Can you hear me now? No...

[codeman38]

(cross-posted to gimp_vent)

Is it just me, or do phone companies make it as hard as possible to get a smartphone on a data-only plan-- at least now that the Sidekick, what I'm using currently on a grandfathered plan, seems to be dead and gone?

Seriously. The whole reason I want a data-centric phone to begin with? Because I can't hear well on the phone. In any given month, I usually don't use more than 100 minutes of talk time because phone calls are so stressful; in most months, I don't even use 60.

Let's look at the options:

• AT&T: Not so bad when it comes to Windows Mobile phones and Blackberries, which actually surprises me quite a bit (though most of the options do seem to be postpaid and contract-based). But the iPhone, perhaps AT&T's most popular smartphone, actually requires filling out a form with documentation of disability. I do have a diagnosed auditory processing disorder, but it's quite a hassle for me to get to a counselor or medical professional who'd be able to actually sign off on the form. (Not to mention that this whole thing with requiring medical documentation cheeses me off as a fan of the social model of disability.)


• T-Mobile: Sidekick prepaid was wonderful... while it was still being sold. And again, Blackberry and WinMo aren't so bad-- if you're willing to go with a postpaid plan. There are flexpay (i.e., prepaid) plans available for WM/BB, but only if you're willing to add 500 voice minutes to the package. And as for any phones running the Android OS (G1, MyTouch, Cliq), there is literally no data-only option, despite several deaf people having complained.


• Sprint: Although there's nothing on their main site about this, they do have a backchannel data-only offering, and the price is quite good. Doesn't require documentation of disability, either; it's all on the honor system, which is also nice. However, it requires signing a 2-year contract; I'd prefer 1-year, even though that means the phone will be more expensive.


• Verizon: Oh, this one gets really weird. As of yesterday, it was possible to get a smartphone on a $55 data/text plan. But now that they've introduced two new Android phones, this has changed. Apparently now, this has to be activated in store, and "appropriate documentation may be required" (I hope this doesn't mean having to track down diagnosis docs like with AT&T!).
  

So, in other words: If you want a data-centric plan, better prepare to have a credit check and be billed on a postpaid basis, possibly with a 2-year contract required. And you may have to go see a doctor in the process to become eligible. If you want an off-contract option, don't expect to have a nice data-centric phone or a reasonably priced data plan.

Seriously, why aren't there more options for this? There are tons of options for voice plans, but very few choices for people who can't use voice services for whatever reason (or who use them so little as to not even hit 100 minutes in a month).


EDITED TO ADD: OK, I found out what Verizon requires on another page of their site, and it's just as I feared:

In order to establish your eligibility for the Blackberry or PDA Smartphone plan, please bring either (i) a letter indicating that you are hearing impaired on appropriate letter head from your audiologist, hearing health professional, speech or language therapist/specialist, physician, surgeon, vocational rehabilitation agency counselor, teacher or credentialed therapist; or (ii) your membership card for the National Association of the Deaf, Hearing Loss of America, AG Bell, Association of Late Deafened Adults, Telecommunications for the Deaf, Inc or other similar group.

So they *have* gone and done the same thing as AT&T. Grr. And I have to wonder whether they would consider my auditory processing disorder eligible or not. Not that it's not already a hassle to try to catch a bus to the necessary doctor's office to get the thing signed off on anyway-- though I suppose they might accept a letter from my GP. I also have to wonder how it'd apply to some of my autistic friends who are speech-impaired but not hearing-impaired...

Which, of course, just makes the subject line of this post just that much more appropriate...

Comments

[amadi]

Hmm, judging by the phone companies you have listed, I'm presuming that you're in the U.S. That leads me to consider, if they want a statement regarding your medical condition, are they willing to give you one attesting that everyone in their various offices and outlets has been trained with regard to HIPAA and federal privacy regulations regarding medical information and that their recordkeeping meets federal standards for the confidentiality of medical information?

I don't see how they can make a requirement that you give them federal protected information without responding in kind in that regard.

Someone with a better understanding of HIPAA than I might be able to find a hole in my thinking, but to me it's a glaring problem.

[kyrielle]

Sadly, HIPAA applies to health care providers, health plans/insurance, and health care data clearinghouses. It stipulates that they have to hold privacy since they're part of the process of providing the care.

Other parties that you authorize to be informed about your health are not bound by HIPAA, including your employer if they get health care information (for example to get medical leave or return to work after same).