Relationships will be - Personally & Professionally CASE STUDY: ALIA & AHMED "DEAF" This situation is based on the Eldridge v. British Columbia (Attorney General) decision. There are many people in Ontario who are DEAF, deafened or hard of hearing. Some people may use sign language as their first language or preferred means of communication, and their lack of fluency in English can seriously impede their ability to communicate unless aided by interpretation. For these Ontarians, effective communication and getting fair access to services and employment is very hard. Alia and Ahmed are parents who were both born deaf. They were expecting twins and would usually provide their own sign language interpreters for their medical visits. Unless an interpreter was present, communicating information was often frustrating for them. At the same time, any miscommunication about medical information could be dangerous. Alia went into labor eight months into her pregnancy. She and her husband found themselves at the hospital without the aid of an interpreter. Neither the attending doctor nor the nurses could effectively communicate with the parents-to-be, who found this isolation difficult and frightening. After the babies were born, they were immediately taken away from the delivery room and put under observation in another area of the hospital. One nurse wrote on a piece of paper that the children were "fine." Otherwise, no one gave any details about the twins' condition to either Alia or Ahmed. In their human rights complaint, Alia and Ahmed alleged that the hospital was providing unequal services because it did not accommodate their needs as DEAF persons. The hospital replied that it was too hard to bring in interpreters on such short notice, and that it was too expensive to keep interpreters on call 24 hours a day. HOMEWORK DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: 1. How would you feel if you were in the same situation as Alia or Ahmed? 2. Whose responsibility is it to provide sign language interpreters in public service sectors? 3. How would this claim be covered under the Code? 4. Do you think it's unreasonable for DEAF people to expect interpreters to be available in emergency situations? What about in other non-emergency situations?