Dr sued $400k for communicating via writing instead of sign language interpreter

[cbrons]

---

Members do not see this ad.

People hold the melting pot up as an example, but if everything melts together then what do we have--indiscriminate mush! I don't want everyone to be the same. I want a heterogenous mixture 🙂 Not oil and water, but something interesting with different textures.

This sounds so flowery... lol... Well the melting pot is the best example. Not everyone is the same. People can still be part of the "pot" and retain their own uniqueness. By not encouraging people to assimilate, you are encouraging them to remain separate from everyone else. We should be an inclusive society that takes the best from every culture - believe me, it isn't going to destroy peoples individuality. Its a simple matter of inclusion.

Everyone in America should try to learn English, enough to function in society and get ahead in life, but there IS intrinsic value in other languages, and we should strive to preserve them. We should also do the best we can to accommodate people as they get on that path to learn English. It's only courteous.

Learning English doesn't mean you have to toss out your native tongue. When I studied abroad in Argentina, nobody accomodated me by speaking to me in two languages because not everyone could speak both of them. On the other hand, people did accomodate me by speaking slower, pointing to things, etc. Anotherwords, they weren't complete a-holes about the fact that my Spanish wasn't perfect. But they definitely didn't bendover backwards and why the hell should they have to? It's their country, and I'm the newbie.

 

[THH]

sorry dude, but 👎thumbdown
just because someone takes it overboard doesn't mean there is no merit to whatever law or statute protects that right.

Opposition to the ADA is a very legitimate position to take. It's one of those things that started off as a good idea, but was executed very poorly.

 

[chiz2kul]

Just getting in here before this spirals out of control lol

 

[THH]

Interesting. While the patient was awarded way too much, the doctor in this case wasn't that bright either:
When you have a patient asking for something and you ignore it, then you're either immoral or an entitled doctor. After the first request he should have either gotten an auxiliary device or transferred the patient. I am willing to bet that the reason this doctor was sued was because he did not treat his patient well - just like most of his patients. Studies have shown that patients sue doctors not because of "malpractice," but because of the "feeling" of harm - e.g., being ignored, patronized, etc. I don't know when will doctors get off their high chair. If you want to have a feel about what I am talking about, take a look at this ridiculous thread: Quacks. Guys, as long as you think that all your patients are worthless loaders and treat them as such, all doctors are going to suffer. That's because the jury, the judge, the prosecutor are patients too! Think about that if any of you sometime in the future decide to call anyone a quack or mistreat them somehow in any way, especially if you lack solid evidence. Somehow I am not too sure that this case will be overturned. Doctors have really dug themselves into a deep resentment hole.

What was the physician suppose to do? Hire a interpreter for $150-200 per visit when Medicare was only reimbursing $49 per visit? And eat the loss? I'm not sure that's a workable business model.

 

[scarletgirl777]

What was the physician suppose to do? Hire a interpreter for $150-200 per visit when Medicare was only reimbursing $49 per visit? And eat the loss? I'm not sure that's a workable business model.

Does anyone else think it's ironic that the interpreter's time is more valuable than the doctor's? 😀

 

[Excelsius]

What was the physician suppose to do? Hire a interpreter for $150-200 per visit when Medicare was only reimbursing $49 per visit? And eat the loss? I'm not sure that's a workable business model.

Did you read the quotes I had in my post? He could have gotten cheaper "auxiliary" equipment to supplant the interpreter. He could also get a tax credit, according to the article. Maybe I should clarify - tax credit means that you pay NOTHING for the services. It's like paying for your books and then the college reimburses you.

But the more important point here is that he was warned. When someone talks to you about the law, you better believe that you might be taken to court. The patient is not supposed to inform the doctor about the law (even if indirectly). He should have either listened to her right then or transferred her to another doctor altogether. You don't ignore a warning that you're in noncompliance with the law. That is very unwise. Doctors usually don't have that privilege of being warned. Well this one was.

 

[THH]

Did you read the quotes I had in my post? He could have gotten cheaper "auxiliary" equipment to supplant the interpreter. He could also get a tax credit, according to the article. Maybe I should clarify - tax credit means that you pay NOTHING for the services. It's like paying for your books and then the college reimburses you.

