NHS ‘routinely failing' deaf patients in England, report finds
Deaf patients face systemic discrimination when it comes to learning about their own health due to NHS failings, with some not understanding that they might have a terminal illness, according to a damning report.
The study by the Royal National Institute for Deaf People (RNID) accuses the NHS of 'routinely failing' deaf people.
A survey of more than 1,000 people in England who are deaf or have hearing loss found that almost one in 10 had avoided calling an ambulance or attending A&E due to their disability, and a quarter had avoided seeking help for a new health concern.
The survey also found that about half of sign language users reported not having understood their diagnosis, or how their treatment worked. NHS staff said a lack of training, time and a poor IT system were major factors in being unable to provide these accessibility requirements for deaf people.
The report also highlights instances of deaf people receiving particularly poor NHS care. In one instance, a woman was not provided with an interpreter, which meant she was unaware she had had a miscarriage.
Another example was a patient receiving no food or water during a hospital stay as they could not hear staff offering it to them.
Sharing her experiences as part of the report, Dr Natasha Wilcock, a deaf doctor who works in palliative care, said she had met patients who had been referred to palliative care services who, due to the lack of communication, did not understand they were dying and no longer receiving cancer treatment.
Last year the NHS was accused of 'dragging its feet' on bringing in new accessibility procedures, leading to disabled people routinely struggling to access healthcare and facing cancelled appointments.
Crystal Rolfe, the director of strategy at RNID, said: 'Imagine not being able to understand a cancer diagnosis, or having to rely on a family member to tell you that you're seriously ill or even dying. The horrifying truth is that too many deaf people in England today don't have to imagine it – it's happening to them in real life.
'The NHS is systematically discriminating against people who are deaf or have hearing loss: it's a national scandal. It is not acceptable that deaf people and those with hearing loss are being routinely failed by an NHS that neglects their communication needs. Lives are being put at risk because of communication barriers, delays and out-of-date systems that are not fit for purpose.
'The government needs to urgently address these issues, make staff training mandatory and overhaul current NHS systems, so that everyone can access their own health information in a way that makes sense – equal access to healthcare is a human right.'
Sign up to Headlines UK
Get the day's headlines and highlights emailed direct to you every morning
after newsletter promotion
Louise Ansari, chief executive at Healthwatch England, said: 'Everyone should receive healthcare in a format they can understand. People who have sensory impairments and learning disabilities have been waiting too long for the NHS to meet their communications needs, which are underpinned by the Equality Act.
'We have asked the government to strengthen legislation to ensure the NHS fully complies with the standard and we urge ministers to publicly confirm their commitment to address this important equality, safety, communication and patient experience issue.'
An NHS spokesperson said: 'The experiences mentioned in this report are shocking and unacceptable – all NHS services have a legal duty to provide clear and appropriate methods of communication to ensure that patients, including those with a sensory impairment such as hearing loss, and their families or carers can fully understand everything they need to about their treatment and care.
