As a criminal defense attorney, the dangers inherent in having police also act as interpreters leave many red flags for me...not just for deaf defendants but also deaf victims. Here are a few issues that jump out to me. 1. Sign language is a visual language and therefore wont be able to be "heard" on an audio recording. If they have body cameras, the body position might not be ideal to record the conversation. This leaves the reporting of the conversation up to the officer with potentially no way to cooroborate their understanding. Its not even that they might lie about the details of the conversation (an unfortunate possibility), but whether they truly understood what was being communicated in the first place with no way to verify.
I've been working to become an interpreter for close to 5 years. It is extremely difficult and an 8 week course is not going to get it done. Even for a CODA. I know several CODAs that are in the program with me. And there is a ton involved in understanding the grammar, culture, and history within the DEAF community. The idea is good to at least take this to know some remedial sign but not to be labeled certified or an interpreter.
It is unethical. Certified or not, Never use the police officers to interpret for the accusers and the detectives/investigators (due to biased). It is truly dangerous.
I cried myself thru 5 long years of college, including summers, at RIT/NTID to become an interpreter. Even though I have two degrees in interpreting, I know that I am STILL not qualified to TEACH ASL! I do NOT have a degree to teach, only to interpret. Some of my professors at NTID in the interpreting program were hearing, which was necessary for English to ASL interpreting courses. ALL the professors had doctorates in order to teach. I have an Associates and a Batchelors degree in English to ASL interpretation. That does not qualify me to teach, so if I can't teach, anyone with less than a masters or doctorate shouldn't be teaching! I've been asked to teach ASL numerous times over the course of my interpreting career, and I've had to educate people as to why i can't teach. Circumstances prevented me a number of times from taking the RID certification exam, mostly due to issues within RID not offering the exam because of problems with the test, so I've never taken it. But one thing not mentioned in the video above is that from my understanding, an individual MUST have a bachelor degree at minimum to sit for the exam, or so I thought....?? I'm hoping this travesty with the NYPD will help educate a lot of people as to qualifications needed to become an interpreter as well as a teacher of ASL!
We struggled with that "dual role" in Southern Maryland. An officer claiming to be fluent (Deaf uncle) was given an extra 6k salary. He does interpreting. And locally we fought and got the Dept to stop using the guy. He got to keep his extra 6k, but salary went back down. WE empowered the police officers in the fastest ways to get contact with an interpreter.
Nice idea, but i would not supportive for anyone use basic sign language to talk with them. I will never forget about 20 years ago i went to hospital for personal reason. They got nurse know basic sign language. I told them "can you call my aunt to come to pick me up?" she misunderstood. they told doctor about getting girlfriend come over to pick up. by the time aunt got here. they agrue to letting her into patient room. she texted me and told me they wont let her to come in. i asked nurse why you wont let my "aunt" come in? Nurse said "girlfriend? she's your girlfriend?! she's 50 year old and you're 25! that's not right!" I like WTF!! i said no no no! she's aunt! A-U-N-T aunt! Nurse got misunderstood. Since then i will never use anyone with basic understand sign language. if i got pull over by police and he/she know basic. it's bad news they could misunderstand like sign language for 21 or gun
I work for DOJ… title II mentioned various way for effective communication and the deaf is the one “chooses” her/his type of devices for their comfort of effective communications. Not the police nor city forces VRI on us. It’s not always effective. In car accidents, an officer cannot even hear the interpreter and did not effectively get our side of story. I got the ticket, lost in the case because he stated it’s totally my fault. He NEVER HEARD THE INTERPRETER VIA VRI. City of Arvada’s staff are jerks thinking they know everything bout deaf. They listen to interpreters not the deaf community!! Interpreter we had is truly takes control of deaf.
Typically RUclips will let you go in the description and press a button that says "show transcript" which will bring up the subtitles in a small window next to the video. You can scroll through them and click on different sentences to jump to that part of the video. Since Daily Moth's subtitles were added before the video was uploaded to RUclips and doesn't use youtube's subtitling feature, RUclips doesn't have the data to tell what the subtitles say or that the video has subtitles at all. I hope this quirk of how RUclips as a platform works doesn't end up reducing the video's algorithmic push to people who typically have subtitles on all the time when watching videos.