But the more important point here is that he was warned. When someone talks to you about the law, you better believe that you might be taken to court. The patient is not supposed to inform the doctor about the law (even if indirectly). He should have either listened to her right then or transferred her to another doctor altogether. You don't ignore a warning that you're in noncompliance with the law. That is very unwise. Doctors usually don't have that privilege of being warned. Well this one was.

I imagine when he received a phone call from this "sign language interpreter service" he probably figured that they were more interested in selling him their service than accurately representing the law. However, I agree that the doctor handled the situation wrong. He should have dropped the patient.

 

[Ailleurs]

Okay, I stopped reading all the replies after a certain point, so I don't know if this was mentioned.

But the article DID mention that the doctor and Gerena both agreed to communicate via writing. If she felt that it wasn't enough, why did she wait until AFTER? Why didn't she write to him before that .. Actually never mind. The article did mention that she had asked for an interpretor a few times. Okay, I guess my argument just died.

But this case, I think it's both the patient's and the doctor's fault. Yes, a doctor has to see 100 patients a day. But the main job of a doctor is to help a patient to the best of his ability. It's not like seeing dead bodies (horrible analogy I know) and trying to figure out the method of death. So I think the doctor should have done something after Gerena asked for an interpretor a couple of times. Gerena, on the other hand, should have warned him that she would go to see.. wait nevermind. Didn't she switch to a different doctor?

Sigh, okay now I don't have enough facts to be mad at Gerena 🙁

Although I am quite mad. But I also think it's the doctor's fault as well for not trying to pacify Gerena after she asked for the interpretor a few times. If one of the family members knows ASL, why couldn't they serve as an interpretor? 😕 But then, I'm guessing, none of them know, otherwise that might have been the case.

 

[medking]

People hold the melting pot up as an example, but if everything melts together then what do we have--indiscriminate mush! I don't want everyone to be the same. I want a heterogenous mixture 🙂 Not oil and water, but something interesting with different textures.

Everyone in America should try to learn English, enough to function in society and get ahead in life, but there IS intrinsic value in other languages, and we should strive to preserve them. We should also do the best we can to accommodate people as they get on that path to learn English. It's only courteous.

I totally agree.

The funny thing though is that many Americans I know did not do the same when they went to a foreign country (they say, "why can't you speak English? or Does anyone here speak English?"). So I hope you are not one of them.

PS: they were living in the foreign country, not just there for vacation.

 

[Superman78]

Although I am quite mad. But I also think it's the doctor's fault as well for not trying to pacify Gerena after she asked for the interpretor a few times. If one of the family members knows ASL, why couldn't they serve as an interpretor? 😕 But then, I'm guessing, none of them know, otherwise that might have been the case.

There's no case here, this is tantamount to the lady who sued McDonalds because she poured coffee all over herself. Just another example of our sue-happy culture. Now the doc has to pay for a lawyer and waste his time.

If you're not happy with your doctor, you go to another one.

 

[Premed Worrier]

The two things in this article that jump out at me are the fact that she stayed with this guy (not being able to communicate effectively) for 20 different appointments. If she really had such a problem communicating why in the world did she stay with him? I think there was some kind of clash towards the end that made her decide to sue, as many have mentioned she probably just didn't jive with the doctor anymore. The second thing is if there really wasn't good communication how did she know to take the medicines she did, when to take them, etc.? Should she have had an interpreter at the pharmacy as well? She didn't sue them (that we know of). There is definitely something between the patient and doctor here besides the language barrier.

All of this is quite obviously speculation on my part.

 

[ChemEngMD]

You're right. It's such an open political environment in China, and everyone just seems so happy because of all the rights they lack...We are totally missing out...

and minorities have it soo easy in this country, its quite unbelievable

True, we got it mad easy. 🙂 Just dodge bullets from your peers and police and you'll be straight.

Assimilation is a good thing. It's what turns a nation into a nation. The notion that assimilation entails the majority destroying the minority's culture is incorrect. The minority integrates its culture into that of the majority, and everyone is enriched in the process - it's why pizza, whiskey, and sushi are so ubiquitous today, instead of being relegated to small subsets of society.

