HOH Interpreters & Deaf clients

Byrdie714 · 07-30-2008, 01:10 PM

A respectable member of AD pose this question on another thread and its a good question.

Whose rights under ADA is beng violated? The HOH interpreter who has the right to work? Or the deaf consumer?

jillio · 07-30-2008, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byrdie714

A respectable member of AD pose this question on another thread and its a good question.

Whose rights under ADA is beng violated? The HOH interpreter who has the right to work? Or the deaf consumer?

Under the ADA as currently written, both are protected, and therefore, it could be a violation of the rights of both. An HOH terp definately has the right to work without thread of discrimination based on their HOH status, only if they are capable of performing all of the requirements of the job with or without accommodation. That holds true for all disabilities.

shel90 · 07-30-2008, 04:12 PM

That would make for a very sticky situation!

deafbajagal · 07-30-2008, 04:41 PM

At the same time, the consumer has the right to an interpreter who is qualified (and certified) with the assurance that the job can be performed.

deafbajagal · 07-30-2008, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Under the ADA as currently written, both are protected, and therefore, it could be a violation of the rights of both. An HOH terp definately has the right to work without thread of discrimination based on their HOH status, only if they are capable of performing all of the requirements of the job with or without accommodation. That holds true for all disabilities.

New question: How do we know if they can perform the job? Certification is usually granted in a testing environment (not based on real life observations of how the interpreters do in various settings).

Byrdie714 · 07-30-2008, 06:05 PM

And just because one is certified doesn't necessairly mean they are qualified and vice versa......

jillio · 07-30-2008, 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deafbajagal

At the same time, the consumer has the right to an interpreter who is qualified (and certified) with the assurance that the job can be performed.

Absolutely. And part of qualified would being able to perform the essential functions of the job. I think that is the wording a case like that would be decided on. If the HOH terp can perform all of the essential functions of the job, then they would fall into the "qualified" category, and the deaf individual's rights would not be violated at that point. But I am just brainstorming here based on my experience of the way the ADA is often interpreted. It would be interesting to see such a case decided.

jillio · 07-30-2008, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deafbajagal

New question: How do we know if they can perform the job? Certification is usually granted in a testing environment (not based on real life observations of how the interpreters do in various settings).

I would say observation under internship by a certified, qualified terp. It would provide information on their skills in real life situations. Quite frankly, I think a period of internship would be a good idea for all terps coming into the field.

HoHGuyOhio · 07-30-2008, 10:35 PM

SERIOUSLY?

I can't believe this would ever come up in any reality that I participate in routinely.

jillio · 07-30-2008, 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoHGuyOhio

SERIOUSLY?

I can't believe this would ever come up in any reality that I participate in routinely.

Its a hypothetical discussion.

HoHGuyOhio · 07-30-2008, 10:57 PM

What's been stated is correct. If an interpreter can perform the essential duties of his/her job with or without an accommodation (hearing aids are not considered an accommodation, they are personal use items) then s/he has the right to do the job without discrimination on the basis of his/her "disability."

Personally, my hearing aids are much like my contacts with regards to how I use them. Both my contacts and my hearing aids move my impaired senses to within normal limits.

And since we're asking "hypothetical" questions, why would you have doubts about a HOH interpreter but not one who wears eyeglasses? Acute vision is important if an interpreter is going to be able to understand a deaf person signing. But the doubt has been cast on HOH interpreters and not visually impaired interpreters.

I'll take internalized self-hatred for $500, Alex.

AlleyCat · 07-31-2008, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoHGuyOhio

What's been stated is correct. If an interpreter can perform the essential duties of his/her job with or without an accommodation (hearing aids are not considered an accommodation, they are personal use items) then s/he has the right to do the job without discrimination on the basis of his/her "disability."

Is that an actual statement in disability law? I don't know so that's why I am asking -- I'm not being sarcastic here. I just have never thought of my hearing aids as a personal-use item, but as an accommodation for my hearing loss.

Etoile · 07-31-2008, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlleyCat

Is that an actual statement in disability law? I don't know so that's why I am asking -- I'm not being sarcastic here. I just have never thought of my hearing aids as a personal-use item, but as an accommodation for my hearing loss.

My take on it is that hearing aids are personal property, not something an employer or other entity does to accommodate you. Providing a ramp, hiring interpreters, offering a space for a service dog to potty, getting a magnifying machine or dictation software...those are accommodations, things they do. Allowing you to wear hearing aids might be considered an accommodation, but the hearing aids themselves seem like they would indeed be a personal item.

jillio · 07-31-2008, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoHGuyOhio

What's been stated is correct. If an interpreter can perform the essential duties of his/her job with or without an accommodation (hearing aids are not considered an accommodation, they are personal use items) then s/he has the right to do the job without discrimination on the basis of his/her "disability."

Personally, my hearing aids are much like my contacts with regards to how I use them. Both my contacts and my hearing aids move my impaired senses to within normal limits.

And since we're asking "hypothetical" questions, why would you have doubts about a HOH interpreter but not one who wears eyeglasses? Acute vision is important if an interpreter is going to be able to understand a deaf person signing. But the doubt has been cast on HOH interpreters and not visually impaired interpreters.
I'll take internalized self-hatred for $500, Alex.

