SPEAKER 1: Welcome to Ask about the ADA, the podcast where we answer your questions about the Americans With Disabilities Act, and we field topics that we hear about frequently here at the Northeast ADA Center. On today's episode, we're going to talk about effective communication particularly in the medical setting. So with that being said, let's move into our questions.
[MUSIC PLAYING]
The first question comes from a dentist. Do I have to pay for an interpreter for every deaf patient? Well, this gets to the heart of effective communication. Effective communication is the principle that every individual with a communication-related disability has the right to an equal level of access to communication with an entity that's covered by the ADA. Now, to provide effective communication, an entity covered by Title II, which is state and local governments, or Title III, again, which are public accommodations or businesses/nonprofits, may need to provide auxiliary aides and services.
Now, auxiliary aid or service is a tool, device, or service that facilitates communication for someone with a covered disability. So to determine what would be the right auxiliary aid or service, a covered entity under the ADA has to look at the length, the complexity, and the duration of the communication that's going to be going on. They'll also have to look at things like the number of people involved and also the preferred method that the individual, who has the communication related disability, uses. So auxiliary aides and services can take a wide variety of different forms. It could be a qualified sign language interpreter for in the case of someone who may be deaf. It could be a qualified note taker. It could be a cued speech interpreter, or it could be also just making simple modifications in the communication style such as allowing more time or perhaps exchanging written notes if necessary.
Again, it's going to depend on the circumstance and the type of communication going on. A lot of times, it can be straightforward and simple. Let's say this hypothetical deaf patient comes in to pay a bill. Well, an interpreter really wouldn't be needed in that kind of a situation where they're just coming in. They're dropping off a payment or making a payment and then leaving. Communication, here, can be probably facilitated pretty easily using simpler methods.
But let's say that same person is going to come back in and they're going to have a dental procedure done, or they need to discuss financing for some more extensive procedure or more extensive dental work. Well, in those cases, a sign language interpreter probably is going to be needed, and in those instances, the covered dentist is going to need to provide them.
Keep in mind, too, that auxiliary aides and services must be given free to the individual with the disability. Again, this is about equal access. So that means that no surcharges, no extra fees can be charged to the individual for having that right to effective communication.
[MUSIC PLAYING]
Now, let's move to our second question. And this comes from the other side of the issue. This is from an individual who happens to be deaf. I made a first-time appointment with my oncologist. They asked if I could bring an interpreter, a family member to provide interpretive services, as sign language interpreters are very expensive. Can they do this?
Well, the short and simple answer is no. A covered entity under the ADA can't ask an individual to provide their own sign language interpreter. As we saw with the last question, Title II and Title III entities covered by the ADA have an obligation to ensure effective communication for people who have communication-related disabilities, including those who have hearing-related disabilities such as people who are deaf. And with that obligation, those covered entities have to provide the appropriate auxiliary aid or service without charging the individual with the disability even if there is some cost involved in that provision.
So are there any exceptions to this case? Well, in general, the Department of Justice recognizes two instances when a companion could be used to interpret for someone needing sign language interpreting services, but they're very specific. In the first case, it must be a situation where there is an imminent threat to the health or safety of an individual. An emergency situation, in other words. In those contexts, an adult or a minor accompanying someone using sign language may serve as an interpreter. Again though, it has to be an emergency situation where there's an imminent risk to health and safety.
Now, in the second circumstance, it would be when there's not an imminent threat but let's say an individual requests that a family member or a companion interpret for them. And it's their request to use a family member or a companion. Well, even in this situation, there are specific criteria that the Department of Justice lays out that have to be followed.
First, it has to come at the request of the individual with the disability. Second, the person, the adult, doing the interpreting must agree to it, willingly agree to do the interpretation. And thirdly, it has to be appropriate to the situation.
So for example, let's say we have someone coming into a police station, and they want to file a complaint. It's likely going to be inappropriate to have a companion do the interpreting in that situation because there's no way to know for sure if the person providing interpretation for the individual who is deaf is part of the complaint or has caused some harm. In the case of a medical situation, a family member or a companion may not know the appropriate sign language for medical terminology or how to convey some of the concepts that need to be discussed during a diagnosis. And so, again, the appropriateness is important.
Keep in mind, too, that in this non-emergency situation and circumstance, a minor cannot serve as an interpreter no matter what. So children, who use sign who may communicate for their parents who are deaf, cannot be relied on as sign language interpreters unless it's specifically an emergency situation with an imminent threat to the health or safety of others
[MUSIC PLAYING]
That's it for today's podcast. We covered some important concepts in effective communication and ones that we hear about or that you can actually read about, too, in Department of Justice settlement agreement activities. I encourage you to reach out with questions to us here at the Northeast ADA. You can call us at 1-800-949-4232. You can visit our website northeastada.org. And, of course, feel free to follow us as well on social media.
Or if you would like a question answered here on the podcast, please feel free to drop us an email through the Northeast ADA website. As always, thank you to our student worker, Grace Fairchild, who is our producer and editor. And thank you, as well, to Peter Quinn of the YTI web team, who does our final edits for the podcast. I hope you found today informative. And if you want, please reach out, and let's continue the conversation.
[MUSIC PLAYING]