Hmm...but most of that stuff is pseudo-cultural...like Chinese food and Mexican food lol

Haha, your post just reminded me of something I read earlier today.

http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/2008/11/09/115-promising-to-learn-a-new-language/

That blog is hilarious...I showed that blog to some of my white friends and a few of them had like 80% in common with the blog

 

[ChemEngMD]

Learning English doesn't mean you have to toss out your native tongue. When I studied abroad in Argentina, nobody accomodated me by speaking to me in two languages because not everyone could speak both of them. On the other hand, people did accomodate me by speaking slower, pointing to things, etc. Anotherwords, they weren't complete a-holes about the fact that my Spanish wasn't perfect. But they definitely didn't bendover backwards and why the hell should they have to? It's their country, and I'm the newbie.

Gross...Argentinian Spanish... Jo me Jamo cbrons

I totally agree.

The funny thing though is that many Americans I know did not do the same when they went to a foreign country (they say, "why can't you speak English? or Does anyone here speak English?"). So I hope you are not one of them.

PS: they were living in the foreign country, not just there for vacation.

haha i've seen this too...it's pretty funny. That's why we get a bad rep throughout the world...and why you sometimes gotta disassociate yourself with America in certain countries...cause for some reason everybody loves Canada so if you say you're from there you'll be golden or I just say I'm from some random latin american country lol

 

[WashMe]

this is probably one of the most ridiculous and infuriating things i have ever read. obviously more can be conveyed by writing than by sign language, and there is a paper trail. if the woman was confused about treatment, all she had to do was read the paper again or write down some questions. she was just trying to get rich for doing nothing (the American way).

 

[LizzyM]

Back on topic: this woman did not have the option of learning to speak English. She was visiting the doctor about once a month for a year and a half for a serious chronic disease that has a relatively high rate of morbidity and mortality.

While the deaf are usually able to read and write in English, they also tend to have rather poor reading skills. You can imagine that sounding out words is difficult when you have no sounds with which to associate the letters on the page. A large proportion of American's have poor health literacy. It is likely that deaf Americans are even more likely to be poor readers and writers. How do you describe your symptoms and ask questions if you can't spell the words or you feel like your spelling and syntax will make you seem stupid?

This woman had the legal right to an interpreter. She had the legal right to medical treatment; refusal to care for deaf patients because of their deafness is illegal. The doc can dislike the law but the law is the law. Note that this is not medical malpractice and the doctor's insurance doesn't cover this jury award. This is coming out of his personal treasure. Also note that $200,000 in punitive damages means that the jury is punishing the doctor. A judge & jury in a civil suit can't put anyone in jail but they can put a financial squeeze on them and that's what they did in this case. The doctor knew the law but chose to ignore it. The patient may not have known her rights going into the relationship but as she grew more aware of her rights, she became more disgruntled with the doctor's refusal to meet her needs.

With regard to the care of non-English speaking patients, telephone interpreter services are available for patients who are not fluent in English and who speak a language that is not otherwise not widely spoken. Using family members as interpreters is suboptimal as issues of confidentiality arise (will a patient be forthcoming about issues they wish to keep secret from family members, particularly offspring).

 

[KempDrumsalot]

I am not really justifying the patient. As I said, 400K is a ridiculous amount. However, given the signs, the doctor should have taken the appropriate action. She had a interpreter call the doctor and inform him about the law. I don't think it could get any more serious than that.

Try making sure to read the entire article. This was AFTER the judgement.

Why is this worth 400,000? I understand compliance and accommodations, but 400,000 dollars is probably worth more than what the patient could earn for the entirety of her life, and her existence was not even affected from the physician's decision.

The patient was offered that much because of the disability basically. Its outrageous.

 

[amph119]

.

 

[HawaiianPreMed]

While I think this law suit is ridiculous, this is a horrible statement. American Sign Language is a language in itself - it has a distinct grammar and structure. It is not simply a bunch of hand gestures. Writing should not be a substitute, just like yelling and gesticulating at a hearing person who speaks a different langauge is not a substitute for an interpreter.

I went to a deaf magnet school and had deaf friends and teachers. Just because the language isn't spoken, doesn't mean its not a language in itself and that they don't deserve the same rights as someone that speaks Spanish.

