Tag: opinion

Opinion, provocative, editorial, perspective, call-to-action, soapbox, pet peeves, prescriptive…

  • VI Anonymity Diminishes Interpreter-Client Relationship

    The differences between text relay and video relay are so vast; it amazes me how the FCC and, in turn, the VRS companies continue to treat VIs (Video Interpreters) like CAs (Communications Assistants; i.e. text relay operators). The effects of this treatment are sometimes unrecognized until something happens to remind an interpreter of what it’s like to feel like… well, like an “interpreter” again, rather than an “operator.”

    Recently, I took a break from my regular video relay interpreting job to interpret in a seminar for which I was requested by the client. The client and I had professional and social relationship that went way back. While on that job, I experienced emotions that I had long forgotten as a VI: the pride in being asked for by name and the joy of being wanted for who I am, not just for what I do.

    What is the point of anonymity when the deaf client can see you? At some point, they are bound to find out who you are; what’s more, if you are active in your profession, they should find out who you are! Sign language interpreters are professionals who bank their businesses on their professional reputations. They make a name for themselves by publishing, doing community service on the boards of interpreting organizations and governing agencies, teaching classes and workshops, mentoring new interpreters, and socializing within the deaf community. Text relay operators, or CA’s, do not need to do any of these professional activities, and they are literally invisible to their clients. It makes sense for them to be anonymous. It does not make sense for video interpreters, who are visible on television screens in people’s homes all over the country, to be nameless. Interpreters who follow the NAD–RID Code of Professional Conduct are never truly anonymous, as they are active and visible members of their communities.

    Anonymity robs from us what many of us have spent years to develop: (more…)

  • FCC Comment: Interpreters ≠ Dial Tone

    I posted the following comment to the FCC regarding Telecommunications Relay Service (TRS) – Docket 03-123.

    I have been told that the FCC considers sign language interpreters to be “equivalent to a dial tone,” and that we are not mandated reporters of abuse. The problem with this is that we are human beings, and unlike text relay operators, we video interpreters actually witness the the sign language users with our eyes. In the dreaded event that a video interpreter were to witness something like a person having a heart attack or stroke, or see a person beaten, raped, or even shot dead before our very eyes, it would cause us irreparable psychological damage if we were forbidden to report it. Granted, a Communications Assistant who performs text relay services may hear something terrible on the voice line, but they can never know for sure what they heard. Video Interpreters (VI’s) are unlike Communications Assistants (CA’s) in that we are eye witnesses to whatever goes on in front of the sign language user’s camera. We should be considered mandated reporters both for the sake of our clients and ourselves. It is a human being’s natural desire, nay, need to “do something about it” when we are witness to abuse. I could not live with myself if I witness such atrocities and did not report it. It doesn’t do our clients any good either for us to remain silent in such dreadful circumstances.

    You will notice that I use the term “Video Interpreter (VI)” in my letter to you. This is the term that has gained universal acceptance among the profession of sign language interpreting. Our work differs from that of CA’s in so many ways that (more…)

  • FCC Comment: No 10-Second Rule

    I posted the following comment to the FCC regarding Telecommunications Relay Service (TRS) – Docket 03-123.

    There are simply not enough qualified American Sign Language Interpreters in the world to meet the needs of all consumers of Video Relay Services, so I oppose the rule that all calls must be answered within 10 seconds. It takes much longer to train a sign language interpreter than it takes to train a text relay operator. The rule might apply for text relay, but in this real world we live it, it is not applicable. Perhaps in another 5 years, if many sign language interpreters are recruited into interpreter training programs in order to fill the need for qualified video relay interpreters, we can comply with this rule. At this point, it is impossible.