That's a very valid question.

jillio · 07-31-2008, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlleyCat

Is that an actual statement in disability law? I don't know so that's why I am asking -- I'm not being sarcastic here. I just have never thought of my hearing aids as a personal-use item, but as an accommodation for my hearing loss.

They would be an accommodation only if the business, school, organization, etc. with which you are communicating, employed, or attending for educational purposes provided such for you in order for you to perform essential functions in that environment.

AlleyCat · 07-31-2008, 03:58 PM

Thanks, guys. I did need that explanation to understand the difference between accommodation and personal use. So when one of my former employers purchased a TTY for me at work many years ago, they were providing me with an accommodation. That's a good way for me to understand it.

jillio · 07-31-2008, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlleyCat

Thanks, guys. I did need that explanation to understand the difference between accommodation and personal use. So when one of my former employers purchased a TTY for me at work many years ago, they were providing me with an accommodation. That's a good way for me to understand it.

Exactly. You have it down pat now.

Byrdie714 · 07-31-2008, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoHGuyOhio

What's been stated is correct. If an interpreter can perform the essential duties of his/her job with or without an accommodation (hearing aids are not considered an accommodation, they are personal use items) then s/he has the right to do the job without discrimination on the basis of his/her "disability."

Personally, my hearing aids are much like my contacts with regards to how I use them. Both my contacts and my hearing aids move my impaired senses to within normal limits.

And since we're asking "hypothetical" questions, why would you have doubts about a HOH interpreter but not one who wears eyeglasses? Acute vision is important if an interpreter is going to be able to understand a deaf person signing. But the doubt has been cast on HOH interpreters and not visually impaired interpreters.

I'll take internalized self-hatred for $500, Alex.

What is personal property of the said individual, Alex?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Etoile

My take on it is that hearing aids are personal property, not something an employer or other entity does to accommodate you. Providing a ramp, hiring interpreters, offering a space for a service dog to potty, getting a magnifying machine or dictation software...those are accommodations, things they do. Allowing you to wear hearing aids might be considered an accommodation, but the hearing aids themselves seem like they would indeed be a personal item.

HA's and eyeglasses would be considered personal property and accomodations even though they are accomodating the individual to bring their senses back within normal range.

Quote:

Absolutely. And part of qualified would being able to perform the essential functions of the job. I think that is the wording a case like that would be decided on. If the HOH terp can perform all of the essential functions of the job, then they would fall into the "qualified" category, and the deaf individual's rights would not be violated at that point. But I am just brainstorming here based on my experience of the way the ADA is often interpreted. It would be interesting to see such a case decided.

It would beinteresting to see how the comes about. I'm sure it will only be a matter of time.

No.....not me.

07-30-2008, 01:10 PM	#1 (permalink)
Byrdie714 Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 8,946	HOH Interpreters & Deaf clients A respectable member of AD pose this question on another thread and its a good question. Whose rights under ADA is beng violated? The HOH interpreter who has the right to work? Or the deaf consumer?

07-30-2008, 04:12 PM	#3 (permalink)
shel90 In a pink and black world Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: In the land of the free Posts: 23,974 Blog Entries: 3	That would make for a very sticky situation! __________________ Shel~ "A child educated only at school is an uneducated child." -George Santayana

07-30-2008, 10:35 PM	#9 (permalink)
HoHGuyOhio Certified Interpreter Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 185	SERIOUSLY? I can't believe this would ever come up in any reality that I participate in routinely. __________________ Chris Certified Interpreter NAD V, NIC Advanced

07-30-2008, 10:57 PM	#11 (permalink)
HoHGuyOhio Certified Interpreter Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 185	What's been stated is correct. If an interpreter can perform the essential duties of his/her job with or without an accommodation (hearing aids are not considered an accommodation, they are personal use items) then s/he has the right to do the job without discrimination on the basis of his/her "disability." Personally, my hearing aids are much like my contacts with regards to how I use them. Both my contacts and my hearing aids move my impaired senses to within normal limits. And since we're asking "hypothetical" questions, why would you have doubts about a HOH interpreter but not one who wears eyeglasses? Acute vision is important if an interpreter is going to be able to understand a deaf person signing. But the doubt has been cast on HOH interpreters and not visually impaired interpreters. I'll take internalized self-hatred for $500, Alex. __________________ Chris Certified Interpreter NAD V, NIC Advanced

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

07-30-2008, 04:41 PM	#4 (permalink)
deafbajagal Jasmine's Tiger "Lilly" Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: USA Posts: 2,634	At the same time, the consumer has the right to an interpreter who is qualified (and certified) with the assurance that the job can be performed.

07-30-2008, 06:05 PM	#6 (permalink)
Byrdie714 Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 8,946	And just because one is certified doesn't necessairly mean they are qualified and vice versa......

07-31-2008, 03:58 PM	#16 (permalink)
AlleyCat Chicken in a Cat Suit Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 2,736	Thanks, guys. I did need that explanation to understand the difference between accommodation and personal use. So when one of my former employers purchased a TTY for me at work many years ago, they were providing me with an accommodation. That's a good way for me to understand it.