Another hospital has agreed to make itself more accessible to the deaf and hard of hearing. This time, it is a hospital in New Hampshire. The hospital agreed to pay a few thousand dollars to a deaf patient who claimed the hospital tried to get his partner to act as an interpreter. More importantly, the hospital agreed to improve its communication services for deaf and hard of hearing patients. Another victory. One hospital at a time, hospitals across the nation are getting the message they must be accessible for deaf and hard of hearing patients.
Unfortunately, the article has some pretty nasty comments on it.


I don’t recollect any nasty comments to my group lawsuit against the hospital. In fact, most readers were horrified, if I remember correctly.
But in the last two years, in other articles covering lawsuits against the hospitals by Deaf plaintiffs, people would leave nasty comments. I’m not sure why. I know for some time, there is a growing sentiment against ADA’s regulations, especially from small business owners. I hope more and more people will understand the essence of a qualified interpreter in a hospital setting. Then they won’t castigate the victims. They’ve suffered enough.
I think that it suitable the hospital because of no interpreters provider they did not hired sign language interpreters in service for deaf patient that unfair they have to be sufferting. It discrimination against deaf and hard of hearing.
What were the “nasty comments” published in the article?
@Hartmut: 99% of the nasty comments are from hearing people who basically don’t want their tax dollars to help any deaf or hoh person have access to the same information that me and other hearing people take for granted. They think the old pen and paper is a good substitute for talking with your doctor. And they don’t seem to realize that just because the man’s companion can sign with him then that makes her skills sufficient enough to interpret in the hospital.
Nasty comments aside, I am glad that hospitals are learning (however slowly) that the ADA is a law, not a suggestion, and they have to comply with it or face lawsuits if they don’t.