As if professors in the various ethnic studies departments in our universities did not have enough to keep them busy teaching victimology 1A to unsuspecting students, now they are turning out those with Masters and Doctors degrees whose theses and dissertations provide racially charged pablum for the newspapers.
In advocating more medical interpreters for Mexican patients on the dole, such "experts" from academia's growth industry allege that doctors on average spend far less time with Hispanics than with white counterparts. ( I don't now about you but my appointment with a specialist rarely lasts more that 30 seconds; it's hardly worth the trip.) Again the methodology was never exactly specified. (What constituted "Hispanic"-- one-quarter, one-half, three-quarters Mexican ancestry? Who and how many doctors or patients were interviewed, what were they asked and what objective standard was used to judge the results?) This is the quality of the scholarship coming out of the ethnic studies departments. No wonder they give social science a bad name.
But all this begs some even more important but unpleasant questions: Why should American doctors hire interpreters for patients inside America? Why does the Hispanic community not insist on more English immersion programs t ensure that the sick are able to communicate effectively and at length with doctors? Why do not children or relatives who speak English interpret for patients instead of costly state translators? Is this a distinctly American problem? Would the Mexican government worry much that Americans in Mexico did not understand Spanish--and therefore got shorter shrift from doctors-- when they visited Mexican hospitals? And finally, what about patient responsibility? Can one expect wholly satisfactory medical care if one refuses to take some responsibility themselves or, through relatives, to ask the right questions and insist on answers?
3 comments:
But all this begs some even more important but unpleasant questions: Why should American doctors hire interpreters for patients inside America?
In order for the US's policy of having an open labor market to be successful.
There's an old capitalist saying, "You get what you pay for." Doesn't his apply to medical care to some extent at least? Do you think a Medicare patient gets the same time of day a fully-insured worker does? The answer is to make interpreters billable to health care users or their employers or both.
"In order for the US's policy of having an open labor market to be successful."
But that is the unwritten policy of the U.S. not the policy of individual doctors or the AMA or other private citizens. The challenge is to bring the government into congruence with the will of the people on this and many other issues. Too bad most voters are ideologues who vote the party line even when the candidates record is inconsistent with their own point of view. Simply illustrates that representative government is really not very representative. Those in political office merely vote in whatever way will get them the most or largest campaign contributions. This may not be the Mexican style of corruption but is is certainly a corruption of the democratic process.
Perhaps this example of interpreters is a good one to illustrate the divide between the public and the congress.
Post a Comment