P&As and Their Work with People

Who Are Deaf and Hard of Hearing

By Issac Leff

NAPAS Legal Intern

Approximately 28 million people in the U.S. are deaf or hard of hearing. In 2003, the P&As had 2,072 clients with hearing impairments. The P&As are dedicated to protecting and advocating for the rights of persons who are deaf and hard of hearing.

The Protection and Advocacy (P&A) and Client Assistance programs make up the nation’s premier disability rights network. Starting in the mid-1970s and proceeding up through today, Congress had the foresight to recognize that if children and adults with disabilities were to have their basic civil rights recognized and upheld, they had to be provided with some assistance. The P&As work to ensure that people with disabilities are not denied their basic right – to live a secure and stable life in their communities. From its original focus of protecting and advocating for people in institutions, the P&A system has grown to protect and advocate for the rights of all people with disabilities on a variety of legal issues. Federal support for advocacy on behalf of people with disabilities has increased from three million dollars in 1975 to more than 120 million dollars in 2004.

Protection and advocacy systems are located in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the federal territories. Additionally, a Native American P&A was established in order to advocate for the rights of Native Americans with disabilities. Typical P&As are independent non-profit organizations, however in some states, P&A agencies are part of the state government. State P&As provide free, legally-based advocacy services and NAPAS is the Washington-based membership organization that represents the needs of individuals with disabilities and the P&A/CAP network at the federal level. As mentioned, P&A services are free to individuals with disabilities. However, because of the large number of service requests the P&As have developed annual priorities to guide their provision of services. Based on these priorities, P&As will provide a wide range of services, including: (1) Information and technical assistance to individuals with disabilities, attorneys, governmental agencies, service providers and other advocacy organizations; (2) Investigating, negotiating or mediating solutions to problems expressed by persons with disabilities eligible for P&A or CAP services; and (3) Providing legal counsel and litigation services to eligible persons and groups who satisfy the established priorities for provision of such services.

The Deaf and Hard of Hearing population served by the P&As:

Approximately 28 million people in the U.S. are deaf or hard of hearing. In 2003, the P&As had 2,072 clients with hearing impairments. The P&As are dedicated to protecting and advocating for the rights of persons who are deaf and hard of hearing.

In addition to all the other populations of disabled individuals the P&As serve, the P&As are increasingly attempting to assist individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing in asserting their rights. The P&A Network recognizes the unique communication and English language barriers confronted by people who are deaf or hard of hearing. Such individuals frequently confront major access barriers in all phases of their lives as they attempt to live and work in their communities. They must deal with daily service providers, doctors, mental health providers, educators, lawyers, judges, employers, and others in the business community who fail to provide them with even basic communication access to services. People who are deaf or hard of hearing, therefore, often need protection and advocacy services to help them deal with these barriers.

The following are just a few examples of the types of services the P&As provided in 2003 to individuals who are deaf and hard of hearing:

The Health Care System- Hospitals, Medical Centers, and Institutions: The central mandates of the P&A system are to protect and advocate for the rights of individuals with all disabilities to live a secure and stable life. The health care system sometimes creates one of the greatest barriers to community and stability for individuals with disabilities and their families and friends. The P&A Network assists deaf and hard of hearing people obtain access, understanding, and stability within the health care system. Some examples of how the P&A Network has assisted these individuals include:

Minnesota: A deaf woman was not provided with an interpreter during a hospital emergency room visit. As a result of the strained communication, the hospital almost performed risky, unnecessary surgery. The woman waited five hours for the hospital to call an interpreter before she finally decided to call one herself but the hospital refused to pay for the interpreter. The P&A intervened and the hospital agreed to a settlement whereby the hospital will provide certified interpreters within one hour of 80 percent of requests and within two hours of all requests; the hospital will have in-house and on-call interpreters with pagers to assist patients; the hospital will provide information to deaf patients in an accessible format; and the hospital will both compensate the deaf woman in this case and make contributions to interpreter provider organizations.

