How do you feel about Terps

[Reba]

The only thing I can say that is the terps have their own choices. Whether they want to become part of the VRS system or not. If they do thats fine by me. ...

I've noticed that some terps prefer video interpreting, and some hate it. Some people are just more suited for different kinds of interpreting; it's not "one size fits all".

The important thing is that the right terp is in the right job; that works best for everyone involved.

 

[Reba]

Recently not that long ago I called to VRS on emergency, terp misunderstand what I said...

I'm sorry that you had such a bad experience, especially in an emergency situation.

Then why do we continue have terps all along life for half century? We need to change for the better to use by Hi-Tech Textcaption Translator.

That works for some people, especially those with good English reading and writing skills and an extensive English vocabulary, in a static setting. But that doesn't cover every situation for every person.

 

[Etoile]

That works for some people, especially those with good English reading and writing skills and an extensive English vocabulary, in a static setting. But that doesn't cover every situation for every person.

That's an excellent point. CART is great in some situations, like classroom, lecture, courtroom - but a lot of the time it wouldn't work. For one thing, it's only one-way...how would the Deaf person talk to the hearing person? And like Reba mentioned, it only works if the Deaf person has very good English skills. I think there is a reason why so many Deaf people are embracing VRS over regular text relay. TTYs are being forgotten now, we have software like NexTel and things like Internet IP relay, but still many Deaf people would rather use a VRS interpreter than a text relay service. I think it is the same for real-time situations too.

 

[Gemtun]

Let's face it - I have a love/hate relationship with interpreters.

I am a very ethical person so it infurates me whenever I come across an unethical interpreter.

But I know many interpreters are wonderful - it is just that some come across as too patronizing.

I love working with interpreters who are ethical, honest, and non-patronizing.

It boils down to the individual, not the interpreter label. Hence if someone asks me how I feel about interpreters, I simply say it depends on WHO the person is. I hate to lump all interpreters into one pile - each one is unique.

I had a WONDERFUL interpreter interpreting for me today during a training session. I wish that there are more clones of him. I hate losing my control to these interpreters who tries hard to patronize me. It is a power struggle sometimes but overall, there are more good experiences than bad experiences.

 

[Calphool]

Let's face it - I have a love/hate relationship with interpreters.

I am a very ethical person so it infurates me whenever I come across an unethical interpreter.

But I know many interpreters are wonderful - it is just that some come across as too patronizing.

I love working with interpreters who are ethical, honest, and non-patronizing.

It boils down to the individual, not the interpreter label. Hence if someone asks me how I feel about interpreters, I simply say it depends on WHO the person is. I hate to lump all interpreters into one pile - each one is unique.

I had a WONDERFUL interpreter interpreting for me today during a training session. I wish that there are more clones of him. I hate losing my control to these interpreters who tries hard to patronize me. It is a power struggle sometimes but overall, there are more good experiences than bad experiences.

This is a really interesting discussion to me. My wife has been signing for about a year, and she's toyed around with the idea of becoming a terp, but right now she's just doing it for enjoyment and for practice -- signing songs at church, signing the sermon as best she can, and so on.

I keep seeing this "ethics" concept bubbling up. I'm trying to figure out what the "ethical" situations would be. I mean, do some terps sign things wrong intentionally? Aren't they supposed to be a kind of passive instrument in the converstation? The only ethical dilema that I can think of would be if you had an interpretter that wouldn't keep interpretting sessions private, or intentionally misinterpretted something.

What are some other examples of unethical behavior that a terp could commit?

Also, regarding the idea that some terps might sometimes be patronizing: can someone give me an example of a behavior that you would consider patronizing? Given that the service a terp performs is ideally translating sound into movement and back, I'm trying to figure out what a terp would do that would seem patronizing. Like... would a patronizing terp sign things too explicitely or something? Or, repeat themselves a lot? What?

Thanks everyone, this is an interesting discussion!

--Cal

 

[Interpretrator]

The only ethical dilema that I can think of would be if you had an interpretter that wouldn't keep interpretting sessions private, or intentionally misinterpretted something.

