interpreter responses 2 of 2
nathan keepers
Description
Collection
Title:
interpreter responses 2 of 2
Creator:
nathan keepers
Date:
1/23/2004
Text:
More responses:
Nathan Keepers, CPO
(really interesting tactic):
We are not obligated to provide services to everyone. We can refer patients
to other facilities or other places when appropriate. BUT we have to be
careful as to why we don't provide services. There are so many out there in
this disabled population that are just hoping and waiting for a good
potential lawsuit to happen. They are looking for something that is more
promising than buying a winning lottery ticket.
One way I have managed to deter patients that appear to be a potential
problem is to schedule them way in the future, and then tell them it will
take a long time until I can take care of their situations or see them.
That is not illegal or in any way makes me liable for a lawsuit. They might
try to sue me, but that is a real long shot for them to prove anything. I
am just hopeful that they are too impatient to wait on me, and will go
somewhere else and let them deal with it.
One other thing to keep in mind, which is what damage will be done to
referral sources. The way I feel about it (which I know has actually been
the case here) is if such a patient is dificult with us, they are the same
way with doctors, therapists, and everyone. I don't think any damage will
happen to referral sources if they also feel that a patient is difficult or
problematic, and we put the patient off.
The only thing I am very careful about is mentioning to a patient about why
I may not want to get involved. I just have to make a quiet decision if I
don't want to see someone or get involved with something, and just tell the
patient it is a time issue, and they could probably get quicker service
soemwhere else, especially if it is for diabetic shoes no less.
Based on some non-O&P work I'm doing with a large hospital group, my
understanding is that if your facility/business accepts federal money
(Medicare) then you are bound by Title VI of the Civil Right Act of 1964,
which requires you to ensure meaningful access to your services for those
with low English proficiency. Typically, that is understood to mean
providing an interpreter if the patient (not her daughter) requests it. The
exact language of Title VI is very vague, but these days the Office of Civil
Rights at HHS has come down hard on hospitals that do not provide
interpreter services.
By the way, the current thinking is that having a minor child interpret for
a parent is a big no no--a violation of the parents privacy and an undue
burden on the child.
Insurance will not pay for an interpreter. At the moment, language
assistance programs and paying for them is a huge cutting edge issue among
hospitals throughout the country. In the hospitals I work with, it's
actually the treating physician that the hospital bills for interpreter time
If I were you I would just write it all down and let her read all of the
instructions and explain IN DETAIL all of the protocols. I would then have
the patient sign it. PERIOD!!!
Perhaps you can call the referring physician and ask him how he was able to
communicate the info? Let him be your mouthpiece. Give her the inserts and
let him explain it.
I would call the local council of
the deaf or the local chapter of people who sign for a living in your
area. I am sure they have volunteers.
It's NOT your responsibility to provide a translator, nor is it within the
realm of services you provide to your patients. I would stick with writing
as a means of communicating. I can't hear you either, but this reply seems
to work just fine
I have had deaf patients who would show up with an interpreter from an
agency.
The agency sent me a bill for there service. At first I refused to pay.
After
checking into if further and talking to a lawyer, it turns out that we have
to
pay for this. Even if we think we can comunicate with writing, we still
have
to pay. It took a long time for me to believe this but it is true. Pay the
fee
or tell them you can not provide the service..
This is not so. The American Disabilities Act does allow her to have an
interpreter provided, but not by you. she can contact an agency the handles
interpreters that work on behalf of the ADA. If there is a charge, she is
responsible for it. She may, on her own, attempt to collect reimbursement
directly from her insurance company. Don't let her con you into it. I also
suggest you stand your ground as you do not wish to set a future precedence
for this.
I had a similar experience when a controlling interpreter wanted to make an
appointment for a patient. She insisted that I pay her directly for her
services or she would not allow her client to come to our office. We never
saw the patient.
She explained that ADA requires any business to provide signers for deaf
people - even grocery stores. I contacted AOPA about this. They were
helpful. I found the requirement, but I put it in the round file.