Renca, thanks for the news, I believe it's big headache about police interpreter, no thanks but I had flat tire on the highway, I tried to text my friend but State Police wave me on the passenger side with the note, I asked him how he know, hearing person saw me to call 911 on the highway quick, surprised me, officer called AAA, no interpreter...
I'm a professional, working NIC certified interpreter of 17 years. On the surface, the program seems innocent enough by setting a baseline for on-scene communication and I think they mean well with the program. But beyond that, it's an ethical and legal nightmare. Confidentiality and neutrality are paramount to the interpreting profession and this is the farthest thing from that. Officers on scene are there to assess and make judgement calls based on the law. It's impossible to act as a neutral party allowing for both a Deaf/HoH/Deaf-Blind person and an officer to communicate and understand each other, only to turn around and make legal judgement call based on the information gather from interpreting that situation. The industry standard that communication is confidential is well established and understood between interpreters and the clients they serve. It's a form of protection that allows the Deaf/HoH/Deaf-Blind community the same rights that hearing people take for granted. This flies in the face of industry standard, the ethical code that all interpreters are held to, and the the level of competence that is required of an interpreter. It takes *years* to become a competent interpreter. This program doesn't take into account that an interpreter that works in the legal field typically has additional specialized training and certifications that they maintain alongside their more "run-of-the-mill" state or national certification. The idea that a person can go from no knowledge of the language to a certified interpreter, (with a focus on the law), in 8 weeks perpetuates the outdated and ignorant assumption that ASL isn't an actual language. It seems to ignore the importance of cultural mediation, an understanding of the wide spectrum of communication usage and needs of a very diverse community.
I disagree 4-8 weeks certification does not guarantee that person is total certified. Those interpreters out there took 2 years, gain practice and study the deaf culture. Those are certainly certified!! I been jailed for asking for interpreters 3 times in city of Arvada in Colorado. Officers story is way out of context and often pride themselves with authority of a badge. Tells DA their version of story when we deaf never had chance tell ours. We get charged plus thumbed up charges ( means not true charges or fake charges) happened to me 2-3 times. 8 weeks programs in my opinion is not enough to really become effective communication. You’re gonna get charged anyway.
This is a really, REALLY bad idea. The opportunities for conflicts of interest to arise is huge, especially if the officer already has a bias against the the deaf individual. For example, if they already suspect that the deaf person is guilty of something, that bias might negatively tailor their communication in some way. Bad, bad idea!
I'd rather have a direct conversation with a CODA cop than have a moderately skilled hearing interpreter in the middle maybe screwing up the conversation. Sometimes CODAs are more "Deaf" than deaf children of hearing parents. I applaud the NYPD's efforts to improve communication. (PS I experienced a life changing assault in NYC in 1969, long before the ADA or Section 504. I am sure that experience would have been a lot less "life changing" if I had been able to communicate effectively with any of the cops who responded.).
At the very beginning of this program, the word 'communicate' should be used instead of 'interpret' If Police Officers can sign enough to communicate with people who are in distress, recognize the person is deaf, immediately request interpreter to dispatch, access VRI even if someone has been in a car accident... when dispatch sends an officer, perhaps EVERY call should include that this person could possibly be deaf, keep that in their mind for every call! The officer can communicate to the deaf person that we will get someone who is certified to interpret for them, and ask them for their preference. This could make every encounter more effective whatever the situation.
This is very much almost three or so weeks late. I do like some of the research and responses given by the interviewees in this video. I'm kind of sad the NYPD is engaging in shenanigans again.
What is ironic is that NYPD already has been working with the Deaf Justice Coalition for more than 10 years. Why all of a sudden it is a hearing person who gets the job after less than a year of negotiating with the NYPD to do the "ASL Initiative"? NYPD already has a valuable resource in place, which is idiotic at best of their behavior.
As a criminal defense attorney, the dangers inherent in having police also act as interpreters leave many red flags for me...not just for deaf defendants but also deaf victims. Here are a few issues that jump out to me.
1. Sign language is a visual language and therefore wont be able to be "heard" on an audio recording. If they have body cameras, the body position might not be ideal to record the conversation. This leaves the reporting of the conversation up to the officer with potentially no way to cooroborate their understanding. Its not even that they might lie about the details of the conversation (an unfortunate possibility), but whether they truly understood what was being communicated in the first place with no way to verify.