South Carolina: The P&A assisted a deaf individual who had entered a local medical center for treatment of her mental illness. Despite repeated requests by the deaf individual and the mental health social worker, the medical center never provided an interpreter. The individual was later discharged without ever having had an opportunity to effectively communicate with the hospital staff. With the help of the P&A, the medical center was required to develop and implement an appropriate and effective communication policy, train staff regarding effective communication, post signs in prominent locations regarding this new policy, and designate a Section 504/ADA coordinator.

Pennsylvania: The state P&A assisted a deaf man and his hearing wife in filing a suit against a medical practice that failed to provide a sign language interpreter for a medical appointment involving their 15-month-old child, and canceled the appointment when they asked for an interpreter. The medical practice settled the case on the eve of the trial.

New Jersey: The New Jersey P&A represented a retired deaf man who had been living in a nursing facility for seven years. This man’s primary form of communication is American Sign Language (ASL) and in the entire time he had stayed at the facility he had never had access to staff, doctors, or residents who could communicate in ASL. The P&A explained to the facility about their requirements under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the facility attempted to comply. However, the facility used interpreters who were not effectively trained in ASL and the man grew frustrated and lonely. In response, the facility sedated him with high doses of psychotropic medication even though he was never diagnosed with a mental illness. Consistent with this man’s wishes, the P&A was successful in getting him transferred to a community-based residence in Ohio which is populated with deaf people and has health care staff trained in ASL.

North Carolina: The North Carolina P&A assisted deaf individuals in a state psychiatric hospital. As a result of the P&A’s intervention, a deaf unit was created in the hospital to increase and facilitate the services available to deaf residents. Additionally, the P&A has increased the quality of regional services available for deaf individuals in the mental health system.

California: A deaf resident in a facility did not have access to a TTY, closed captioning, interpreter services, or a flashing signal fire alarm. The California P&A mediated with the facility director on the resident’s behalf and the facility provided the requested services.

South Carolina: A deaf patient at a private medical center was denied an interpreter. The South Carolina P&A assisted the patient in filing suit regarding this violation of the ADA and Section 504. The case was resolved through mediation and the medical center adopted an appropriate effective communication policy.

Alaska: The Alaska P&A assisted the mother of an adolescent son who was in an alcohol treatment program. The mother is deaf and wanted to participate in the family counseling sessions. The program did not want to provide the mother with an interpreter. With the intervention of the P&A, the mother was provided with an interpreter and could fully participate in the family counseling sessions.

Connecticut: The Connecticut P&A recently completed its monitoring of a class action settlement involving 32 acute care hospitals in the state. The litigation was brought on behalf of deaf individuals who did not receive appropriate communication accommodations while they were hospitalized. Due to the settlement, sign language interpreter services have been greatly expanded and are readily available to patients in the inpatient units. This has resulted in shortening the length of stay for deaf individuals and has enhanced the accuracy of assessments of deaf patients.

Massachusetts: The Massachusetts P&A represented a deaf individual who was being discharged from a state psychiatric hospital to a program which conditioned housing to medication compliance and mandatory blood testing. The P&A intervened and found an alternative permanent housing placement that was not tied to treatment compliance.

Delaware: The Delaware P&A assisted an institutionalized, deaf woman with mental illness. The State did not provide her effective communication services and programs while institutionalized and did not provide her reasonable accommodations in her community placement. After the P&A became involved, the State provided the deaf woman with the remedies she sought.

The Legal System - Courts, Jails, and the Police: There are countless laws in the U.S. that protect the rights of individuals involved with the legal system (whether criminal defendants or victims). If people do not have accommodations which allow them to understand their rights, their rights cannot be protected. The P&A Network has advocated for deaf and hard of hearing individuals in this context and some examples include:

Illinois: The P&A assisted an individual who uses sign language as his primary form of communication in his lawsuit against the state. The man was arrested by the Chicago police for an outstanding traffic offense. He was neither offered nor provided an interpreter. He was at no time informed of his rights to a telephone call, legal counsel or information about bail. When he was arraigned, his repeated requests for an interpreter were denied. Because there was insufficient room in the jail, the individual and other arrestees were told that they would be released pending a hearing the following month. At that time, he was asked for an address and telephone number where he could be reached. He provided the name of his sister, who is hard of hearing and uses a TTY.

