Nevada registry clarifies requirements for certified and registered sign language interpreters

In a recent meeting of the Assembly Committee on Health and Human Services, critical discussions unfolded regarding access to interpreting services and the qualifications of interpreters in Nevada. The atmosphere was charged with a sense of urgency as committee members sought to address the needs of individuals requiring assistance in communication, particularly those who rely on American Sign Language (ASL).

Ricky Rupp, a key participant in the discussion, raised an important question about how small ophthalmology providers could gain access to necessary devices for their patients. The response highlighted a significant challenge: while there is a federal mandate under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) ensuring access for all individuals, the mechanisms for providing such access in practice remain complex. Rupp emphasized the need for solutions that would allow providers to better serve their patients, noting that ASL is a distinct language that requires appropriate resources for effective communication.

The conversation then shifted to the qualifications of interpreters in Nevada. Adrian Navarro clarified the difference between certified and registered interpreters, explaining that not all registered interpreters hold certification. This distinction is crucial, especially in medical settings where the need for qualified interpreters is paramount. Assemblymember Gray raised concerns about the implications of using interpreters without medical certification, underscoring the potential for confusion and miscommunication in healthcare environments.

Navarro further elaborated on the state's registry of interpreters, which serves as a consumer protection measure rather than a direct resource for healthcare providers. The registry ensures that individuals listed are qualified to provide interpreting services, but it does not facilitate direct contact between healthcare providers and interpreters. Instead, agencies typically mediate these interactions, leaving the decision to accept assignments up to the interpreters themselves.

As the meeting concluded, the committee members were left with a clearer understanding of the challenges and responsibilities surrounding interpreting services in Nevada. The discussions underscored the importance of ensuring that all individuals, regardless of their communication needs, have access to the services they require. With the ADA as a guiding principle, the committee expressed a commitment to exploring ways to enhance access and support for both providers and patients in the state.