I agree, but seriously, 400k is a lot of money for a lack of understanding. I mean, if communication through writing with the help of family members wasn't clear enough for her, then maybe we should all start suing doctors with accents?

 

[muggle911]

Why is this worth 400,000? I understand compliance and accommodations, but 400,000 dollars is probably worth more than what the patient could earn for the entirety of her life, and her existence was not even affected from the physician's decision.

The patient wasn't given this much b/c of her disability. The total $400,000 is a result of compensatory and PUNITIVE damages.

Compensatory = small amt that amounts to what the patient "suffered", i.e. what she actually deserved.

Punitive = what the courts are granting the patient in order to punish the doctor. It also serves as an example for other physicians to not do the same thing as this doctor.

If they had just given the patient ~$5,000 (or whatever they deamed the actual damages were), neither the doctor nor others who viewed this case would have been affected by the verdict.

 

[yellowtibby]

I wonder if she would have still sued the doctor if he dropped her. She may bring a discrimination lawsuit against him for refusing to see her, it's a lose lose situation. 😎

 

[Dr Lyss]

Back on topic: this woman did not have the option of learning to speak English. She was visiting the doctor about once a month for a year and a half for a serious chronic disease that has a relatively high rate of morbidity and mortality.

While the deaf are usually able to read and write in English, they also tend to have rather poor reading skills. You can imagine that sounding out words is difficult when you have no sounds with which to associate the letters on the page. A large proportion of American's have poor health literacy. It is likely that deaf Americans are even more likely to be poor readers and writers. How do you describe your symptoms and ask questions if you can't spell the words or you feel like your spelling and syntax will make you seem stupid?

This woman had the legal right to an interpreter. She had the legal right to medical treatment; refusal to care for deaf patients because of their deafness is illegal. The doc can dislike the law but the law is the law. Note that this is not medical malpractice and the doctor's insurance doesn't cover this jury award. This is coming out of his personal treasure. Also note that $200,000 in punitive damages means that the jury is punishing the doctor. A judge & jury in a civil suit can't put anyone in jail but they can put a financial squeeze on them and that's what they did in this case. The doctor knew the law but chose to ignore it. The patient may not have known her rights going into the relationship but as she grew more aware of her rights, she became more disgruntled with the doctor's refusal to meet her needs.

With regard to the care of non-English speaking patients, telephone interpreter services are available for patients who are not fluent in English and who speak a language that is not otherwise not widely spoken. Using family members as interpreters is suboptimal as issues of confidentiality arise (will a patient be forthcoming about issues they wish to keep secret from family members, particularly offspring).

I never really thought about it like that. From that perspective, than I think the patient was justified (especially if he was made aware of the law and he chose to ignore it). I still think the size of the award was excessive... I just don't understand why she would have agreed to communicate through writing or continue to go for a year if this was such a big issue. I would have left after my 2nd or 3rd visit.

 

[Dr Lyss]

I wonder if she would have still sued the doctor if he dropped her. She may bring a discrimination lawsuit against him for refusing to see her, it's a lose lose situation. 😎

definitely. If she's getting $400k for not getting an interpreter I can imagine the size of the lawsuit for dropping a patient based on a disability... I'm about to go learn sign language 🙂

 

[pianola]

Back on topic: this woman did not have the option of learning to speak English. She was visiting the doctor about once a month for a year and a half for a serious chronic disease that has a relatively high rate of morbidity and mortality.

While the deaf are usually able to read and write in English, they also tend to have rather poor reading skills. You can imagine that sounding out words is difficult when you have no sounds with which to associate the letters on the page. A large proportion of American's have poor health literacy. It is likely that deaf Americans are even more likely to be poor readers and writers. How do you describe your symptoms and ask questions if you can't spell the words or you feel like your spelling and syntax will make you seem stupid?