Those are two MAJOR ethical blunders, but there are many, many, many, many more ethical dilemmas interpreters find themselves in! (Can I get an "amen"?) Along with the ones you mentioned, refusing to interpret something for personal reasons and adding personal commentary to the interpretation are giant no-nos.

Here's a link to RID's Code of Ethics:

RID's Code of Ethics

I also remember reading, quite some time ago, a list of many ethical dilemmas that interpreters face. I can't remember if it was a book by itself or if it was part of another book. A quick search on Amazon and Harris doesn't turn anything up...other terps? Do you know what I'm talking about? It was extremely thought-provoking.

Also, regarding the idea that some terps might sometimes be patronizing: can someone give me an example of a behavior that you would consider patronizing?

A patronizing interpreter will do everything for the deaf person instead of letting him or her do it himself. As in "Oh, I'll just talk to the teacher about this problem the deaf student is having" instead of empowering the student to do it himself. Or let's say the deaf client notices people laughing, perhaps about a funny noise in the room, and when they ask about it responding "It's not important" or something similarly dismissive. Perhaps the client is more interested in what took place there than in what is supposedly the "important" part being interpreted -- it's usually not the terp's place to decide for the client what is important and what isn't. (There are exceptions, of course!)

This is just off the top of my head but I think any interpreter here could write a book about behaving ethically and not being patronizing, including chapters on things we're seen our colleagues do that make us cringe. Not to mention chapters on things we've done ourselves and wished we could take back!

 

[Etoile]

I also remember reading, quite some time ago, a list of many ethical dilemmas that interpreters face. I can't remember if it was a book by itself or if it was part of another book. A quick search on Amazon and Harris doesn't turn anything up...other terps? Do you know what I'm talking about? It was extremely thought-provoking.

You might be thinking of Decisions? Decisions! which is a book. I've got it at home; I'll pull it out tonight and post some examples of ethical dilemmas.

 

[Calphool]

Those are two MAJOR ethical blunders, but there are many, many, many, many more ethical dilemmas interpreters find themselves in! (Can I get an "amen"?) Along with the ones you mentioned, refusing to interpret something for personal reasons and adding personal commentary to the interpretation are giant no-nos.

Here's a link to RID's Code of Ethics:

RID's Code of Ethics

I also remember reading, quite some time ago, a list of many ethical dilemmas that interpreters face. I can't remember if it was a book by itself or if it was part of another book. A quick search on Amazon and Harris doesn't turn anything up...other terps? Do you know what I'm talking about? It was extremely thought-provoking.


A patronizing interpreter will do everything for the deaf person instead of letting him or her do it himself. As in "Oh, I'll just talk to the teacher about this problem the deaf student is having" instead of empowering the student to do it himself. Or let's say the deaf client notices people laughing, perhaps about a funny noise in the room, and when they ask about it responding "It's not important" or something similarly dismissive. Perhaps the client is more interested in what took place there than in what is supposedly the "important" part being interpreted -- it's usually not the terp's place to decide for the client what is important and what isn't. (There are exceptions, of course!)

This is just off the top of my head but I think any interpreter here could write a book about behaving ethically and not being patronizing, including chapters on things we're seen our colleagues do that make us cringe. Not to mention chapters on things we've done ourselves and wished we could take back!

Ok. I understand now. My mental image of an interpretter was that they are kind of a passive instrument in the process, and perhaps ideally that's the case, but every situation would be different, wouldn't it? If you were interpretting for a student in a school situation, and the student wasn't being cooperative for some reason, as an interpreter you'd find yourself in a difficult situation. You could try to "speak for them", which would be ethically wrong, but might lead to some kind of resolution to the problem, or you could just sit there with the difficult student and do nothing, which would be ethically right, but difficult to do, given the desire to help, or to speed things along. I understand now.

Regarding "refusing to sign something for personal reasons", what if you had a client that was behaving irrationally--cursing and so on? Do you have an obligation to speak filth? Can you establish your boundaries up front with a client, to make sure to steer clear of such situations? It's probably rare, but that would be terrible to feel like you had an obligation to use vulgar language if you wouldn't use that language yourself!