We have seen many deaf people over the years. A family member or pencil and
paper usually work well.
I can not answer your question, but here is a resource that probably can.
Disability Law Resource Project
www.DLRP.org
1-800-949-4232
This daughter sounds charming
This is the ADA's opinion on the deaf and interpreters in a hospital
setting. It is correct that you can't charge the patient, but I suppose that
you and the patient need to decide whether or not the nature of your
communication is complex enough to warrant a real time interpreter or if
written communication will suffice. They do state that it is inappropriate
to use a family member to interpret. The Department of Justice operates an
ADA Information Line (800-514-0301) which should help you to get a more
clear answer since small businesses often operate under different
regulations than larger facilities. Hope this helps.
If you do it once, you will have set a precedent. Walk very carefully
I can see that the entitlement mentality is alive and well in the U.S.
I don't see how it is you responsibility either. I wonder if her
daughter imposes the same interpreter requirement upon her mothers'
physicians and rehab providers. I doubt it. Maybe you could tell her
daughter you know of noone who could interpret, then ask politely what
interpreter her mothers' physician uses so you could hire him/her.
My hospital says that the patient is responsible for translation. On it's
face I would say that the law does NOT demand that YOU provide services and
nobody would or should expect services that would be provided at a loss. If
this were true every non English speaking person could demand the same
thing.
Sounds like she has a chip on her shoulders
I really want to know the outcome of this. The precedent could lead to all
sorts of problems. Do you have to provide transportation for those without?
Translators for those who are linguistically challenged (don't speak
English)? Unfortunately, some people feel that advocating for the disabled
means making others miserable.
Iused to work for an insurance company and I know that we would not have
paid
for the interpreter
Yep,
You get to eat it!
I have had to do it in the past. The hourly rate for the interpretor is
greater than our reimbursement under Medicaid!
Just wait until they come back for free adjustments and you get to pay
again.
Another example of legislative absurdity!
_________________________________________________________________
High-speed users�be more efficient online with the new MSN Premium Internet
Software. <URL Redacted>
Nathan Keepers, CPO
(really interesting tactic):
We are not obligated to provide services to everyone. We can refer patients
to other facilities or other places when appropriate. BUT we have to be
careful as to why we don't provide services. There are so many out there in
this disabled population that are just hoping and waiting for a good
potential lawsuit to happen. They are looking for something that is more
promising than buying a winning lottery ticket.
One way I have managed to deter patients that appear to be a potential
problem is to schedule them way in the future, and then tell them it will
take a long time until I can take care of their situations or see them.
That is not illegal or in any way makes me liable for a lawsuit. They might
try to sue me, but that is a real long shot for them to prove anything. I
am just hopeful that they are too impatient to wait on me, and will go
somewhere else and let them deal with it.
One other thing to keep in mind, which is what damage will be done to
referral sources. The way I feel about it (which I know has actually been
the case here) is if such a patient is dificult with us, they are the same
way with doctors, therapists, and everyone. I don't think any damage will
happen to referral sources if they also feel that a patient is difficult or
problematic, and we put the patient off.
The only thing I am very careful about is mentioning to a patient about why
I may not want to get involved. I just have to make a quiet decision if I
don't want to see someone or get involved with something, and just tell the
patient it is a time issue, and they could probably get quicker service
soemwhere else, especially if it is for diabetic shoes no less.
Based on some non-O&P work I'm doing with a large hospital group, my
understanding is that if your facility/business accepts federal money
(Medicare) then you are bound by Title VI of the Civil Right Act of 1964,
which requires you to ensure meaningful access to your services for those
with low English proficiency. Typically, that is understood to mean
providing an interpreter if the patient (not her daughter) requests it. The
exact language of Title VI is very vague, but these days the Office of Civil
Rights at HHS has come down hard on hospitals that do not provide
interpreter services.
By the way, the current thinking is that having a minor child interpret for
a parent is a big no no--a violation of the parents privacy and an undue
burden on the child.
