Revises provisions relating to services to persons who are deaf or hard of hearing. (BDR 40-841)
The bill significantly modifies existing state laws regarding healthcare communication, requiring health facilities and providers to proactively inform deaf or hard of hearing patients about their rights to request assistance from sign language interpreters. Facilities must make good faith efforts to secure in-person interpreters while also providing remote options when necessary. Additionally, the Department of Health and Human Services is tasked with maintaining a directory of facilities offering specialized services to the deaf and hard of hearing, promoting compliance among providers across Nevada.
Assembly Bill 395 aims to enhance services to persons who are deaf or hard of hearing by mandating that certain health facilities and healthcare providers ensure the availability of qualified sign language interpreters. This legislation is focused on improving communication and access to healthcare services, particularly for communities in counties with populations over 20,000. The bill outlines the procedures for notifying patients about interpreter availability and specifies the conditions under which remote interpreter services may be provided.
The reception of AB395 appears to be largely positive, with support from advocates for the deaf community who see this as a step towards ensuring equal access to healthcare. Concerns may arise, however, regarding the logistics of implementation, particularly the availability of qualified interpreters and the potential financial burden on healthcare facilities. Supporters praise the bill for addressing long-standing gaps in healthcare accessibility for individuals with hearing impairments.
Notable points of contention include the appropriateness and feasibility of the requirements set forth in the bill, especially related to staffing and resource allocation within healthcare facilities. Some stakeholders may express apprehension about the financial implications for healthcare providers required to comply with the new regulations, potentially leading to debates about funding and resources for effective implementation. There may also be concerns on how strictly the state will enforce the regulations and the potential consequences for non-compliance.