This woman had the legal right to an interpreter. She had the legal right to medical treatment; refusal to care for deaf patients because of their deafness is illegal. The doc can dislike the law but the law is the law. Note that this is not medical malpractice and the doctor's insurance doesn't cover this jury award. This is coming out of his personal treasure. Also note that $200,000 in punitive damages means that the jury is punishing the doctor. A judge & jury in a civil suit can't put anyone in jail but they can put a financial squeeze on them and that's what they did in this case. The doctor knew the law but chose to ignore it. The patient may not have known her rights going into the relationship but as she grew more aware of her rights, she became more disgruntled with the doctor's refusal to meet her needs.

With regard to the care of non-English speaking patients, telephone interpreter services are available for patients who are not fluent in English and who speak a language that is not otherwise not widely spoken. Using family members as interpreters is suboptimal as issues of confidentiality arise (will a patient be forthcoming about issues they wish to keep secret from family members, particularly offspring).

👍👍


Like I said on the first page: Maybe the doctor was able to make his opinions/questions/thoughts known and understood, but it is at least equally important that the patient be comfortable and easily able to communicate. It's not just about the doctor's ability to communicate.

 

[chessknt]

Back on topic: this woman did not have the option of learning to speak English. She was visiting the doctor about once a month for a year and a half for a serious chronic disease that has a relatively high rate of morbidity and mortality.

While the deaf are usually able to read and write in English, they also tend to have rather poor reading skills. You can imagine that sounding out words is difficult when you have no sounds with which to associate the letters on the page. A large proportion of American's have poor health literacy. It is likely that deaf Americans are even more likely to be poor readers and writers. How do you describe your symptoms and ask questions if you can't spell the words or you feel like your spelling and syntax will make you seem stupid?

This woman had the legal right to an interpreter. She had the legal right to medical treatment; refusal to care for deaf patients because of their deafness is illegal. The doc can dislike the law but the law is the law. Note that this is not medical malpractice and the doctor's insurance doesn't cover this jury award. This is coming out of his personal treasure. Also note that $200,000 in punitive damages means that the jury is punishing the doctor. A judge & jury in a civil suit can't put anyone in jail but they can put a financial squeeze on them and that's what they did in this case. The doctor knew the law but chose to ignore it. The patient may not have known her rights going into the relationship but as she grew more aware of her rights, she became more disgruntled with the doctor's refusal to meet her needs.

With regard to the care of non-English speaking patients, telephone interpreter services are available for patients who are not fluent in English and who speak a language that is not otherwise not widely spoken. Using family members as interpreters is suboptimal as issues of confidentiality arise (will a patient be forthcoming about issues they wish to keep secret from family members, particularly offspring).

The issue is whether or not she is entitled to be provided one at the physician's expense. Like someone else mentioned, providing every patient translator services is not a workable business model. I am sure the doctor was not opposed to her providing her own interpreter but she clearly didnt want that as evidenced by her use of the translator phone call offering their services.

 

[Dr Lyss]

The issue is whether or not she is entitled to be provided one at the physician's expense. Like someone else mentioned, providing every patient translator services is not a workable business model. I am sure the doctor was not opposed to her providing her own interpreter but she clearly didnt want that as evidenced by her use of the translator phone call offering their services.

legally I believe the physician has to pay for it, not sure though. If the patient had to pay for it then it would prevent patients that can't afford their own translator from receiving adequate care.

 

[dragonfly99]

The doctor was in the wrong (legally speaking). However, I feel that the award was excessive.

The doctor ran afoul of the ADA.

For those of you posting that the doc should have "found her another doctor" or implying that he could have refused to see her, that is incorrect. That would also be illegal. You can't fire a patient for being disabled, or refuse to see all disabled patients.

This is another unfunded mandate from the gov't. If you are a big university hospital or huge super-practice of urologists or something, you can likely afford to provide interpreter services and just eat the costs. However, for a 1 or 2 doc solo practice this could be a significant hardship. However, the gov't does not care. The law is the law and if you don't follow it you may be sued.

It is also illegal to force a patient to use his/her family or friends as an interpreter, unless the patient wants that/offers to. If he/she wants an interpreter, you must provide one (or use one of those "language lines" vis telephone, etc.). The problem with this is you (the doc) will not be paid by the insurance company in most cases. Also, I don't think it's legal to bill the patient for the cost of those services...

