Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to highlight that the lack of a specific right to a medical translator under International Law can be considered an outlier when viewed within the context of the copious legislation regarding translation in general. Given the lack of specific legislation guaranteeing the right to a medical translator under International Law, the paper further aims to highlight the resulting effects on medical providers and patients.
Design/methodology/approach
The paper opted for a detailed historical legal analysis regarding the history of translation under International Law in general, as well as specific international, intranational, and regional legislation regarding the right to a translator in medical settings. The data were complemented by a thorough review of documentary analysis of existing scholarship, detailing the experiences of medical providers and patients.
Findings
The paper provides insights as to how international legislators have traditionally viewed medical translation: whether as a matter of international relations, access to care, discrimination, or as a fundamental part of the Right to Health. The paper finds that differing views on the subject have result in nations, regions, and medical providers having great discretion in deciding which patients are provided with a translator. The paper finds that such decisions are often made on a basis other than that of patient health.
Research limitations/implications
Because the provisioning of translators in medical settings currently inevitably falls to a nation or single institution, research into which patients receive a translator and why lacks generalizability (because empirical data are not available for every region of the world). Researchers in future are encouraged to further develop the empirical evidence found in their regions with a more quantitative approach, documenting the non-provisioning of translators in their areas and categorizing the motives behind the decisions of medical providers in a given area.
Practical implications
The paper includes implications for patients who have suffered adverse events after miscommunication (or lack of communication) with their medical providers. The paper aims to investigate in what venue may they seek legal remedy, and on what grounds. The paper also has implications for national and regional governments. Given the lack of binding International Law regarding medical translation, national and regional governments attempt to guarantee the provisioning of translators to some patients and not others. Such decisions may become political and have unintended consequences for medical providers and patients alike.
Social implications
The paper includes implications for international legislators and national legislators. The paper also includes implications for medical providers and patients, as language barriers are becoming a more common feature in medical facilities around the world due to globalization and migration. The rate of patients suffering adverse events after not being provided with a competent medical interpreter is bound to rise.
Originality/value
This paper fulfills a need to examine medical translation in the context of other types of translation under International Law. This paper fulfills a need to study how the lack of specific International Legislation guaranteeing the right to medical translation has implications for national/regional legislators, medical providers, and patients alike. This paper fulfills a need to discuss the legal remedies available to patients who have suffered adverse medical events after not being able to communicate with their medical provider.
Explicitation in Medical Translation: A Corpus Study