When the police were unable to contact the sister, he was placed in jail where he remained for 33 days. No further attempts were made to reach his sister and he was not granted access to a TTY or an interpreter for the entire 33 days. Ultimately, the State’s Attorney declined to prosecute the individual for the traffic offense and he was released. With the help of the P&A, the individual filed suit and ultimately settled the suit for a confidential amount.

Louisiana: The P&A filed suit on behalf of a deaf individual who had been in jail for 22 days and had not been provided an interpreter, was not taken to court, was not provided an interpreter for his court date, and was not given access to a TTY. As a part of a settlement, the Sheriff will provide interpreters and TTYs for deaf inmates, will inform the relevant courts of the deaf inmates’ need for interpreters when they go to court, and will allow the P&A to monitor the Sheriff’s compliance with the settlement.

Alabama: After receiving three different complaints from deaf individuals located in different parts of the state, the Alabama P&A became involved in a matter involving the entire state’s court system. The individuals were each denied interpreter services by three different state judges. These individuals needed the interpreter services in order to participate in court proceedings. The P&A was able to refer the judges to the pertinent law, which requires that these services be provided during judicial proceedings. The P&A also provided assistance to the court system in how these accommodations should be provided and developed an informational handbook on the ADA’s requirements in the court system. This handbook was distributed to all judges in the state.

Illinois: The Illinois P&A filed an appellate amicus brief in a case involving the custody rights of a father who is deaf. The trial court ruled the father was unfit to be the custodial parent of his children because he was deaf. This was contrary to the evidence in the case as well as the advice of the guardian ad litem. The appellate decision went against the father, but the court made clear it was for other reasons.

Oregon: The Oregon P&A’s advocacy efforts were responsible for giving deaf and hard of hearing inmates access to TTYs while in county and state prison facilities. Additionally, the Oregon P&A forced the parole department or the court to pay for and provide interpreters for group counseling classes/sessions that are required as a condition of probation or parole.

Minnesota: The Minnesota State Court Administrator’s office began a new policy which centralized the system for providing interpreters. However, under this new policy, deaf people began experiencing problems securing qualified sign language interpreters for court proceedings. With the assistance of the Minnesota P&A, the Minnesota Supreme Court hired a part-time sign language interpreter, agreed to continue to evaluate the system it uses to provide sign language interpreters for court proceedings, and gave deaf people an opportunity to provide feedback and other comments and criticisms about their experiences during court proceedings.

Tennessee: Upon realizing that a majority of the complaints received from deaf clients were related to denials of reasonable modifications by courts and law enforcement agencies, the Tennessee P&A published an article in a newsletter clarifying the rights of deaf people to receive sign language interpreting services under both the ADA and Tennessee law. The P&A plans to disseminate copies of their article to all courts and law enforcement agencies in Tennessee and to send follow-up correspondence to encourage compliance.

Employment: Title I of the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 protect qualified individuals with disabilities, including those who are deaf and hard of hearing, from discrimination in the area of employment. Some examples of how the P&A Network has assisted deaf and hard of hearing individuals in the employment context include:

Massachusetts: United Airlines withdrew a job offer to hire a deaf individual as an airline mechanic after the employer learned the individual was deaf. The P&A assisted the individual in his case against United and the case settled. The individual was asking to be reinstated with full seniority and benefits back to the date on which the job offer was rescinded, plus lost wages, benefits, and damages. The settlement included a large part of the relief sought.

Education: Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the IDEA provide comprehensive services for students (from birth to age 21) who are deaf or hard of hearing. P&As represent many students who are deaf or hard of hearing. Some examples include:

New Mexico: The New Mexico P&A represented a 31-year-old deaf woman with two children who was receiving SSI. This woman was attending a community college to obtain the education she needs to become an ASL instructor. This woman tried to work with Student Special Services in order to obtain interpreters for her classes. However, the school only occasionally provided interpreters, and even when it did, the interpreters sometimes did not show up, were late, left early, or simply did not convey the material correctly. As a result, the woman was forced to drop some of her classes. With the assistance of the P&A, the school agreed to pay for the classes the woman was forced to drop, provide more information for deaf students about obtaining interpreters in the college’s catalogue, and has requested funding to create a Deaf Services Coordinator position at the college.

