Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2007;334:490 (10 March), doi:10.1136/bmj.39143.032801.1F
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Jones is correct that many people with limited English who seek NHS care are vulnerable, sick, and disempowered and have good reasons why they cannot immediately or easily learn English.1 Adams is also correct that providing a free translation service creates a perverse incentive for people to resist the social integration that could improve their health and wellbeing.2 But translating what is said is often the least problematic task faced by the professional interpreter, whose multiple (and inherently conflicting) roles also include those of advocate, cultural adviser, negotiator, broker of trust, professional friend, teacher, taxi service, and citizens advice bureau.345 Translation without careful attention to the patient's health literacy, receptiveness, and personal priorities (for right of residence, housing, and so on) may erode rather than enhance doctor-patient communication.45
Before we all lock horns over "paying for translation," let us shift the debate to more fruitful territory. I propose we start
Trisha Greenhalgh, professor of primary health care
University College London, London N19 5LW
p.greenhalgh@pcps.ucl.ac.uk
What can you learn from this BMJ paper? Read Leanne Tite's Paper+