It was heartening to read via this link, a successful court case against a Hospital for trying to bully and pressurise an deaf patient into using relatives to interpret, avoid compliance with the law, and mostly to save money.
Hermans, who communicates primarily via ASL, alleged that despite repeated requests for a sign language interpreter, hospital staff never provided him with one. He also alleged the hospital's staff tried repeatedly to persuade his companion, who is not a qualified interpreter, to serve in that role despite her being unwilling to do so. As a result, Hermans alleged he was not able to understand what was taking place during his hospital visit.
In reality WHO is to blame here ? I have campaigned against relative signed support for years in UK Hospitals and in General Practitioner and care areas, who has been the most bitter opponent of those opposing relative support ? The DEAF have. There is SUPPORT and there is INTERPRETING, they are NOT the same thing. Let's just cut out the deafie at the start...
When I first mooted the idea, after having a lot of problems, (many that still actually exist), in that there had been constant pressure on deaf people by the medical profession (Albeit they are NOT the only people many areas do it), for deaf patients to be asked, "Can a friend, or relative translate for you ? because we have no financial system here to pay for qualified help, and, it would take weeks to arrange an supported diagnosis, because we cannot do it in the limited time we allot to hearing patients.." Yeah yeah and 50 other excuses...! WHo hasn't the GP system whereby the Brit GP's ignore patient phone contact numbers , and only use the relatives number ? Neatly avoids any contention happening, and the deaf going with it to, "Make things easier..." easier for who ? mostly those who want to avoid paying for terps ?
Do deaf not care about relatives who lose a days work helping out ? who compensates them ? Deaf are not playing fair, are complacent, stuck in their ways, and apparently not caring so long as someone ANYONE does it.... Time to get off your backside.
Apart from the fact none of the reasons were actually legal, I got opposition from deaf people and an British Deaf charity for sign users, accusing me of trying to deny deaf people the right to choose whoever they want. What right did I have to do that ? I pointed out that many deaf do not HAVE relatives to do this work, and there are numerous areas where you simply do not WANT a relative knowing all your personal details, this was linked by the fact hardly ANY relatives of the deaf patients were qualified enough in sign language, or were neutral either. A lot of deaf not understanding their medical issue, are denied knowledge by inept family support, it isn't just outside the family that people think "They won't understand all this, so let's do the highlighted version.." approach ! or simply will not admit they haven't understood everything either.
We reported a case of a deaf woman using an 8yr old child, who understandibly could not cope with the emotional situation of her mother being seriously ill, and was making her mother's condition worse, as well as making treatment impossible, the Dr did the only thing he could he refused to allow the child to do the interpreting and requested a terp, the Deaf charity threatened legal action could you believe ? When (As in this instance recently reported), a deaf patient attends an hospital, two areas present themselves for contention, (1) Reassurance to the patient, and (2)Clarity with the Medical staff treating them. It's not unknown patients relatives can sideline their deaf siblings and children to dictate what level of information the deaf patient gets, and can withold or not understand the medical condition (Or the signs for it), to reassure.
Having fully trained and neutral interpreting there, means both doctor and patient know exactly what is going on, and, a terp will not try to influence a decision either. I changed tactics after being opposed, to lobby Hospital Insurance companies, pointing out an unqualified interpreter can mean an huge court case if the deaf patient gets more ill or worse. Unfortunately we haven't yet had an Brit case like America has, it cannot come too soon in my view, if only to wake up these deaf to the dangers they are putting themselves in. Again the Deaf representatives group insisted on the paramount right of the deaf person to use whom they want, this totally undermined any campaign I was making to force the british NHS to honour the law, and to convince the deaf they are wrong about this.
Today the deaf STILL oppose a block on relative interpretation, even when I suggested, we allow relatives there as SUPPORT, but still NOT as interpreters. It would seem they want to be controlled by relatives, of course the really big issue here is not just 'deaf rights' (Which in this case is downright lethal !), but it removes DEMAND for qualified help, undermining campaigns for more terps, and makes deaf people downright lazy in not ensuring they are getting the right message. We had the ludicrous situation of a deaf woman going on national TV saying she had no qualified medical help, then saying her Mum was her preferred choice as interpreter, and she admitted she had never taken a sign exam in her life,and was complaining she had to leave her job to help her daughter, so the daughter was oblivious to that too.
Curiously we read a deaf comment here "It makes no difference WHO deaf use, if a mistake is made we can still sue the hospital for poor communication..." Have you EVER read anything so stupid ? No you can't, because you have declared your 'right' to use whom you want, which suits a system determined NOT to facilitate your access, down to the ground, so I was under attack from the Deaf, and the Medical profession for two very perverse reasons, neither of them about real access ! A simple statistical fact for the Deaf, no demand equals no more interpreters geddit ?
Either use Interpreters or drop the campaigns for more and take your chances... It's time deaf took responsibility for their support. You mess it up in Hospital there may be no way back....
A message for the British BDA and RNID, how about a campaign to back me up ? and educate the deaf community against their own misguided sense of rights ? Perhaps we need hospitals to sue relatives who misinform...
3 comments:
Have a comment ?