A Deaf woman who uses BSL has had her complaint against her GP upheld by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman.
The woman, who is from Northern Europe and is a BSL user, was provided with an interpreter until 2011, when the funding for the interpreter was suddenly withdrawn.
The woman was told that instead, she would be given longer appointment times and that staff would communicate with her through written notes.
Watch the case summary in BSL:
The woman, who was pregnant at the time, complained about this decision, explaining that she could not understand written English and said she had left appointments not knowing how to take her medication.
The practice then told the woman that it was the Primary Care Trust’s responsibility to fund interpreters, which the PCT disagreed with, saying it was the practice’s responsibility.
The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman says in its case summary:
The Practice failed to take into account its responsibilities under the Equality Act 2010 as a service provider.
The Practice is required to take reasonable steps to make sure that, as a disabled person, Mrs E is not put at a substantial disadvantage in comparison with people who are not disabled.
The Practice tried to make some adjustments for Mrs E, such as giving her longer appointments. However, because it did not take necessary steps to understand the way in which she communicated, its attempts were, on the whole, inappropriate and ineffective.
The Practice wrongly concluded that Mrs E should be able to communicate through written English. She cannot, because she is a Deaf BSL user. In failing to recognise both of these important facts, the Practice has reached incorrect conclusions about its duties under the Equality Act 2010, which has led to its failure properly to consider whether the provision of a sign language interpreter is a reasonable adjustment under the Act.
It also says:
The Practice and the NHS England Local Area Team (which took over the PCT’s responsibilities when the NHS restructured) acknowledged and apologised for their failings and paid the woman £3,000. They put together an action plan to show how they will meet Mrs E’s needs in future, and they undertook to do the same for other patients with disabilities.
Read the case study here: http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/make-a-complaint/case-summaries/volume-2/health/deaf-patient-denied-access-to-bsl-interpreter-at-gp-practice
Find out how to make a complaint to the NHS in England in BSL through this video:
Monkey Magic
February 23, 2015
Poor Mrs E – but brilliant that she did something about it otherwise the assumption would be that this kind of treatment is ok. Thanks Mrs E – this outcome will help Deaf people everywhere who aren’t able to access a service where they have a right to.
Judith Pryer
February 25, 2015
Apart from the obvious main issue the worrying thing about the narrative above is the statement that being Deaf is being disabled.
Cathy
February 25, 2015
Judith, I don’t think “being deaf is being disabled” is a worrying statement. I consider deafness a serious disability when one cannot communicate with anybody without a lot of hassle going on: Lipspeakers, Interpreters, Hearing Dogs, notetakers, hearing aids, cochlear implants, vibrating alarms, flashing doorbell lights, asking people to be Deaf Aware and speak clearly, in good lighting etc etc………I think you have to ask yourself: “what on earth do deaf people need all this stuff for if deafness is not a disability?!?! Time to dump all the above!!!”
I know it is easy to think deafness is not disabling because ears cannot be seen unless you look in the mirror, but just because they are largely forgotten about does not mean they are not included in bodily functions. Its exactly the same as when legs don’t work: one has a wheelchair and negotiates the lift; when ears don’t work; one wears hearing aids or a CI and utilises an interpreter. Both legs and ears are useless so if one is disabled when legs don’t work, then one is equally disabled when ears don’t work!!!
And when thought about more deeply deafness is the worse disability of all (my friend was killed many years ago by a motorbike as she never heard it roaring down the road) as it cuts you off from people; as Helen Keller said! A wheelchair never does that!!!
Judith
March 8, 2015
I cannot agree that Deafness is a disability. I am very Hard of Hearing and as near Deaf as makes no difference. Of course there are practical difficulties such as not being able to use a ‘phone but I most certainly do not consider myself as disabled and many of my Deaf friends agree. Communicating can be sometimes challenging but not a great deal worse than dealing with a foreigner who doesn’t speak the language.
I recently completed an NVQ BSL Course. One of my debate topics was whether the Deaf consider themselves as disabled. Having carried out research amongst the local Deaf community the answer overwhelmingly is that they do not. Only a very small percentage of those interviewed considered themselves disabled purely based on deafness alone and not related to other conditions.
The use of any type of aid cannot be an automatic measure of disability. A person needing spectacles or contact lenses isn’t classed as disabled so just because a person wears hearing aids or has a CI does not necessarily equate to a disability either.
I work full time in the hearing world and see hearing clients almost daily. Yes, I lip read and couldn’t function without that ability but I would never willingly allow the label ‘disabled’ to be attached to me.