... the scaremongers (BSL Interpreter specific)

Many people in my line of work will have seen the article in The Guardian entitled, "Lack of British Sign Language interpreters putting deaf people at risk" which told of a Deaf lady who spent 12 days in hospital, had her appendix removed, but the hospital did not employ an interpreter at any point.(1)
Anyone put in this situation without an interpreter is at risk.  No-one can doubt that, except the ignorant many who think that 'lipreading' or 'pen & paper' are suitable communication techniques.

However, the story was then pushed on 'Deaf News Today' with the title, " BSL terp shortage puts deaf at risk  -  A growing problem in the U.K. is the lack of qualified British Sign Language interpreters."
The 'lack' has been translated as 'shortage' and suddenly we are focussing (as Jim Edwards does in the original article) on statistics rather than on the fact that the hospital failed their patient!  Deaf News Today weren't the only people to do this.

So, what statistics are they focussing on?  Jim Edwards (Signature Chief Executive) says that there are 800 registered interpreters for 25,000 sign language users in the UK.  Not quite Daily Mail sensationalism (see their '1 nurse for 250,000 patients' story), being as that equates to 31 sign language users per interpreter - about the number of children that many teachers have in their class.

So what number should we be aiming for?  Double that number?  Triple?  What effect would that have on the profession?
It seems that the common complaint by health professionals and employers is that interpreters are not available 'at short notice' or for 'emergency bookings'.  Well, if we triple the number of interpreters, that should solve that problem ... except of course, that the interpreters who are sitting at home waiting for the 'short notice' or 'emergency' jobs to come in, have no idea if they will get paid that day!  So, maybe they need to get a job on the side so that they can pay their mortgage ... but then they wouldn't be available for the interpreting job!

Some agencies have 'specialised' in short notice work.  They charge a premium and some organisations will pay that, but one of the other main complaints is that interpreters are expensive!

So, the world needs thousands of interpreters who are "registered, qualified, bilingual and bi-cultural professionals"(2) who have day jobs with bosses who will release them at the drop of a hat (akin to RNLI lifeboat crew) when they are called out?

I'd like to suggest an alternative - rather than rushing a bunch of people who 'always wanted to learn to sign' through some training to boost the figures, why not use the funding and expertise available to shore up the skills of the yellow badge holders(3) that exist?
Many Registered Sign Language Interpreters have a narrow comfort zone which means they turn down work in police stations, conferences, theatre, mental health settings, etc.  Knowing one's limits is incredibly important in our line of work (as is recognising over-confidence), but why is the training and subsequent CPD and support not shifting those limits and opening interpreters to new areas of work?  If this could be achieved, people needing interpreters at short notice would have a much longer list to chose from as confidence in/skills of ALL registered interpreters increases.

Just an idea!



(1)  Full story here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/may/07/lack-interpreters-deaf-people-risk?CMP=twt_gu
(2) As defined by: http://www.asli.org.uk/files/downloads/4_delivering_in_bsl_-_advice_1.pdf
(3) Registered Interpreter http://www.nrcpd.org.uk