yet another supposed anti-immigrant law passed by AZ


Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
New AZ law: Firms have no legal duty to have translators
PHOENIX - A Glendale optometrist's yearlong legal fight over what services he had to provide for a Spanish-speaking customer has translated into new protections for other businesses.

Gov. Jan Brewer has signed legislation affirming that nothing in state law requires businesses to provide "trained and competent" interpreters when a customer comes in speaking a language other than English.

Assistant Attorney General Michael Walker said that has probably always been the law. But that didn't save John Schrolucke from having to spend time and money defending himself and his practice before Walker's office finally dismissed the case.

Schrolucke told lawmakers the incident stems from a patient who spoke only Spanish. Although she did bring her 12-year-old child with her to the office, he said allowing the child to interpret for the parent would have gotten him into legal trouble.

He said he faced a potential malpractice lawsuit if the child did not properly translate some of the more technical explanations being provided, so he turned the woman away, telling her through her child to come back with someone at least 18 years old.

Schrolucke said he also gave the woman the option of going to one or two other optometrists who speak Spanish.

Instead, he said, the woman filed a discrimination complaint with the Attorney General's Office.

State law prohibits discrimination in places of "public accommodation," which include restaurants, hotels, theaters and any place that offers services or goods to the general public.
another step toward AZ as english only?

Secret Squirrel

There is no Justice!
Dec 21, 2004
Up sh*t creek, without a paddle
Srsly?? No...Really?? This is dumb. This is a non-issue.

I know that if I needed brain surgery for some reason, I DO NOT want someone with a southern drawl as my surgeon. I also don't want someone that only speaks Japanese that I need my 12 year old to translate for, as "my doctor" of any type. I guess the world encompasses all kinds...

This is dumb. Next plz.
Last edited:


Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
wanna learn how to drive? ask psp
learn how to get chicks? ask mushu

yeah, i see your point.


Texans fan - LOL
Aug 13, 2007
Another pausing point in my quest to wonder what life would be like without lawyers...


Turbo Monkey
Mar 18, 2002
G14 Classified
I'd vote this for worst lawsuit of the year, but Orly the Birther seems to have that one in the bag.

Discrimination? Nah. They'd have better luck attempting to sue under the ADA, claiming that a foreign tongue creates a disbability in America.


Harbinger of Doom
Oct 23, 2001
The optometrist actually had somewhat of a point in turning the lady away. Here's the AMA's stance on the issue:


The ADA does not mandate the use of interpreters in every instance. The health care professional can choose alternatives to interpreters as long as the result is effective communication. Alternatives to interpreters should be discussed with hearing impaired patients, especially those not aware that such alternatives are permissible under the Act. Acceptable alternatives may include: note taking; written materials; or, if viable, lip reading. A health care professional or facility is not required to provide an interpreter when:

- it would present an undue burden. An undue burden is a significant expense or difficulty to the operation of the facility. Factors courts use to determine whether providing an interpreter would present an undue burden include the practice or facility's operating income and eligibility for tax credits, and whether it has sources of outside funding or a parent company. Courts also consider the frequency of visits that would require the services of an interpreter. However, the single factor of the cost of an interpreter exceeding the cost of a medical consultation generally has not been found by the courts to be an undue burden.
- it would fundamentally alter the nature of the services normally provided. For example, in sensative situations, utilizing a family member as an interpreter, or an interpreter not affiliated with the practice or facility, may be inappropriate.

Where use of an interpreter would fundamentally alter the nature of the services provided or constitute an undue burden (difficult elements to prove in a court action), the physician permitted to refer the patient to another physician, if alternatives are not viable.
NB: Optometrists are not physicians and thus this AMA opinion doesn't directly affect them but the analogy is clear.


Business is good, thanks for asking
Jun 4, 2006
I have no idea where I am
I bet the optometrist routinely complains that illegals don't contribute to the local economy.

They come here and never purchase goods or services and they take all our jobs away...


Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
I bet the optometrist routinely complains that illegals don't contribute to the local economy.

They come here and never purchase goods or services and they take all our jobs away...
the stolen jobs are largely labor, primarily by latinos.
the far fewer number of available computing jobs are taken by asians/indians, who by their trade more often need corrected vision.

i think that's what his beef is, capitalist bastard that he is