Massachusetts: The Massachusetts P&A assisted several students on an individual basis to allow the students to be placed in a signing environment. In several cases, the P&A had to intervene on behalf of a student because the school district did not want the student to be placed in a school for the Deaf even though it was clear the environment at the Deaf school (which primarily uses ASL) would best suit the needs of the student. In one case, P&A successfully argued that the stay-put provisions of the IDEA required a student to stay at a school for the Deaf who was trying to remove her because of behavioral problems pending a hearing on these issues.

Missouri: The Missouri P&A assisted a four-year old deaf girl and her deaf parents so that the girl could attend school. Previous to the intervention of the P&A, the girl was not attending school. The P&A assisted the communication between the school and the parents and helped both to find the child eligible for special education and to develop an IEP for the child.

South Dakota: The South Dakota P&A has assisted students at the South Dakota School for the Deaf develop Individualized Education Plans (IEP). Additionally, the P&A has recently been working with the state Attorney General’s Office to determine whether the state Board of Regents or the state Department of Education has the responsibility to conduct due process hearings when issues arise with a student’s IEP at the South Dakota School for the Deaf.

New Jersey: The New Jersey P&A was contacted by the mother of a 23 year-old student in a program for the deaf at a local community college. The student was struggling in his classes and needed tutoring. The P&A acted as a go-between with the school’s coordinator of the deaf program and the student’s mother. The P&A successfully assisted the student in receiving tutoring as well as information about another program in which the student was interested.

Wisconsin: On two occasions, the Wisconsin P&A successfully sought and represented a deaf boy with mental illness in due process hearings. The school district proposed placing the boy in the Wisconsin School for the Deaf, but this placement would not have been a sufficient placement because of his mental health needs. On both occasions, the parties settled prior to the hearings and the school district agreed to pay for the boy’s placement at the National Deaf Academy in Florida.

Public Accommodations: In 1990, the ADA brought the promise of integration and equality to people with disabilities and to deaf and hard of hearing individuals. As the primary non-federal enforcers of the ADA, P&As continue their education, advocacy and litigation efforts in order to ensure that deaf and hard of hearing individuals can have access to a stable and secure life in the community. Examples of P&A efforts in this area include:

Illinois: When the Sears Tower Skydeck first opened, its programs were not accessible to people who are deaf and hard of hearing. The Illinois P&A advocated on behalf of a deaf individual who had visited the Skydeck. As a result of this advocacy, Sears made immediate changes to make the Skydeck accessible. These changes included providing guests with a written script of the theatre presentation, a written script of the audio tour on the 103rd floor, as well as a podium equipped with a reading light inside the theatre for groups arriving with an interpreter.

Minnesota: A ten year-old, deaf boy registered to participate in a golf instructional program offered by a recreational facility. The boy requested a sign language interpreter be provided for the golf lessons. The golf facility refused. The Minnesota P&A filed a lawsuit on behalf of the boy and was able to reach a settlement. The facility agreed to provide interpreter services for golf lessons and to provide accommodations to assure effective communication with other customers in any other programs at the facility. Due to the efforts and advocacy of the P&A, the boy was able to fully participate in the golf lessons.

Government Programs: Many individuals with disabilities are eligible for benefits under various governmental programs. The P&A Network assists deaf and hard of hearing individuals obtain access to such programs. Examples of this assistance include:

Mississippi: The Mississippi P&A represented a deaf married couple who had outstanding overpayment with the Social Security Administration (SSA). Both of the individuals had prior work experience, but due to illness and a job lay-off, they were both unemployed. Communication problems because of the couple’s deafness had prevented a resolution of their problems. SSA used the couple’s 13-year-old daughter to facilitate communication with the couple. The P&A informed SSA that it was not appropriate to use a 13-year-old child as an interpreter or to expect a 13-year-old child to bear the communication responsibility for SSA. As a result of the P&A’s intervention SSA hired a qualified interpreter. The outstanding overpayment was eventually waived.

California: The California P&A represented a young deaf man who wanted to go to law school. This young man was approved to receive vocational rehabilitation services, but the Department of Rehabilitation (DOR) refused to support his goal of becoming a lawyer. The young man contacted the P&A which wrote a letter on his behalf requesting an informal review of the case closure and ultimately represented the young man at an administrative review hearing. The P&A was successful in persuading the department to support his goal of being a lawyer. The young man’s VR plan was modified accordingly.