Insurance will not pay for an interpreter. At the moment, language
assistance programs and paying for them is a huge cutting edge issue among
hospitals throughout the country. In the hospitals I work with, it's
actually the treating physician that the hospital bills for interpreter time
If I were you I would just write it all down and let her read all of the
instructions and explain IN DETAIL all of the protocols. I would then have
the patient sign it. PERIOD!!!
Perhaps you can call the referring physician and ask him how he was able to
communicate the info? Let him be your mouthpiece. Give her the inserts and
let him explain it.
I would call the local council of
the deaf or the local chapter of people who sign for a living in your
area. I am sure they have volunteers.
It's NOT your responsibility to provide a translator, nor is it within the
realm of services you provide to your patients. I would stick with writing
as a means of communicating. I can't hear you either, but this reply seems
to work just fine
I have had deaf patients who would show up with an interpreter from an
agency.
The agency sent me a bill for there service. At first I refused to pay.
After
checking into if further and talking to a lawyer, it turns out that we have
to
pay for this. Even if we think we can comunicate with writing, we still
have
to pay. It took a long time for me to believe this but it is true. Pay the
fee
or tell them you can not provide the service..
This is not so. The American Disabilities Act does allow her to have an
interpreter provided, but not by you. she can contact an agency the handles
interpreters that work on behalf of the ADA. If there is a charge, she is
responsible for it. She may, on her own, attempt to collect reimbursement
directly from her insurance company. Don't let her con you into it. I also
suggest you stand your ground as you do not wish to set a future precedence
for this.
I had a similar experience when a controlling interpreter wanted to make an
appointment for a patient. She insisted that I pay her directly for her
services or she would not allow her client to come to our office. We never
saw the patient.
She explained that ADA requires any business to provide signers for deaf
people - even grocery stores. I contacted AOPA about this. They were
helpful. I found the requirement, but I put it in the round file.
We have seen many deaf people over the years. A family member or pencil and
paper usually work well.
I can not answer your question, but here is a resource that probably can.
Disability Law Resource Project
www.DLRP.org
1-800-949-4232
This daughter sounds charming
This is the ADA's opinion on the deaf and interpreters in a hospital
setting. It is correct that you can't charge the patient, but I suppose that
you and the patient need to decide whether or not the nature of your
communication is complex enough to warrant a real time interpreter or if
written communication will suffice. They do state that it is inappropriate
to use a family member to interpret. The Department of Justice operates an
ADA Information Line (800-514-0301) which should help you to get a more
clear answer since small businesses often operate under different
regulations than larger facilities. Hope this helps.
If you do it once, you will have set a precedent. Walk very carefully
I can see that the entitlement mentality is alive and well in the U.S.
I don't see how it is you responsibility either. I wonder if her
daughter imposes the same interpreter requirement upon her mothers'
physicians and rehab providers. I doubt it. Maybe you could tell her
daughter you know of noone who could interpret, then ask politely what
interpreter her mothers' physician uses so you could hire him/her.
My hospital says that the patient is responsible for translation. On it's
face I would say that the law does NOT demand that YOU provide services and
nobody would or should expect services that would be provided at a loss. If
this were true every non English speaking person could demand the same
thing.
Sounds like she has a chip on her shoulders
I really want to know the outcome of this. The precedent could lead to all
sorts of problems. Do you have to provide transportation for those without?
Translators for those who are linguistically challenged (don't speak
English)? Unfortunately, some people feel that advocating for the disabled
means making others miserable.
Iused to work for an insurance company and I know that we would not have
paid
for the interpreter
Yep,
You get to eat it!
I have had to do it in the past. The hourly rate for the interpretor is
greater than our reimbursement under Medicaid!
Just wait until they come back for free adjustments and you get to pay
again.
Another example of legislative absurdity!
_________________________________________________________________
High-speed users�be more efficient online with the new MSN Premium Internet
Software. <URL Redacted>
Citation
nathan keepers, “interpreter responses 2 of 2,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 24, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/222326.