 

[LizzyM]

She was legally entitled to a sign language interpreter provided by the physician. The cost on an interpreter for < 1 hour per month was a fraction of the gross income of the practice, it was a fraction of the physician's net income as shown at trial. It would not have bankrupted the physician to provide the service he was required by law to provide (what net gains he made treating other patients could be used to cover his net loss with this patient). If he objected to the unfunded mandate, he should lobby his elected representatives or join with other providers to do so. The unfunded mandate to provide interpreter services has been a hobbyhorse of the AMA for years.

 

[scarletgirl777]

Okay, I stopped reading all the replies after a certain point, so I don't know if this was mentioned.

But the article DID mention that the doctor and Gerena both agreed to communicate via writing. If she felt that it wasn't enough, why did she wait until AFTER? Why didn't she write to him before that .. Actually never mind. The article did mention that she had asked for an interpretor a few times. Okay, I guess my argument just died.

But this case, I think it's both the patient's and the doctor's fault. Yes, a doctor has to see 100 patients a day. But the main job of a doctor is to help a patient to the best of his ability. It's not like seeing dead bodies (horrible analogy I know) and trying to figure out the method of death. So I think the doctor should have done something after Gerena asked for an interpretor a couple of times. Gerena, on the other hand, should have warned him that she would go to see.. wait nevermind. Didn't she switch to a different doctor?

Sigh, okay now I don't have enough facts to be mad at Gerena 🙁

Although I am quite mad. But I also think it's the doctor's fault as well for not trying to pacify Gerena after she asked for the interpretor a few times. If one of the family members knows ASL, why couldn't they serve as an interpretor? 😕 But then, I'm guessing, none of them know, otherwise that might have been the case.

When there are other options, most experts strongly advise against using family members as interpreters. It can mess up the family dynamic, it can result in the family member's needs and wants having higher priority, and it's more likely that the speech being passed through the interpreter can be censored in either direction of communication because they are not trained and have a rapport with the patient.

 

[chessknt]

The unfunded mandate to provide interpreter services has been a hobbyhorse of the AMA for years.

As in the AMA is trying to lobby to have it changed? If so, why hasnt it been?

 

[scarletgirl777]

This sounds so flowery... lol... Well the melting pot is the best example. Not everyone is the same. People can still be part of the "pot" and retain their own uniqueness. By not encouraging people to assimilate, you are encouraging them to remain separate from everyone else. We should be an inclusive society that takes the best from every culture - believe me, it isn't going to destroy peoples individuality. Its a simple matter of inclusion.

Learning English doesn't mean you have to toss out your native tongue. When I studied abroad in Argentina, nobody accomodated me by speaking to me in two languages because not everyone could speak both of them. On the other hand, people did accomodate me by speaking slower, pointing to things, etc. Anotherwords, they weren't complete a-holes about the fact that my Spanish wasn't perfect. But they definitely didn't bendover backwards and why the hell should they have to? It's their country, and I'm the newbie.

And by flowery you mean idealistic and bleeding heart right? It's ok, looking back on it, you're probably right. 😀

 

[ucladoc2b]

Did you read the quotes I had in my post? He could have gotten cheaper "auxiliary" equipment to supplant the interpreter. He could also get a tax credit, according to the article. Maybe I should clarify - tax credit means that you pay NOTHING for the services. It's like paying for your books and then the college reimburses you.

That's not entirely true. He could still incur substantial cost to the practice, even after tax credits.

 

[LizzyM]

As in the AMA is trying to lobby to have it changed? If so, why hasnt it been?

Let me just stay that the AMA News has devoted many column inches to this topic over the years.

It is tough to ask legislators to vote so that physicians get to keep more money while disabled patients get less service. Would you vote for that knowing that you need to face the voters again next year? There are no tax dollars lying around that can go to pay doctors more than they are being paid now and the thought is that the cost is small enough for most practioners that it can easily be absorbed as one of the costs of doing business.

The AMA does want to find affordable ways for physicians to meet their obligations. Keeeping open the option of adaptive devices in place of interpreters would be one example.

 

[xanthomondo]

This article doesn't mention it, but the one posted in SP a few months ago did. This lady had an extensive history of suing doctors, hospitals, and even the lawyer who won this case for her (which was settled for $1,000) over her disability.

