Is it ethical to use relatives as interpreters in healthcare?

On the face of it, it seems only too logical to use a family member to interpret when limited-English speakers use the NHS.  The family member knows their Wife/Granny/Son better than anyone, the cost to the Health Service is nil and their presence, and language skills, will only make the meeting go smoothly.

Well…no, actually.  Imagine you are on a family holiday in France; everyone goes along, parents, Aunts and Uncles and their children.  Suddenly your Mother falls ill.  Your 14 year-old nephew is with you and he speaks really good French, or so he says.  Still happy for him to interpret when your Mum sees the Physician?

Let’s leave aside the embarrassment that everyone will feel in this situation, let’s ignore the fact that your nephew probably won’t have a clue about the medical terms in English, never mind French, and let’s gloss over the probability that the extent of his French is asking the way to the beach and ordering food from a restaurant.

Why don’t we concentrate on the fact that the poor French physician can’t do his job properly because of the language barrier.  No-one knows if the right questions are being asked or if the answers are being given truthfully.  In this situation, relatives will almost always act as advocates for their sick Mum, changing the doctor’s questions to fit what their parent wants, or is prepared, to hear and subtly changing her answers so the Doctor is happy too.  No-one wins.

TRIBUNAL Climbie 1There are, of course, much more serious examples in the real world of why we should professional interpreters, such as the story of eight year-old Victoria Climbié, who moved from the Ivory Coast to the UK in 1998 – she was abused and murdered by her great Aunt and her partner in 2000.

Victoria was seen up to 40 times by social services, the police and the NHS, but the interpretation was done mainly through her great Aunt.

We can only imagine that the use of a professional interpreter may have changed the outcome for Victoria, but of course we will never know.

Since 2001, the amendment to the Race Relations Act has made it clear that no-one that uses public services can be disadvantaged because of their race, colour or creed.  Public bodies are now offering vastly-improved interpreting and translation facilities for their clients, and at Applied Language Solutions we are very proud to be part of that service.

Our Face-to-Face and Telephone interpreters support thousands of NHS assignments each month, ensuring that patients receive the treatment they deserve and that medical professionals can be certain their words are being interpreted faithfully and accurately by a language professional.

This actually saves the NHS huge sums of money and thousands of hours every year, because limited-English speakers can receive the world class medical care that we all expect from our NHS in a timely and efficient manner.

Better services and money saved?  Some good news for the public sector at last, especially as there’s a General Election looming in May and budgets could get tighter  – whoever wins.

One comment

  1. I never paid much head to translations. This is the first piece that I have read equating translations with potential interventions. The case of Victoria Climbie was tragic. Excellent post with some sound reasoning.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*