One thing I've noticed as I've been learning ASL is that the language seems... hmmm... what's the word.... maybe... "direct" compared to spoken English. I suppose the mental process of converting spoken words into concepts that we do as hearing people probably has a kind of "dampening" effect that isn't there when you "see" your language. The eyes are faster than the ears! I've also noticed that if I sign for a few hours with my wife or with friends that my arms start to ache, so that probably also contributes to why ASL seems more direct. To use extra little superflous words like we do in English would wear your arms and hands out faster!

Does this "directness" also contribute to the dilemas you've mentioned, or am I reading too much into it? A hearing person that didn't understand this attribute of ASL might take this directness as offensive if you did a very straight interpretation. Or, do you try to compensate for the directness in some way (like mentally choosing a softer way of saying the same thing)? How far can you compensate before you're changing the intent of the signer?

This is a very interesting discussion to me.

 

[Lantana]

I have found, over the years that I dislike having terps that I socialize with. I do not want to know my interpreter well enough to consider them a FRIEND. I prefer someone whom I have never seen before, particularly socially. If you want to be an interpreter that is great, but have a social life AWAY from deafies.

I have had an interpreter come up to me at a party and ask me "What happened after that last appointment"? Things like this should be a No, No.

I have also seen interpreters who had too much to drink at a party and brought up things that were inappropriate.

That is why I feel as I do.

 

[Etoile]

Regarding "refusing to sign something for personal reasons", what if you had a client that was behaving irrationally--cursing and so on? Do you have an obligation to speak filth? Can you establish your boundaries up front with a client, to make sure to steer clear of such situations? It's probably rare, but that would be terrible to feel like you had an obligation to use vulgar language if you wouldn't use that language yourself!

It is rare, but it does happen. And yes, you have to say whatever they're saying - irrational or not, swear words or not, even if they're lying. The interpreter is required to say whatever the client says. You can't negotiate that kind of thing with the client up front - that's just one of the things you have to live with as an interpreter.

Does this "directness" also contribute to the dilemas you've mentioned, or am I reading too much into it? A hearing person that didn't understand this attribute of ASL might take this directness as offensive if you did a very straight interpretation. Or, do you try to compensate for the directness in some way (like mentally choosing a softer way of saying the same thing)? How far can you compensate before you're changing the intent of the signer?

You're right, ASL is considered much more direct than English. It's a part of Deaf culture, actually - Deaf people are often more blunt than hearing people. You are actually right about "compensating" - it's referred to as cultural mediation. You do choose words that fit better within hearing culture when you're voicing. It's a judgment call - sometimes it's more important to accurately convey the Deaf person's feelings than to "soften" the message for the hearing person.

 

[Etoile]

Here are some examples from Decisions? Decisions! -

You interpret for one Deaf student in a Grade 11 Biology class. The class has been going on for approximately six months. The teacher is well versed in the use of an interpreter and works well with the Deaf student. You have a good working relationship with the teacher. It happens one day that the class is doing a lab that absolutely necessitates working in partners. Students cannot work alone or in groups of three. For safety reasons, the teacher cannot be a partner to a student and must supervise the lab. The lab cannot be made up at another time because of scheduling and lack of resources. The Deaf student is left without a partner. The teacher asks you if you could partner with the student "just this one time, I know you aren't supposed to but I'm really stuck." What are the ethical issues here? What are your options? What would you do and why?

You are working with Dana, an interpreter in your community. You have done your prep work and both agreed that you would want feedback and notes and that your turns would be approximately 20 minutes in length. You have written encouraging and positive comments for your partner, along with a couple of linguistic questions. At the next spell off, Dana takes over at 15 minutes and you note there is nothing written on the notepad. After 20 minutes, you resume the working position, again having left a few notes for your partner. Once more, Dana takes over at 15 minutes and leaves no notes on the notepad for you. How do you feel? What are the ethical issues? What are your options? What will you do and why?

