In the past few weeks, interpreters have been in the headlines nearly every day, representing a few steps forward — and backward — for the overall profession. Here are some of the latest trends in the spoken language space:
Worldwide, interpreters struggle for better conditions. Advocates in Korea are discussing the adoption of a court interpreter certification program, while Guam is rolling out court interpreter training. In Australia, a deaf student sued his university over the lack of adequate interpreting services. Sign language interpreters in Tanzania decry the need for better equipment, while in South Africa, interpreters have gone on strike over not getting paid.
Some U.S. courts provide unequal access to justice. Federal law requires courts to provide interpreters, but many courts still fall short of their obligations. California Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed a bill that would have ensured interpreting services for seven million Californians, in part through telephone interpreting. An Indiana court ruled that a person with the abilities of a first-grader in English would have to find her own interpreter, even though this decision is in conflict with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. Meanwhile, in Iowa, a county courthouse struggles to handle all of its cases with Spanish speakers by relying on a single interpreter (the upside might be job security).
Other courts show signs of progress. It’s not all bad news on the legal interpreting front. Nebraska is working to remedy its court interpreter shortage. Maine has also made significant improvements in its court interpreting program — of course, this only happened as the result of a Department of Justice complaint.
Medical interpreters are sometimes provided, sometimes not.Health care organizations continue to seek ways to improve language access. The United Kingdom’s National Health Service is relying increasingly on telephone interpreting in an effort to trim budgets. Back in the U.S., the state of Washington has announced its intentions to deny Medicaid patients their right to an interpreter, even though recipients of federal funds — including Medicaid programs — are required to provide language services under Title VI. A hospital in New Hampshire already learned its lesson the hard way — it has agreed to pay US$100,000 to six patients who were denied their rights to receive interpreting services.
Non-professional interpreters continue to practice. A story in the Chicago Tribune lauds the benefits of bilingualism for children, and while there’s no doubt that this is true, the article also describes how children end up providing language services for vital information, such as prescriptions for medications and Social Security information — a risky practice. Meanwhile, in Kansas, a college student acts as a court interpreter.
What does all this activity mean? At Common Sense Advisory, we believe that many of the setbacks are growing pains for the profession. However, the worldwide shortage of interpreters, coupled with global economic woes, continues to prompt businesses and government entities to look toward technology — including telephone interpretation, machine interpretation, and other such solutions to expand access to spoken language services in linguistically diverse societies.
