (N = 1), “I click thru any mandatory training” (N = 1), “I have not had training recently” (N = 1), “I honestly don’t pay attention to what’s included” (N = 1), implicit bias (N = 1), “It is a generic training in bias” (N = 1), “LGBTQ” (N = 1), “LGBTQ sensitivity” (N = 1), “Many of the above” (N = 1), microaggressions (N = 1), “Mostly focused on African America issues” (N = 1), “Title IX” (N = 1), “Anti-Asian sentiment” (N = 1), “I think antisemitism just added” (N = 1), “Religious discrimination” (N = 1)

DISCUSSION

This study identified alarmingly high reported experiences of antisemitism by Jewish healthcare professionals, and found that few organizations address antisemitism in anti-bias training. Nearly 40% reported personal experiences with workplace antisemitism. With 71.6% of respondents agreeing that antisemitism should be included in anti-bias training, it is clear that Jewish healthcare professionals are deeply concerned about the adverse impacts of antisemitism in their workplace.

The national representation (professionals from 32 states), and diversity with respect to age and years in participants’ professional positions are study strengths. Limitations include an overrepresentation of physicians (74.0%) and individuals from academic settings (52.1%). As a non-probability sample, these results are not generalizable. The data could include multiple respondents from the same organization; and therefore, results about requirements for and content of anti-bias training should be interpreted cautiously. Snowball sampling prohibits accurate response rate reporting and determination of how participants received the survey link. We reported percentages of people exposed to antisemitism, not event frequency which may be much higher. Finally, we did not provide participants a standard definition of antisemitism. While respondents may have reported events not considered antisemitic by some, the study aim was rather to assess reported experiences of antisemitism.

There should be zero tolerance for all forms of hate, particularly in healthcare organizations. Antisemitism endemic in US healthcare until the mid- to late twentieth century included discrimination against Jewish patients, quotas on Jewish students accepted to medical schools, and discrimination for residency program positions.³ The resurgence of antisemitism, the world’s oldest form of hatred, in the US, in general, and in medicine since Oct 7, 2023, requires urgent action by medical schools and healthcare organizations. Based on our results, incorporating education about antisemitism into existing anti-bias training and/or into diversity, equity, and inclusion paradigms⁴ is a currently untapped opportunity for medical schools and healthcare organizations to potentially mitigate existing and emerging discriminatory and hateful conduct.

Data Availability

Deidentified data available upon request. Inquiries should be directed to the Founding Director of Data & Analytics: alexandraf@standwithus.com. Interested parties will be asked to fill out paperwork including credentials and intent, and ultimately include StandWithUs in their citation.

Declarations:

Conflict of Interest:

Hedy S. Wald, PhD is a Commissioner of the Lancet Commission on medicine, Nazism, and the Holocaust. The views presented in this article do not represent other members of the Lancet Commission on Medicine, Nazism, and the Holocaust, but rather the views of the authors only. Dr. Roth is President of the Healthcare Council of the Coalition for Jewish Values, Baltimore, MD, and Director of the Publications Committee, American Jewish Medical Association, New York, NY. Both of Dr. Roth’s positions are unpaid and voluntary.