Legislative Advocacy: The P&A Network advocates for the rights and interests of people who are deaf and for those who are hard of hearing. The P&As help shape public policy on the local, state, and national level through the act of education of policy makers. They also monitor existing and proposed legislation. Some of the ways the P&As have improved public policy on behalf of individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing include:

Delaware: The Delaware P&A has provided various disability councils with analysis of proposed bills and regulations and has drafted amendments to laws which affect persons who are deaf or hard of hearing. One example of the Delaware’s P&A advocacy efforts involved proposed standards for a new Hearing Aid Loan Bank program. The P&A’s advocacy ended up changing the liability level of parents from complete liability to liability only for damage beyond normal wear and tear which is due to intentional acts or gross negligence of the parent. Another example of the Delaware P&A’s advocacy is the assistance provided in an amendment to the state’s “lemon law” that applied to assistive technology (AT). The amendment requires sellers and lessors of assistive technology to provide, at a minimum, a one year warranty on AT devices.

Ohio: The Ohio P&A is involved in a variety of policy and systemic activities involving the deaf and hard of hearing community, including: commenting on Ohio Department of Mental Health rules and regulations, participating on the Ohio Mental Health and Deafness Taskforce, evaluating their own services for this population by retaining consultants, and monitoring the health and safety of this community in state hospitals.

Washington: The Washington P&A, in collaboration with others, was successful in getting the regulations changed for a telecommunications grant. The change required all phone companies in Washington to include a TTY number on both the company welcome letter and company disconnect letters. A Washington staff member testified before the Utilities and Transportation Commission in support of the changes.

Outreach to the deaf/hard of hearing community: The P&A Network performs various activities to reach out to the deaf and hard of hearing population to both educate and inform individuals about their rights and the services the P&A Network performs. Examples include:

Ohio: The Ohio P&A has developed various publications targeting the deaf population in Ohio and also developed a video in ASL to inform deaf individuals in the mental health system of their rights. Lastly, the Ohio P&A conducted town hall meetings and sponsored a booth at DEAFair 2003 in Columbus.

Utah: The Utah P&A reached out to the deaf and hard of hearing community by conducting legal clinics at Utah’s Community Center for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. The main concerns the P&A found dealt with employment discrimination and the lack of interpreters at medical facilities and attorney’s offices.

Virginia: The Virginia P&A spoke at the Richlands Club of the Deaf and provided information to the attendees. The information focused on the Americans with Disabilities Act, the services the P&A provides, and information about the requirement that medical providers provide interpreter services to deaf patients. In addition, the P&A was able to meet one-on-one with people to discuss their own issues in detail and was able to make contacts within the Deaf community.

TEXAS:

The Texas P&A, Advocacy, Inc.(AI), has made special efforts to reach out to and better serve the deaf and hard of hearing population. These efforts began over a decade ago. In 1991, AI applied for and received funding for a Deaf Advocacy Project (DAP) from the Texas Equal Access to Justice Foundation, which continues to provide funds for the DAP. That same year, AI established a Deaf Services Specialist position. Dr. Mike Collier, who is deaf, has served as the AI Deaf Services Specialist (DSS) and Deaf Project Coordinator since its inception.

In his roll as the DSS, Dr. Collier works with staff across all programs within AI to assist them in their work with people who are deaf or hard of hearing. Some of Dr. Collier’s duties as the DSS include: reviewing clients cases from across the state that involve individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, providing technical assistance to staff handling cases involving individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, assisting AI Program and Policy staff on deafness related issues, providing routine Deafness training for all AI staff, providing outreach and training to community service providers and other professionals on the legal rights of deaf and hard of hearing individuals to equal access to services and the unique communication and language needs of those who are deaf or hard of hearing, and providing outreach and education to persons who are deaf or hard of hearing in order to inform them of their legal rights. (Dr. Mike Collier can be reached at: mcollier@advocacyinc.org)

Examples of some of the ways the Texas P&A (AI) has assisted the deaf and hard of hearing community include:

The Texas P&A has begun to utilize Video Remote Interpreter services (VRI) as one way to make their services accessible for people who are deaf or hard of hearing. With VRI, interpreters can be secured on demand at any time, and at any place that has high speed internet access, a computer with video camera, or a video phone. By using VRI services, businesses and agencies are also able to provide interpreter services for people who are deaf on demand as needed. VRI services should be particularly useful in rural areas which are located far away from cities with interpreter service agencies. With the availability and utilization of VRI, no agency, company, or individual has an excuse for not providing communication access to people who are deaf or hard of hearing.

