The need for Sign Language Interpretation for Clinics has always been an issue in the Deaf community. There has been a long history involving legal cases regarding this issue, and there are many different arguments both for and against interpreters in medical settings even though they are required in education. The Americans with Disability Act (ADA) provides guidelines for the provision of interpreting services when necessary, but it does not address all details, leaving them open to interpretation. This lack of specificity allows each set to make its own policies on the matter, which sometimes results in conflict between patients, providers, interpreters, and also patients who cannot afford interpreter services. Even though there is no legal requirement for Sign Language Interpretation for Clinics, the Deaf community still wants this service because it can be life-changing in many different ways.
One of the reasons that clinics are unable to have an interpreter present all of the time is cost. However, providers claim that they cannot afford them even when interpreted visits are paid for by Medicaid. The amount reimbursed by Medicaid often falls far short of interpreters’ usual fees, which charge up to $125 per hour. A survey among U.S. states found that California reimbursed at a rate below what was requested in 85 percent of cases, and reimbursements were lower than requested in each case where an interpreter was requested but not provided. By law, clinics are required to provide auxiliary aids if they fall under the category of public accommodations. Therefore, clinics should be willing to pay for interpretation services because these services fall within the category of auxiliary aid.
The National Association of the Deaf (NAD) launched a campaign, “Break down Barriers to Healthcare,” in order to address the lack of access to quality healthcare for deaf and hard-of-hearing people. The NAD has been fighting against this issue long before these laws were passed by lobbying individual states, which then resulted in lawsuits that enforced state compliance with Title III ADA Standards for Accessible Design. In order to eliminate these barriers, interpreting services must be available when necessary, whether through an agency or self-employed interpreter. In addition, there should be a backup plan in place in case the interpreter is running late and/or needs to cancel.
The NAD has emphasized that having interpreters present at medical appointments can prevent misunderstandings and other miscommunications between providers and patients. The potential for misdiagnosis, incorrect prescriptions, wrong procedures, or wrong dosages of medicine can lead to serious consequences.
