Auslan Interpreters

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (15:06): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before addressing a question to the Minister for Health and Wellbeing on the topic of Auslan interpreters in emergency departments.

Leave granted.

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS: Patients and carers who are deaf or hard of hearing need access to Auslan interpreters as soon as possible when they present to emergency departments so that they can make informed consent. Without that interpreter present, doctors will have failed their obligation to receive informed consent for those patients. Hospitals refusing to provide an interpreter to patients is discrimination, and of course hinders the hospital's duty of care.

I have received a case, the details of which I will not go into today—I will communicate that to the minister separately from this—showing that, at least at the Women's and Children's Hospital, emergency departments are not currently providing those Auslan interpreters in a timely fashion to assist patients and their families who are deaf or hard of hearing. Hospitals not providing those interpreters is, of course, discrimination under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992, by failing to provide reasonable accommodations, and means that that hospital is failing in its duty of care. Additionally, pressure put on individuals in this NDIS environment to provide their own interpreters is not within the framework of a public health system delivered in the appropriate way.

My question to the minister is: can he now clarify that Auslan interpreters should and will be provided to deaf and hard of hearing patients and carers in our hospitals and short stay emergency departments on request, as needed, in a timely way?

The Hon. S.G. WADE (Minister for Health and Wellbeing) (15:08): I thank the honourable member for her question. Let us be very clear: deaf and hard of hearing South Australians have the same right to access the health system as the rest of the community. Access, of course, is physical access, but of course it is also communication access. There is no point in getting through the door if you cannot actually communicate with someone.

There is no doubt that the health system has a responsibility to give that same right of access to all. The Marshall Liberal government has made very clear its attitude to inclusion, both for the deaf and hard of hearing community and for the disability community, which is why this parliament recently passed the Disability Inclusion Act, brought to this place by my honourable colleague the Minister for Human Services.

The issue of access in relation to the deaf and hard of hearing, and also people with disability, has been brought starkly to mind in terms of the new Royal Adelaide Hospital. In spite of spending $2.4 billion, there were significant disability shortcomings, such as the lack of a publicly-accessible changing place. The house will obviously remember the advocacy of the Hon. Kelly Vincent in that regard.

In relation to people who are deaf or hard of hearing, one of the problems in that hospital is the lack of facilities for the toileting needs of assistance dogs and, of course, amongst accredited assistance dogs are dogs that support people who are deaf and hard of hearing. That is, if you like, touching on the physical aspects, but the honourable member is completely correct to highlight the importance of communication in terms of access to hospitals.

SA Health hospitals have an obligation to ensure that communication is possible with all individuals, including those who are deaf or hard of hearing, across all our health services. Obviously, there is a range of communication challenges: people from culturally and linguistically diverse communities, people with dementia who often have problems with communication, and of course the community that the honourable member highlights, the deaf or hard of hearing community.

To ensure quality and safety for patients and to enable clear communication, Auslan sign language interpreters are arranged for patients who are deaf or who have hearing loss, irrespective of their NDIS eligibility. No patient should be charged for interpreter services; likewise, no patient should be expected to use their NDIS resources to access health services.

The honourable member asked me if I thought they should be provided and the answer is yes. In terms of the access issues I note that the honourable member identified particular issues at the Women's and Children's and I am more than happy to follow those up, because we want a health system that is of high quality and value for money for all South Australians and that is accessible to them.