You interpret for a student in a college course. This is your first time to interpret for this student and for this instructor. The instructor gives students time during class to work on their assignments. The Deaf student isn't interested in using his/her time that way and tries to engage you in conversation every time this happens. You make your responses short and try to avoid visual contact with the student in hopes that he/she will focus on the assignment. Tonight the instructor sees the two of you signing and reprimands you in front of the class, "Please stop chatting with my student. You are preventing him/her from doing the work!" What are the ethical issues? What are your options? What will you do and why?

There are dozens more in the book, it's well worth the cost.

 

[Lantana]

I think there is a big misconception between ASL and Minimum language skills.

How many of you terps can interpret for MLS without a reverse interpreter?

 

[Interpretrator]

they are kind of a passive instrument in the process

We are active participants in the process of communicating language and culture. There used to be a trend towards the "machine model" of interpreting where we sit there and spit out language like a computer, but that's changed over the years to the idea that interpreters are cultural mediators.

or you could just sit there with the difficult student and do nothing, which would be ethically right, but difficult to do, given the desire to help, or to speed things along.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by your example. Whether the student is being difficult or not, I interpret the spoken language to him and his signed language to the hearing people. If he doesn't like the teacher then it's his responsibility to do something about it. That's where I don't "patronize."

An exception to this would be where misunderstandings arise due solely to language/cultural issues. Interpreters encounter situations where they are the only one in the interaction who can see why both the deaf and hearing clients are getting frustrated -- possibly due to cultural ignorance or the difference in languages. For example: a hearing teacher thinks a deaf student is ignoring her because she doesn't answer right away. What is really happening is that it's taking longer for me to interpret the utterance into ASL and the student hasn't received all the information yet. The teacher starts asking "Would you please answer me??" and the student gets upset because he hasn't even had a chance!

At this point I would "break role" and politely explain the misunderstanding (either speaking and signing at the same time, or doing one and then the other). Most people today agree this is an appropriate thing to do; some who still adhere to the machine model think otherwise. My belief is that the interaction should take place as though the interpreter were not there, and though usually that can happen without interference, sometimes the very act of interpretation means we encounter these roadblocks. WHen that happens I think it's our job to remove them.

Do you have an obligation to speak filth?

Yes.

It's probably rare, but that would be terrible to feel like you had an obligation to use vulgar language if you wouldn't use that language yourself!

Someone who has a problem with this likely shouldn't be an interpreter. You can do your best to pick and choose certain situations you know you should avoid, but you pretty much have to be ready to do and say almost anything, from cursing to dancing!

However, if you're in an ongoing situation that makes you uncomfortable, it is your right and your obligation to remove yourself. I knew a terp who was working in a classroom where during a discussion, a certain hearing student said horrible things about the ethnic group to which the terp began. She finished her assignment that day in a professional manner but immediately asked to be removed from the class. Those kinds of things will come up, but a certain flexibility and open-mindedness are important attributes for an interpreter.

A hearing person that didn't understand this attribute of ASL might take this directness as offensive if you did a very straight interpretation. Or, do you try to compensate for the directness in some way (like mentally choosing a softer way of saying the same thing)? How far can you compensate before you're changing the intent of the signer?

That is a good observation and a good question and something my fellow terps and I talk about a lot. "Intent" is the key word here. When a student in class tells the teacher "YOU WRONG," does he really mean to say "You're wrong!" or, if he were a hearing speaker familiar with the discourse community of the classroom, would he have said something like "I'm not sure I agree with that"? There is definitely some cultural mediation that has to take place but there's a fine line where you're putting words in the client's mouth. There's no easy answer!

Man, sorry this was so long.

 

[Interpretrator]

I have had an interpreter come up to me at a party and ask me "What happened after that last appointment"? Things like this should be a No, No.

Absolutely! That is horribly inappropriate.

One of my teachers gave an example of running into a client in a social situation. She had interpreted for this client at a medical appointment recently. When she saw the client, the first thing she said was "How are you? I haven't seen you in so long, what's new?" Basically signalling that the professional encounter would not be mentioned and confidentiality would be observed.