In Texas, Adult Protective Services made a home visit to a deaf woman who was reported to be suicidal. Because they did not bring an interpreter, they used the woman’s eight year-old son as an interpreter. As a result, the woman’s son had to hear and translate his mother’s suicidal thoughts and feelings. With the help of the P&A, the woman brought suit against Adult Protective Services; the case was settled out of court.

AI represented a man who is deaf and who had resided in the Deaf unit of the Austin State Hospital (ASH) after his parents’ dropped him off at ASH as a child over twenty-five years ago. It was discovered in the course of an Olmstead initiative, that the people incarcerated for the longest periods of time in ASH were deaf patients. AI was successful in demanding that community-based services through a Medicaid Waiver Program serve the individual in the least restrictive environment and in an environment in which services were accessible. He was also given access to vocational rehabilitation services.

A woman who is deaf, was ordered by the court and the State Child Protective Services (CPS) to attend parenting classes or risk losing her kids. The court, court appointed attorney, and CPS initially did not provide interpreters. AI staff successfully convinced each entity that it was responsible for providing interpreters to deaf consumers.

A woman who is deaf and was in need of legal services in a custody dispute, attempted to get a lawyer through a lawyer referral service by which local attorneys take lower rates to serve the working poor. She was denied interpreter services, both by the referral agency (for the initial referral visit), and by the participating attorneys to whom she was referred. AI successfully negotiated with the referral agency to ensure her receipt of legal services with an interpreter, and to ensure that future clients who are deaf receive interpreters through the agency and in subsequent visits through the contracting lawyers.

A parent who is deaf was billed for interpreter services when her daughter, who is hearing and has mental illness, was in distress in a local emergency room. AI was successful in getting the hospital to pay for the interpreter services. AI is in the process of reviewing the hospital’s effective communication policy as a whole.

AI assisted several individuals who are deaf and were court-ordered to participate in anger management classes with local stress management clinics. In each case the clinics refused to provide interpreters. AI successfully convinced each clinic that its classes must be accessible to persons who are deaf.

The Texas P&A brought consolidated cases on behalf of two deaf individuals in order to require several police departments to meet their obligations under the ADA to ensure effective communication for deaf individuals during bookings and in court proceedings. One client was the victim of a crime and even though they knew he was deaf, the police did not bring an interpreter when they came to interview him. Another client went before a judge three times without an interpreter. This same client was not provided access to a TTY and was asked to sign probation documents without an interpreter. The cases were settled and the City agreed to take various steps to remedy these deficiencies in their police, jail, and judicial system.

A woman who is deaf and involved in a civil trial, needed interpreters to understand the proceedings. The judge stated that she was responsible for providing her own interpreters. AI successfully advocated on her behalf so that the court would in the future provide her and other individuals who are deaf with qualified interpreters.

A deaf man with schizophrenia was denied State funded mental health services (MHMR), including case management and visits to a psychiatrist, because of the expense of providing interpreter services. AI assisted him in appealing his denial for services. As a result, MHMR agreed to provide and pay for interpreter services.

A woman who is deaf requested interpreter services for classes at a State university but was denied. In addition, a professor required students to watch movies that were not captioned. AI successfully intervened on this student’s behalf. As a result, the university developed new policies and procedures for providing interpreters and other support services for students who are deaf. It also modified its own ADA training for teachers in efforts to ensure classroom instruction is accessible for students who are deaf.

A man who recently became deaf needed computer-assisted real time captioning (CART) services to have access to his State university classes. CART allows persons who are deaf or hard of hearing to read real time captions of what spoken or otherwise heard (e.g., a jet over head, a train, chat in hall, a bell ringing, etc.). AI successfully convinced the university of their responsibility to provide CART services to this individual and other students who are deaf or hard of hearing, when appropriate.

