Excerpt from: Texas Association of the Deaf (click for full article)
Pop quiz time. Which of the following jobs does not require a
license: a.) doctor; b.) lawyer; c.) barber; d.) legal or medical
interpreter for the deaf.
If you guessed D, you’re right – and that’s a huge problem, say deaf
individuals and advocates for the deaf who testified on April 2 before
the House Human Services Committee in support of House Bill 2072 by
Austin Dem Rep. Eddie Rodriguez.
HB 2072 would turn the state’s voluntary certification program for
deaf and hard of hearing interpreters into a professional licensing
requirement. That in turn would assure hearing disabled consumers have
access to high quality interpreters, including in the most critical
settings – think hospitals, jails, police stations, or in court. The
bill would place the regulation of deaf interpreters to the Department
of Assistive and Rehabilitative Services, and would give DARS the
authority to investigate and, importantly, to penalize scofflaws.
Disability law requires equal access for the deaf and for the use of
“qualified” interpreters. The problem is that there is no definition for
qualified – and “therein lies the problem,” said DARS’ Lori Breslow who
spoke before the committee as a resource witness. Indeed, substandard
interpreters can wreak havoc. Consider the case of Esther Valdez, who
was arrested by Austin Police in
June 2009 for ignoring police orders – commands she couldn’t hear
because she is deaf; Valdez was never provided with an interpreter
during her three-hour encounter with the cops. The department has a
checkered history in dealing with Austin’s sizable deaf community and
has twice been subject to federal lawsuits brought to address the
communication breakdown. Austin Police don’t regularly call for
interpreters, we reported back in December 2010 in a cover story about
Valdez’s case, instead opting to call on fellow officers who have
limited signing skills; in 2010 none of the three officers paid a
bilingual stipend for their supposed signing skills were actually
certified. Currently there are four officers receiving bilingual pay;
none are certified.
Recent Comments