I've been working to become an interpreter for close to 5 years. It is extremely difficult and an 8 week course is not going to get it done. Even for a CODA. I know several CODAs that are in the program with me. And there is a ton involved in understanding the grammar, culture, and history within the DEAF community. The idea is good to at least take this to know some remedial sign but not to be labeled certified or an interpreter.
It is unethical. Certified or not, Never use the police officers to interpret for the accusers and the detectives/investigators (due to biased). It is truly dangerous.
I cried myself thru 5 long years of college, including summers, at RIT/NTID to become an interpreter. Even though I have two degrees in interpreting, I know that I am STILL not qualified to TEACH ASL! I do NOT have a degree to teach, only to interpret. Some of my professors at NTID in the interpreting program were hearing, which was necessary for English to ASL interpreting courses. ALL the professors had doctorates in order to teach. I have an Associates and a Batchelors degree in English to ASL interpretation. That does not qualify me to teach, so if I can't teach, anyone with less than a masters or doctorate shouldn't be teaching! I've been asked to teach ASL numerous times over the course of my interpreting career, and I've had to educate people as to why i can't teach. Circumstances prevented me a number of times from taking the RID certification exam, mostly due to issues within RID not offering the exam because of problems with the test, so I've never taken it. But one thing not mentioned in the video above is that from my understanding, an individual MUST have a bachelor degree at minimum to sit for the exam, or so I thought....?? I'm hoping this travesty with the NYPD will help educate a lot of people as to qualifications needed to become an interpreter as well as a teacher of ASL!
Learn ASL course is real hard to understand than medical or law courses. RID has to do something against NYC Police Dept. It’s very shame. Oh please!
We struggled with that "dual role" in Southern Maryland. An officer claiming to be fluent (Deaf uncle) was given an extra 6k salary. He does interpreting. And locally we fought and got the Dept to stop using the guy. He got to keep his extra 6k, but salary went back down. WE empowered the police officers in the fastest ways to get contact with an interpreter.
Nice idea, but i would not supportive for anyone use basic sign language to talk with them. I will never forget about 20 years ago i went to hospital for personal reason. They got nurse know basic sign language. I told them "can you call my aunt to come to pick me up?" she misunderstood. they told doctor about getting girlfriend come over to pick up. by the time aunt got here. they agrue to letting her into patient room. she texted me and told me they wont let her to come in. i asked nurse why you wont let my "aunt" come in? Nurse said "girlfriend? she's your girlfriend?! she's 50 year old and you're 25! that's not right!" I like WTF!! i said no no no! she's aunt! A-U-N-T aunt! Nurse got misunderstood. Since then i will never use anyone with basic understand sign language. if i got pull over by police and he/she know basic. it's bad news they could misunderstand like sign language for 21 or gun
I work for DOJ… title II mentioned various way for effective communication and the deaf is the one “chooses” her/his type of devices for their comfort of effective communications. Not the police nor city forces VRI on us. It’s not always effective. In car accidents, an officer cannot even hear the interpreter and did not effectively get our side of story. I got the ticket, lost in the case because he stated it’s totally my fault. He NEVER HEARD THE INTERPRETER VIA VRI.
City of Arvada’s staff are jerks thinking they know everything bout deaf. They listen to interpreters not the deaf community!! Interpreter we had is truly takes control of deaf.
Typically RUclips will let you go in the description and press a button that says "show transcript" which will bring up the subtitles in a small window next to the video. You can scroll through them and click on different sentences to jump to that part of the video. Since Daily Moth's subtitles were added before the video was uploaded to RUclips and doesn't use youtube's subtitling feature, RUclips doesn't have the data to tell what the subtitles say or that the video has subtitles at all.
I hope this quirk of how RUclips as a platform works doesn't end up reducing the video's algorithmic push to people who typically have subtitles on all the time when watching videos.
There is no short cut to become a qualified interpreter..Even for CODA too. Deaf Customers deserve every right of communication..Thanks
Renca, thanks for the news, I believe it's big headache about police interpreter, no thanks but I had flat tire on the highway, I tried to text my friend but State Police wave me on the passenger side with the note, I asked him how he know, hearing person saw me to call 911 on the highway quick, surprised me, officer called AAA, no interpreter...