The only time I ever discuss assignment-related issues with a client is if the CLIENT brings it up first. For example, if I see a student outside the classroom and he tells me "Hey, I got an A on that test!" I will of course congratulate him. But I would never ask him what he got on the test first.

How many of you terps can interpret for MLS without a reverse interpreter?

Personally I haven't been in this situation. If I didn't feel that I had enough language skills to interpret, I would not accept the assignment. I don't believe that being able to interpret for MLS is a necessary requirement for all sign language interpreters; knowing how to work with CDIs should be, however.

EDIT: I have been in many situations where the student has learning or processing disorders that interfere with language reception or production, but I don't think they count as MLS. In these cases I just adapt my language to theirs and do as much as I can to make sure they're understanding (extra comprehension checks, etc.).

I think there is a big misconception between ASL and Minimum language skills.

I just reread this, and I think this is very widespread in the hearing community, but not necessarily among interpreters. I have had to explain to teachers that their student is perfectly capable of understanding language and what is being said to him -- just not in spoken English.

 

[signer16]

I have found, over the years that I dislike having terps that I socialize with. I do not want to know my interpreter well enough to consider them a FRIEND.

I totally, absolutely, 100% agree with you, and this is from a terp perspective. Interpreting for friends, especially outside of a very informal social situation, is tough. It's not comfortable, and brings up SO many ethical issues.

I prefer someone whom I have never seen before, particularly socially. If you want to be an interpreter that is great, but have a social life AWAY from deafies.

Here's where more of the issue comes up for me. First, it can help if the terp has seen you before, because you know each other's styles and preferences, hopefully. If you've seen them in a similar interpreting situation, it may make it much easier the second time, especially if they were good.
Secondly, if interpreters have a social life completely away from deafies, they are gonna losing something very important, their skills. You need interaction with the deaf community to be cultural aware, as well as aware of new signs, new styles...all of that. I understand your point but... interpreters need to have deaf friends and socialize with deaf people in order to become better interpreters. And as for CODA terps, who may have spent their whole lives in the deaf community, what do they do?

I have had an interpreter come up to me at a party and ask me "What happened after that last appointment"? Things like this should be a No, No.
I have also seen interpreters who had too much to drink at a party and brought up things that were inappropriate.

I'm so sorry that has happened to you. That is VERY unprofessional and inappropriate. They are, in some ways, supposed to pretend that they never saw you when they interpreted for you, let alone ask you about the consequences. I can see a person trying to be friendly but um...sorry no. As for the drinking...if you want to argue terps shouldn't get drunk with their deaf friends, or friends in the deaf community, you'd have another whole argument, lol.

 

[Reba]

I have found, over the years that I dislike having terps that I socialize with.

That is your personal preference, and it should be respected.

I do not want to know my interpreter well enough to consider them a FRIEND. I prefer someone whom I have never seen before, particularly socially. If you want to be an interpreter that is great, but have a social life AWAY from deafies.

Unfortunately, that is not practical. ITP students need to interact with the Deaf community in order to gain communication skills and to become comfortable with Deaf people. Terps need to maintain and perfect their skills with Deaf people. Also, many Deaf and terps socialize within the same circles, so it's difficult to "avoid" each other without becoming anti-social.

That doesn't mean all terps and all Deaf consumers should become friends. We all have individual lives and interests. I'm much older than most of my consumers so we just don't hang together much on the outside but we don't "avoid" each other either.

I have had an interpreter come up to me at a party and ask me "What happened after that last appointment"? Things like this should be a No, No.

You are absolutely correct. That is a definite "no, no". Even if I socialize with a consumer, I never chat "shop" with them in public unless they bring it up. Even then, I try to keep away for assignment related topics.

I have also seen interpreters who had too much to drink at a party and brought up things that were inappropriate.

Being under the influence is no excuse for inappropriate terp behavior (in relation to terp ethnics, that is--dancing on table tops or swearing at the boss is another thing).

That is why I feel as I do.

You certainly have a right to your feelings. I'm sorry that you have been "burned" by past experiences.