 

[Dr Lyss]

This article doesn't mention it, but the one posted in SP a few months ago did. This lady had an extensive history of suing doctors, hospitals, and even the lawyer who won this case for her (which was settled for $1,000) over her disability.

👎 welcome to america

 

[cpants]

She was legally entitled to a sign language interpreter provided by the physician. The cost on an interpreter for < 1 hour per month was a fraction of the gross income of the practice, it was a fraction of the physician's net income as shown at trial. It would not have bankrupted the physician to provide the service he was required by law to provide (what net gains he made treating other patients could be used to cover his net loss with this patient). If he objected to the unfunded mandate, he should lobby his elected representatives or join with other providers to do so. The unfunded mandate to provide interpreter services has been a hobbyhorse of the AMA for years.

I understand that it's the law, but it just isn't right. Why should a doctor be forced to eat 150 dollars every times he sees a deaf patient? It makes no difference how much the doctor or his practice makes, he shouldn't be financially punished for seeing a disabled patient. The deaf community should be the strongest lobbyists for the mandate to be funded, since it would remove a strong disincentive for a physician to see and care for deaf patients. If a patient has a medical reason for needing a translator, then it should be paid for by medicare/insurance as part of the cost of care.

If you speak a foreign language, you should not be entitled to translation services. Pay for your own, or see a doctor which speaks your language or provides translators in order to gain your business. I know that it is difficult and disorienting to be a patient in a foreign country. That does not mean that physicians should be singled out to pay for the care out of their own pockets. If as Americans we deem this service necessary, we should pay for it as taxpayers.

 

[LizzyM]

There is far more information about this case than the AMA story includes.

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202425326286



http://www.foxrothschild.com/Newsstand/News.aspx?id=8250

 

[scarletgirl777]

Let me just stay that the AMA News has devoted many column inches to this topic over the years.

It is tough to ask legislators to vote so that physicians get to keep more money while disabled patients get less service. Would you vote for that knowing that you need to face the voters again next year? There are no tax dollars lying around that can go to pay doctors more than they are being paid now and the thought is that the cost is small enough for most practioners that it can easily be absorbed as one of the costs of doing business.

The AMA does want to find affordable ways for physicians to meet their obligations. Keeeping open the option of adaptive devices in place of interpreters would be one example.

There are certain parts of the country (very few, but still) that have larger than average concentrations of Deaf people. Is there going to be a disincentive now to practice there unless you know ASL yourself? If people are going to have unequal costs of doing business, then there has to be more flexibility in what they can charge their patients, and if Medicare has a hard lock on office visits costing $49, that's not going to cut it.

 

[cpants]

.

 

[LizzyM]

This article doesn't mention it, but the one posted in SP a few months ago did. This lady had an extensive history of suing doctors, hospitals, and even the lawyer who won this case for her (which was settled for $1,000) over her disability.

Can you direct us to any news reports of those suits?

If you've muddled this story with another case of a deaf woman who settled for $1,000 in a suit against a lawyer, you might want to redact or edit your post.

 

[LizzyM]

I understand that it's the law, but it just isn't right. Why should a doctor be forced to eat 150 dollars every times he sees a deaf patient?

The physician's tax return in this case showed a net income of $425,000. Even at $150/mo (and a visit with an interpreter every single time may not have been necessary), this would have been small potatoes out of the doc's pocket.

Don't pull that s h i t on a jury or they'll slap you with $200,000 in punitive damages.

 

[umean2tellme]

Hopefully by the time I'm a doctor I can sue patients for lying to me, that'll even things out a bit.

 

[sarahl86]

I am more than a little disgusted by some of the posts on here. Don't be ignorant and suck it up - Deaf people and anyone with a disability is just as entitled to healthcare as you are.