'NHS England is committed to meeting its responsibilities with the accessible information standard and will continue to support organisations to ensure it is implemented in a consistent way, including with the upcoming publication of a new patient safety framework highlighting the importance of ensuring people's communication support needs are met.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
25 minutes ago
- BBC News
Restrict shop-bought baby food, government tells parents
Parents should not rely on shop-bought baby food pouches as everyday meals, new government guidance is the first time the NHS website has published advice on commercial baby food, and follows an investigation by BBC Panorama which found baby food pouches from six leading UK brands failed to meet their key nutritional critical of the way companies market their products as healthy options, have welcomed the leading baby food pouches carry labels such as "perfectly balanced for growing babies" or "packed with goodness". 'It's about time' advice introduced The NHS Start For Life website, run by the Department of Health and Social Care, also now advises parents to check food labels and choose products with the least amount of sugar, and to not let babies or children suck directly from food pouches - which can increase their risk of tooth it also says they should not feed snacks to children under one. Baby food snacks - such as puffs and sticks - have grown in popularity in recent weaning expert and author Charlotte Stirling-Reed told the BBC it was "about time that this was addressed... because food pouches and commercial baby foods are used so much by parents. It was a real gap in the NHS advice until now."Dr Vicky Sibson, director of the charity First Steps Nutrition Trust which campaigns for improvements in shop-bought baby foods, told the BBC that without clear advice it can be "confusing for parents" when they see shop-bought products marketed as being "just as good" as homemade foods. In April, BBC Panorama looked at the baby food pouches of six leading companies. The products have become a staple for many households with babies and children up to the age of two or three. They are convenient and have long shelf experts believe the products should only be used sparingly, are not replacements for homemade meals, and can cause children health problems if used as their main source of this was put to some of the leading brands, the market leader Ella's Kitchen told the BBC it agreed with all three other brands featured in the investigation – Heinz, Piccolo, Little Freddie, Aldi and Lidl - said their products were intended as a complementary part of a child's varied weaning NHS Start For Life website also now states that parents should wait until their baby is around six months old before feeding them solid foods, even if labels say the products are suitable from four among the brands investigated by Panorama, the companies Piccolo, Ella's Kitchen and Aldi promote their fruit-based pouches to babies as young as four months, despite the NHS and World Health Organization saying babies should not be given solid food until about the age of six Panorama began its investigation, all three companies said they are rebranding their products as suitable from six months. Baby food regulations 'need updating' Dr Sibson believes the government should now look to introduce stronger mandatory regulations for companies producing commercial baby foods to improve the suitability of the products for young children and regulate how they are marketed to Department of Health and Social Care told the BBC "current laws already set strong standards for baby food and we support action against any products that don't meet them".The British Retail Consortium says companies "take great care to optimise the nutritional composition of these products. All products are clearly labelled so parents can make informed decisions when feeding their baby."
Daily Mail
33 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
RICHARD LITTLEJOHN: How dare the far-Left ideologues who run our health service visit their class-war bigotry on sick children
How often have you heard the Left scaremongering about the imminent privatisation of the NHS, warning of patients being turned away from hospitals and GP surgeries because they can't afford to pay? At every election I can remember they have disingenuously raised the spectre of people dying in agony because the Tories, and now Reform, were planning to scrap the 'free-at-the-point-of-use' principle which underpins the health service.
BBC News
41 minutes ago
- BBC News
Canterbury GP's genital exams 'unnecessary', court hears
A former GP conducted "unnecessary" genital examinations on nine male patients, including young teenagers, a court has Manson, 56, is alleged to have carried out the exams for complaints including coughs, headaches and knee accusers said they did not recall him wearing gloves, offering a chaperone or giving "proper explanations" for the examinations before they took at Canterbury Crown Court on Monday, Dr Manson, of Tower Way, Canterbury, denied 18 offences of sexual assault and six of indecent assault. The court heard that Dr Manson worked as a GP between 1994 and 2017, along with working as a GP trainer and programme director of GP training, and as a GP appraiser for the General Medical first complaint of sexual assault against him was filed to Canterbury Police in 2017, followed by an NHS England exercise which saw more alleged victims come a police interview, he said he had never touched a patient for improper or sexual purposes and said every examination was conducted for justified medical reasons, the court was Jennifer Knight KC told jurors Manson also failed to document in patients' notes any potential findings or the the fact such examinations had taken place at all. The first two alleged victims were brothers and both saw Manson before and after they were 16, the court said they were told to pull down their trousers and boxer shorts during a number of Knight said that the elder brother initially "assumed" this was necessary but had gradually become "uncomfortable".Their mother told investigators she never met Dr Manson when her sons were young teenagers as she would always stay in the waiting room, the court heard. Another alleged victim saw Dr Manson twice in 1999 when he was 35 and then 12 years later in 2011, each time with abdominal all three occasions, a genital examination was undertaken and, on both occasions in 1999, his underwear was removed without consent, the court Manson told police this had been necessary to check lymph nodes and femoral pulses in the victim's groin area. However, Ian Wall, a forensic medicine professor and GP, noted there would be no reason to do this, especially without trial continues.