Not sure if it’s a good idea to use police as an interpreter. It’s bias, so it might be unethical in the end.
Pls be request to sign language interpreter by laws. I did it all the times don’t be afraid
Thank you
That's interesting good news 😁
Thanks for Renca story is very important
I'm a professional, working NIC certified interpreter of 17 years. On the surface, the program seems innocent enough by setting a baseline for on-scene communication and I think they mean well with the program. But beyond that, it's an ethical and legal nightmare. Confidentiality and neutrality are paramount to the interpreting profession and this is the farthest thing from that. Officers on scene are there to assess and make judgement calls based on the law. It's impossible to act as a neutral party allowing for both a Deaf/HoH/Deaf-Blind person and an officer to communicate and understand each other, only to turn around and make legal judgement call based on the information gather from interpreting that situation. The industry standard that communication is confidential is well established and understood between interpreters and the clients they serve. It's a form of protection that allows the Deaf/HoH/Deaf-Blind community the same rights that hearing people take for granted. This flies in the face of industry standard, the ethical code that all interpreters are held to, and the the level of competence that is required of an interpreter.
It takes *years* to become a competent interpreter. This program doesn't take into account that an interpreter that works in the legal field typically has additional specialized training and certifications that they maintain alongside their more "run-of-the-mill" state or national certification. The idea that a person can go from no knowledge of the language to a certified interpreter, (with a focus on the law), in 8 weeks perpetuates the outdated and ignorant assumption that ASL isn't an actual language. It seems to ignore the importance of cultural mediation, an understanding of the wide spectrum of communication usage and needs of a very diverse community.
I disagree 4-8 weeks certification does not guarantee that person is total certified. Those interpreters out there took 2 years, gain practice and study the deaf culture. Those are certainly certified!! I been jailed for asking for interpreters 3 times in city of Arvada in Colorado. Officers story is way out of context and often pride themselves with authority of a badge. Tells DA their version of story when we deaf never had chance tell ours. We get charged plus thumbed up charges ( means not true charges or fake charges) happened to me 2-3 times. 8 weeks programs in my opinion is not enough to really become effective communication. You’re gonna get charged anyway.
Agreed 10000000% hearing consider deaf as dummy I hate that.
This is a really, REALLY bad idea. The opportunities for conflicts of interest to arise is huge, especially if the officer already has a bias against the the deaf individual.
For example, if they already suspect that the deaf person is guilty of something, that bias might negatively tailor their communication in some way.
Bad, bad idea!
I'd rather have a direct conversation with a CODA cop than have a moderately skilled hearing interpreter in the middle maybe screwing up the conversation. Sometimes CODAs are more "Deaf" than deaf children of hearing parents. I applaud the NYPD's efforts to improve communication. (PS I experienced a life changing assault in NYC in 1969, long before the ADA or Section 504. I am sure that experience would have been a lot less "life changing" if I had been able to communicate effectively with any of the cops who responded.).
At the very beginning of this program, the word 'communicate' should be used instead of 'interpret' If Police Officers can sign enough to communicate with people who are in distress, recognize the person is deaf, immediately request interpreter to dispatch, access VRI even if someone has been in a car accident... when dispatch sends an officer, perhaps EVERY call should include that this person could possibly be deaf, keep that in their mind for every call! The officer can communicate to the deaf person that we will get someone who is certified to interpret for them, and ask them for their preference. This could make every encounter more effective whatever the situation.
Thanks for this very late news!
This is very much almost three or so weeks late. I do like some of the research and responses given by the interviewees in this video. I'm kind of sad the NYPD is engaging in shenanigans again.
Thank you Renca Dunn. Deaf Up👍
thank you
What is ironic is that NYPD already has been working with the Deaf Justice Coalition for more than 10 years. Why all of a sudden it is a hearing person who gets the job after less than a year of negotiating with the NYPD to do the "ASL Initiative"? NYPD already has a valuable resource in place, which is idiotic at best of their behavior.
Call district fraud attorney on the interpreter and question her how 8 weeks of learning interpreting equals to Two year.
Oohhh, maybe they can be certified by the guy who interpreted the Nelson Mandela funeral. 🙄
it is not brilliant move with pilot way to do that... it is completely RED FLAG no question !!
He 🧏 does not understand in the world need Fair 🗣️
NO good ! 👎 No.