Conduits of communication? Part 2

As discussed in Conduits of Communication Part 1, there is a valid reason why it has been taught that interpreters are conduits of communication. By categorizing interpreters into unemotional machinery, the issue of interpreter bias is perceived to have been addressed. However, often resolving one problem creates new ones.

For instance, in 2015, my downstairs flooded, which required my floor to be completely replaced. The problem was resolved. However, we discovered that the floor was now one quarter inch taller, resulting in our cabinets being taller. Our cabinets could not be installed until a quarter inch of the backsplash was removed. There were two pillars in our living room that also needed to be shaved down quarter inch as well. Every time a problem was solved, a new one took its place.

The issue in considering interpreters simple conduits of information is that the full scope of the interpreting profession is discarded. It’s often assumed that healthcare interpreters are only to convey what is stated. For instance, the code of ethics also includes cultural awareness and advocacy. I have seen cases when medical professionals chastise interpreters if it was perceived that they did anything other than stay quiet and render information when it’s their turn.

They mistakenly expect the interpreter to only repeat everything “word for word.” First, I want to highlight that a “word for word” translation is called transliteration. It doesn’t account for context or grammar of another languages. Often it is difficult, if not impossible to understand. Interpreters transmit the message accurately but not word for word.

Cultural Awareness

Cultural Awareness is a core ethical principle of healthcare interpreting. Its sole purpose is to facilitate communication across cultural differences. The role of a facilitator is one of action and leadership. This cannot be done if an interpreter is silent and only communicates information as a mobile device app. To assist all parties in cultural awareness, it must be understood that the interpreter provides valuable knowledge that the healthcare professional requires to perform her duties effectively. The interpreter must alert all parties of any significant cultural misunderstandings that arise. Only the interpreter can bridge that divide. The interpreter is not only fluent in both the language and culture of the LEP patient, but also the language and culture of the doctor. This uniquely qualifies the interpreter to intercede and facilitate communication. This requires professional discernment that machines are currently incapable of doing.

Advocacy

Another fundamental principle of the interpreter’s code of ethics is advocacy. The objective of advocacy is to prevent harm to LEP people receiving interpreter serves. The interpreter has the ethical right to underscore and protect an individual from harm. For instance, suppose an interpreter becomes aware of a patient allergy. The doctor is ready to administer an injection that could create a bad reaction. It is senseless, at this critical moment, for the interpreter to remain silent and only serve as a conduit of information. Interpreters also have an ethical responsibility to advocate on behalf of a patient if malpractice or abuse occurs.

In the case of mistreatment, disrespect, or abuse, the professional interpreter would never worsen a situation by making a spectacle. The professional interpreter should go through the proper channels to report such mistreatment or abuse.

Therefore, if the interpreter’s role is strictly relegated to an unbiased conduit of information, the essential ethical principles of cultural awareness and advocacy could easily be ignored and maligned. The next medical interpreting blog will further investigate how this concept of the interpreter simply being a conduit of communication has affected the relationship between medical professionals and professional interpreters.