AI represented a young man who is deaf in the juvenile system who had been ordered to a residential treatment center (primarily for hearing youth) to receive mental health services. AI demonstrated that the facility did not offer accessible services for deaf youth. The young man was permitted to reside at home and receive community-based mental health treatment in a family setting Again, AI advocated that the court system and program providing the therapies were obligated to provide interpreter services. Both entities eventually agreed.

A deaf individual’s court-appointed attorney for criminal charges refused to provide him with an interpreter. AI successfully advocated for the attorney to provide an interpreter for his client in face-to-face meetings.

AI represented a deaf child who lives in a small town and was denied interpreter services for a summer swimming class sponsored by the city. AI was successful in avoiding litigation and in getting the city to provide interpreter services.

A deaf woman needed an interpreter to communicate with her doctor. Her doctor refused to accommodate her. AI advocated on her behalf by providing the doctor with written information concerning the doctor’s legal obligations. At this point, the doctor agreed to provide an interpreter.

The local bar association hosts free legal clinics for the public from time to time where non-attorneys participate. They provide training in many areas of law and self-advocacy. This association refused to make its events accessible to deaf participants. AI was successful in convincing the organization to provide interpreters for such events.

ARIZONA:

The Arizona P&A has made special efforts to reach out to and better serve the deaf and hard of hearing population.

Examples of just some of the ways the Arizona P&A has assisted the deaf and hard of hearing community include:

An Arizona Wal-Mart Store refused to hire two deaf individuals as stockers/receiving clerks because they were deaf. The P&A assisted these individuals in receiving a settlement. Wal-Mart subsequently hired more than five individuals who are deaf, one of whom is currently in a management level position. Wal-Mart has now added closed captioning to its training videos, has added ASL interpreters to its computer based training modules, and has created a detailed reasonable accommodation policy and procedure.

A deaf individual was involved in a two-car accident. The sheriff’s department came to the scene and began investigating the accident. During the course of their investigation, the officers interviewed the other driver, the driver’s minor child, and all other witnesses, all of whom can hear. However, the officers did not interview the deaf driver. The officers, without having interviewed the deaf driver, gave her a ticket. The ticket was later dismissed by a justice of the peace. At the hearing, the officer admitted he was unfamiliar with the requirements of the ADA. The P&A assisted the deaf driver in filing a discrimination suit which was settled on favorable terms.

A deaf woman stayed at a Howard Johnson in Arizona. The hotel failed to provide a TTY in her room, failed to provide a TTY at the front desk, and misrepresented the fact the hotel had a TTY. With the help of the Arizona P&A, the hotel entered into a settlement agreement whereby the hotel agreed, among other things, to pay monetary relief, purchase two TTYs for use in guest rooms, purchase and maintain a TTY at the front desk at all times, and implement an ADA training program for its employees.

The Arizona P&A assisted two deaf individuals file a lawsuit against Best Buy because its automated telephone application system was not accessible to people who use TTYs. The suit settled and required use of an accessible 800 system, steps to notify deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals of the new TTY accessible system, damages to these individuals, and allowing the P&A to monitor compliance with the settlement.

The Arizona P&A compelled the State and Governor to comply with the ADA’s self-assessment requirements. Arizona’s state agencies completed their self-evaluations and agreed with the Arizona P&A and the P&A’s clients to make all rest areas on interstate and state highways in Arizona accessible to individuals with disabilities, to install TTYs at all rest areas, and to make state-owned highway emergency call boxes accessible to and usable by individuals who are deaf (as well as others with disabilities).

A deaf student with emotional disabilities was a student at the state school for the deaf. The student’s education team determined he was not making enough progress and required a different, specialized placement in an environment capable of dealing with all of his disabling conditions, including an ASL environment. The school district disagreed with the education team’s findings and refused to change his placement but the Due Process Hearing Officer ruled against the school district. The P&A helped represent the student throughout a variety of appeals and eventually succeeded in requiring the school district to move the student to a residential treatment center for persons who are deaf which offer an ASL environment.¹