I work with Deaf and Hard of Hearing patients in a medical setting daily, and still see gross negligence by health care providers who receive fair warning that they are to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. The doctor could have easily referred the woman to another provider who could have provided for an interpreter or auxiliary aids (PS, interpreters are NOT that expensive), so I can't really feel sympathy for him - he had fair warning. It is NOT financial punishment to pay for an interpreter for Deaf patients: it is giving the patient vital access to information that as a doctor, it was his obligation to provide. If he couldn't fulfill said obligation, tell the patient to see another physician: when there is a legitimate financial reason why he couldn't pay for the interpreter and the patient were to complain about the referral, then drag that to court because it probaly would've worked out better in the long run and saved him $400,000. If he was able to hire a staff interpreter ($40-50k per year depending on experience), hell, he'd be making money off of seeing Deaf patients. This is the rationale for the program I work for now, and we are the only agency in my entire state that can serve Deaf/Hard of Hearing patients needing substance abuse or mental health treatment.

This doctor's attitude is unfortunately very common though: most hearing people don't realize that Deaf and Hard of Hearing individuals have delayed language acquisition (even through early use of hearing aids) because they are learning a language unnatural to them - it is common for D/HH people to have sub-standard reading and writing abilities due to this language delay. Not to mention the sense of detachment they feel from families and most of society because they are a cultural and linguistic minority. The ADA was designed to protect their human rights regardless of thier disability, and shame on anyone who thinks they aren't entitled. And for the record, lip-reading is highly inaccurate.

Writing English back and forth with a D/HH person would be almost equivalent to doing the same with a Spanish speaker - maybe they can pick some things out here and there, but they would really struggle to make sense of the whole picture. English is a second language to a Deaf person, so don't assume they have full comprehension of it just because they can make a sentence. Factor in a language delay that affects their primary language development and you have someone trying really really hard to make sense of what they're seeing, either in sign or written down. They need an interpreter, not only to mediate cultural differences (because yes, an interpreter does go from English to ASL, but they also factor in hearing and Deaf cultures). It is their right.

And family is not a reliable interpreting source because they don't adhere to ethical standards set by the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, and may edit what a doctor tells their family member patient if they don't like the news.

 

[Dr Lyss]

The physician's tax return in this case showed a net income of $425,000. Even at $150/mo (and a visit with an interpreter every single time may not have been necessary), this would have been small potatoes out of the doc's pocket.

Don't pull that s h i t on a jury or they'll slap you with $200,000 in punitive damages.

oh snap LizzyM just laid the smackdown 😆

 

[closer23]

.

 

[LizzyM]

A very curious thing... one news story noted that the doc was "legally embattled". Turns out he pled guilty back in '89 and was sentenced to 4 years plus 5 years probation for what was called at the time, "the biggest drug research fraud case in the history of the FDA."

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1370/is_n5_v23/ai_7701721

"Questioned by [US attorney] Weissman, Fogari admitted it was he [not his assistant] who falsified all data and that he did not conduct any legitimate research during the entire eight-year period."


He lost his license back then but I guess he got it back after he paid his debt to society.

 

[scarletgirl777]

Can you direct us to any news reports of those suits?

I think he was talking about a different deaf woman who sued over her son's hospitalization in New Jersey. Your story in Law talks about both cases.

 

[Retsage]

That blog is hilarious...I showed that blog to some of my white friends and a few of them had like 80% in common with the blog

Man, I am a white person, I read that blog, and all I can think is "****, he's got my number all right."

 

[copingmethods]

The physician's tax return in this case showed a net income of $425,000. Even at $150/mo (and a visit with an interpreter every single time may not have been necessary), this would have been small potatoes out of the doc's pocket.

Don't pull that s h i t on a jury or they'll slap you with $200,000 in punitive damages.

So what? Even if he made that much or more, why should he be required to provide a service for free (or even a net loss in this case)?

 

[Dr Lyss]

Man, I am a white person, I read that blog, and all I can think is "****, he's got my number all right."

haha they made a book out of it. Love that blog

 

[walderness]

If anything, the ADA is not far-reaching enough. Since there is not an ADA “police,” the courts are the ONLY avenue for change and enforcement towards accommodation. This is part of the problem. The justice department must receive 3 letters of complaint about a business or practice before they will contact them to recommend that accommodations be made. Results are essentially useless.

People on this thread are forgetting or unaware of the fact that only businesses with more than 15 employees are subject to the ADA requirements, so as to prevent undue burden.

As a portion of operating costs in this physician's case, $150 in business expense is not an unreasonable cost.