Lawsuit Attacks Ga. Mental Health System; Could Cost Millions

[Beowulf]

Screw it, let the deaf suffer. They are expendable. :roll:

 

[Reba]

Screw it, let the deaf suffer. They are expendable. :roll:

No, that's not right.

I'm just saying that it's too bad a lawsuit seems to be the only solution presented.

 

[Beowulf]

Ah, I checked the second link and got my answer.

"The lawsuit claims the state needs to hire more counselors trained in sign language and devote more funding for group homes for hundreds of deaf residents in need of specialized mental health care."

Is this realistic? I can see where counselors trained in sign language would be useful, but need this be a requirement? I have always used interpreters in my many many counseling sessions.

 

[Foxrac]

Time for state of Georgia to learn the lesson from lawsuits.

 

[Reba]

Is this realistic? I can see where counselors trained in sign language would be useful, but need this be a requirement? I have always used interpreters in my many many counseling sessions.

I don't see anything wrong with using interpreters but apparently some people prefer signing counselors.

ASL fluent counselors are a great idea but like you said, is it realistic? There are some around but probably not enough to satisfy the need. What if all deaf patients/clients are assigned to the signing counselor only, even if a non-signing counselor is a better fit for their needs? Will they be stuck with the signing counselor just because he or she signs?

I hope they don't mean signing counselors will be a requirement but will be an option in addition to interpreters.

 

[Reba]

Time for state of Georgia to learn the lesson from lawsuits.

Yes, Georgia needs to get with the program but it's too bad the people of Georgia might end up paying for that lesson. (I mean paying beyond the actual costs of providing terps and signing counselors.)

 

[jillio]

It doesn't seem like that would cost millions.

Another media exaggeration. Gets that, "Why should my taxes go to pay for someone else's mental health care" reaction. All about politics.

 

[jillio]

Is this realistic? I can see where counselors trained in sign language would be useful, but need this be a requirement? I have always used interpreters in my many many counseling sessions.

It would depend on the number of deaf using mental health services. Just like with the group homes; if there is a large population needing these services, then it is realistic. But for all areas, no.

Additionally, a counselor that signs and specializes in deaf mental health care can also provide other services: case management and mental health care to hearing clients, as well. They can also provide advocacy services. In that way, it becomes more cost efficient for the center employing them.

In the case of deaf mental health care consumers being few and far between, a terp is the most logical way to go.

 

[jillio]

I don't see anything wrong with using interpreters but apparently some people prefer signing counselors.

ASL fluent counselors are a great idea but like you said, is it realistic? There are some around but probably not enough to satisfy the need. What if all deaf patients/clients are assigned to the signing counselor only, even if a non-signing counselor is a better fit for their needs? Will they be stuck with the signing counselor just because he or she signs?

I hope they don't mean signing counselors will be a requirement but will be an option in addition to interpreters.

Many people aren't trusting of confidentiality being observed in the strictest sense when a terp is used. Some very, very personal and often traumatic information comes out in session. It is hard enough to discuss this without a third person being present. I can see it from both sides. While I know that terps are under the same confidentiality restrictions in this case as the counselor is, I can also see the problems with trust. It is often difficult for any client to get to the point where they have a therapeutic level of trust in the counselor alone, let alone adding someone else to the mix.

 

[jillio]

Yes, Georgia needs to get with the program but it's too bad the people of Georgia might end up paying for that lesson. (I mean paying beyond the actual costs of providing terps and signing counselors.)

If these are state run facilities under the auspices of the state mental health dept., then they are run using state funding. Often, this is the only place those most in need of mental health care can receive services.

 

[Reba]

Many people aren't trusting of confidentiality being observed in the strictest sense when a terp is used. Some very, very personal and often traumatic information comes out in session. It is hard enough to discuss this without a third person being present. I can see it from both sides. While I know that terps are under the same confidentiality restrictions in this case as the counselor is, I can also see the problems with trust. It is often difficult for any client to get to the point where they have a therapeutic level of trust in the counselor alone, let alone adding someone else to the mix.

That's why I would like to see it as an option for those who desire it.

 

[jillio]

"According to the lawsuit, Georgia lacks therapists and counselors who speak American Sign Language. Communication is usually through hand interpreters, but third-hand communication doesn’t work well when it comes to psychiatry."
Interesting.

(I'll call myself a "hand" interpreter now. )

Seriously. Does that mean they aren't requesting interpreters but ASL signing psychiatrists?

"Since there are no group homes for the deaf mentally ill, Belton had to buy one for her daughter with her own money. Even with that home, she had trouble finding anyone trained to staff it."
Wow!

Psychiatrists rarely provide therapy these days. They are most often in collaboration with a LPC or a psychologist who provides the therapy, and they provide medications. In the case of a mentally ill consumer who does not have a disorder that requires medication, a psychiatrist is not involved at all.

 

[jillio]

Increased premiums and canceled policies come to mind.

We aren't talking about health care insurance. We are talking liability insurance the hospital is required to carry.

 

[jillio]

That's why I would like to see it as an option for those who desire it.

There is nothing to prevent it being an option. This lawsuit is about the availability of the option.

 

[Reba]

We aren't talking about health care insurance. We are talking liability insurance the hospital is required to carry.

Yes, I know. But the increase costs of the liability insurance will be passed on in the form of increased fees for the consumers, and increased taxes to pay for state's increased liability insurance premiums.

 

[jillio]

Oh great insurance will cover it...... No drawbacks to that. :roll:

So, you are saying that deaf residents of Georgia who need mental health care and use a state facility to receive it should not have the same access to therapy that a hearing person has? Nice.

 

[jillio]

Yes, I know. But the increase costs of the liability insurance will be passed on in the form of increased fees for the consumers, and increased taxes to pay for state's increased liability insurance premiums.

But not premium increases and cancelled policies for the consumer. Just like increases in my malpractice premiums are not passed to members of the same companies PPO.

 

[Reba]

There is nothing to prevent it being an option. This lawsuit is about the availability of the option.

I was responding to Beowulf's question about using terps. I said make it an option as opposed to making it a requirement. That is, allow for signing counselors AND interpreters. For that matter, allow for any other options that a client might prefer (for non-signing deaf/hoh clients).

 

[Foxrac]

Yes, Georgia needs to get with the program but it's too bad the people of Georgia might end up paying for that lesson. (I mean paying beyond the actual costs of providing terps and signing counselors.)

Well, there is election and people of Georgia can vote irresponsible and mishandling politicians out and replace with more common sense politicians and know how to avoid lawsuit as possible.

In Alabama, you can request the ASL interpreter at state hospital, no problem for deaf people.

 

[Reba]

But not premium increases and cancelled policies for the consumer. Just like increases in my malpractice premiums are not passed to members of the same companies PPO.

No. The premium increases for the state hospitals will mean they will have to either increase their fees for their services, or the taxpayers will have to pay to make up the difference. If policies are canceled, then clinics will close, and then there will be even fewer resources available to those who need them.

Sometimes lawsuits can backfire, and people need to be aware of that possibility.