jillio
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2006
- Messages
- 60,232
- Reaction score
- 22
NAD and Law Firm File Complaint Against St. Agnes Hospital
Silver Spring, MD - The National Association of the Deaf and Brown, Goldstein & Levy, LLP, have filed a complaint in federal court against St. Agnes Hospital alleging its failure to provide qualified sign language interpreter services to ensure effective communication with Daniel and Michelle Sorace, a deaf couple. The complaint was filed in the United States District Court in Baltimore, Maryland.
The complaint alleges that after Mr. Sorace fell from the roof of his home, he was transported to St. Agnes Hospital by ambulance at approximately 1:30 p.m., on May 26, 2007. On the way to and after their arrival at the hospital, Mrs. Sorace repeatedly requested qualified sign language interpreters to ensure effective communication with hospital staff, according to the complaint.
The complaint alleges that, due to his injuries, Mr. Sorace could only move his right hand. Despite Mr. Sorace's condition, hospital staff attempted to use Deaf-Talk, a video remote interpreting service. Mrs. Sorace explained that this accommodation was not appropriate because Mr. Sorace could not see the television monitor because he was on a stretcher facing the ceiling. Furthermore, the interpreter would not be able to see both his head and his right hand.
The complaint alleges that Mrs. Sorace contacted a friend who contacted an interpreter. The interpreter arrived at the hospital at 7 p.m. and stayed until 11 a.m., when the hospital began providing its own interpreter services.
Prior to being discharged, Mr. Sorace was told to schedule an appointment with a clinic within St. Agnes Hospital. The complaint alleges that when Mrs. Sorace tried to schedule an appointment by telephone through a video relay service, St. Agnes Hospital refused to accept the call. The complaint further alleges that the Soraces tried to make an appointment by telephone using an interpreter that the hospital provided. The clinic refused to schedule an appointment for Mr. Sorace because he is deaf. The Soraces then scheduled an appointment with a different orthopedic clinic.
"This case illustrates that video remote interpreting is not always an appropriate accommodation for patients who are deaf," stated Rosaline Crawford, Director of the NAD Law and Advocacy Center. "Patients and interpreters need to see each other. When this is not possible using video remote interpreting equipment, hospitals may need to provide another accommodation that is effective, such as qualified sign language interpreter services on site."
"It is inexcusable for hospitals or health care providers to refuse to accept relay calls or schedule appointments for patients who are deaf," stated Bobbie Beth Scoggins, NAD President.
The complaints request the United States District Court to declare that St. Agnes Hospital violated the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and award money damages to Mr. and Mrs. Sorace.
==============
Silver Spring, MD - The National Association of the Deaf and Brown, Goldstein & Levy, LLP, have filed a complaint in federal court against St. Agnes Hospital alleging its failure to provide qualified sign language interpreter services to ensure effective communication with Daniel and Michelle Sorace, a deaf couple. The complaint was filed in the United States District Court in Baltimore, Maryland.
The complaint alleges that after Mr. Sorace fell from the roof of his home, he was transported to St. Agnes Hospital by ambulance at approximately 1:30 p.m., on May 26, 2007. On the way to and after their arrival at the hospital, Mrs. Sorace repeatedly requested qualified sign language interpreters to ensure effective communication with hospital staff, according to the complaint.
The complaint alleges that, due to his injuries, Mr. Sorace could only move his right hand. Despite Mr. Sorace's condition, hospital staff attempted to use Deaf-Talk, a video remote interpreting service. Mrs. Sorace explained that this accommodation was not appropriate because Mr. Sorace could not see the television monitor because he was on a stretcher facing the ceiling. Furthermore, the interpreter would not be able to see both his head and his right hand.
The complaint alleges that Mrs. Sorace contacted a friend who contacted an interpreter. The interpreter arrived at the hospital at 7 p.m. and stayed until 11 a.m., when the hospital began providing its own interpreter services.
Prior to being discharged, Mr. Sorace was told to schedule an appointment with a clinic within St. Agnes Hospital. The complaint alleges that when Mrs. Sorace tried to schedule an appointment by telephone through a video relay service, St. Agnes Hospital refused to accept the call. The complaint further alleges that the Soraces tried to make an appointment by telephone using an interpreter that the hospital provided. The clinic refused to schedule an appointment for Mr. Sorace because he is deaf. The Soraces then scheduled an appointment with a different orthopedic clinic.
"This case illustrates that video remote interpreting is not always an appropriate accommodation for patients who are deaf," stated Rosaline Crawford, Director of the NAD Law and Advocacy Center. "Patients and interpreters need to see each other. When this is not possible using video remote interpreting equipment, hospitals may need to provide another accommodation that is effective, such as qualified sign language interpreter services on site."
"It is inexcusable for hospitals or health care providers to refuse to accept relay calls or schedule appointments for patients who are deaf," stated Bobbie Beth Scoggins, NAD President.
The complaints request the United States District Court to declare that St. Agnes Hospital violated the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and award money damages to Mr. and Mrs. Sorace.
==============
