May 14, 2013

Interpreting 2
Scenario #1
Response – The CPC states that (a) Interpreters possess the professional skills and knowledge required for the specific interpreting situation. The conflict in this situation that the counselor just assumes that since I know how to communicate through sign then I can interpret easily. The counselor also assumes that I know about the client’s mental health status because; I have interpreted therapy sessions before.
Consumer Perspective – The deaf client expects a qualified interpreter to be interpreting for him when needed during his sessions. The counselor expects that the interpreter chosen is qualified to interpret mental health settings. The interpreter’s perspective is that they are given a job that they are qualified for; interpreter’s also expect to perform interpretations accurately for their client. What would I do? – In this situation I would take the job as the case aide for the client. I have interpreted many therapy sessions before and know how to handle a mental health setting. However, I would inform the counselor that just because someone can communicate through sign does not mean they can accurately interpret for someone. I would also mention to the counselor that I do not have a lot of knowledge on the patient’s mental health and you cannot assume that because you interpret for therapy sessions you know everything about everyone’s state of mind.
Short/Long Term Affect – The short term affect for the deaf client is that he is happy to have an interpreter qualified for the job. The short term affect for the counselor is that he is happy you took the position, but is slightly insulted on you remarks about his lack of knowledge on interpreters. The short term affect for the interpreter is that they are excited to take the job, but also shocked on the lack of knowledge the counselor has for interpreters. The long term affect for the deaf client is that he/she expects to always have a qualified interpreter. The long term affect for the counselor is he now knows that he cannot just hire anyone who knows sign language to interpret. The long term affect for the interpreter is that they are glad they explained the role of an interpreter to the counselor and knows that they will be more cautious of who they hire to interpret.
Scenario #2
Response – The CPC states that (a) interpreters conduct themselves in a manner appropriate to the specific interpreting situation. The conflict in this situation is that the deaf client you are interpreting for asks you and your teammate to go out to lunch while the case is going on. Consumer Perspective – the deaf client expects you to interpret accurately for them in the specific situation. The deaf client in this case also expects that you can have lunch with him/her. The lawyers expect you to interpret accurately for the client without bias. The other parties involved expect me to interpret accurately as well without bias. The interpreter perspective is to interpret accurately for the case and not get personally involved in any way.
What would I do? – I would talk with my teammate and about all the reasons we cannot go out to lunch with the client. There is a conflict of interest if we get personally involved and may interrupt our interpretation. I would then with my teammate tell the client we are unable to have lunch with him/her because; the case is still active and I would explain that having lunch would be a conflict of interest during the case and we may be replaced if anyone knew we met with the client while not in the courtroom.
Short/ Long Term Affect – The short term affect for the deaf client is that he/she is upset that my teammate and I would not attend lunch with him/her. The short term affect for the interpreter is that they feel bad they had to say no because; they know interpreters can understand and can have a connection with the deaf client. The long term affect for the deaf client is that