Katie Bentley

Kellie Stewart

IPP 240

11/24/13

Video Case Analysis

Summary

This case involves an interpreter who is looking for work during the slower months of the
summer. She is contacted by a local community college to interpret for a deaf student for a three
hour course that will last the duration of a full ten weeks. She is being offered the position
without the assistance of a team interpreter. Therefore, the college is willing to pay her 1
times her hourly rate to work alone.

Facts

She is a nationally certified (RID) interpreter.
She has been in private practice for 5 years.
It is the beginning of summer and work is slow.
A local community college has contacted her to work.
She is being asked to interpret a 3 hour course on computer networking for a full 10
weeks.
The community college has a small budget for disability services.
The college is willing to pay her 1 times her hourly rate.



Lenses
There are many people involved in this case. One of them is the interpreter who has been
contacted by the local community college for this position. Another person involved is the deaf
student who would be receiving this interpreters work. A third party involved is the community
college and the coordinator who has contacted this interpreter regarding the position. Finally, the
field of interpreting itself, future interpreters, and future deaf students would all have
involvement in this case as well.

Issue (s)
Should this interpreter accept this long of an assignment, a 3 hour course, without a team
interpreter?
Should this interpreter accept pay that is 1 times her hourly rate to compensate their
work?

Analysis

This case would be considered a Right versus Wrong Moral Temptation according to
Kidder (Kidder, 1995). The reasoning for this is that there are justifications violating the RID
Code of Professional Conduct if the interpreter were to accept this position at the local
community college. One tenet that would apply to this case is tenet 2.4 under professionalism.
It states request support (e.g. certified deaf interpreters, team members, language facilitators)
when needed to fully convey the message or to address exceptional communication challenges
(e.g. cognitive disabilities, foreign language, emerging language ability, or lack of formal
instruction or language) (Code of Professional Conduct, 2005). This tenet applies due to the
fact that this interpreter would not be requesting any support from a team member when it would
be necessary for an assignment that is three hours long. Stewart and Witter-Merithew also
explain that most interpreters require working with a second interpreter for assignments lasting
longer than 1 to 2 hours, depending on the type of assignment (Stewart & Witter-Merithew,
2006).
Another tenet that applies to this case is tenet 6.3 which states, promote conditions that
are conducive to effective communication, inform parties involved if such conditions do not
exist, and seek appropriate remedies. Interpreting this assignment, for this length of time, with
no team interpreter would not be promoting conditions that are most conducive for effective
communication. Seeing as at some point the interpretation may begin to breakdown as the time
carries on and there is no team interpreter to switch, this would not result in the most effective
communication taking place.
Tenet 3.8 which states, avoid actual or perceived conflicts of interest that might cause
harm or interfere with the effectiveness of interpreting services, applies to this case as well. If
the interpreter is willing to work alone for this amount of time, due to the fact that she will be
receiving pay of 1 times her hourly rate, then she is considering herself before the work.
Therefore this would result in a conflict of interest and should be addressed. The potential drive
behind why she may be accepting this assignment could be the fact that she would be making 1
times her hourly rate. The reasoning for accepting the work should not be the fact that the pay
is going to be higher. That may be a nice perk that she would make more but the work could
potentially suffer because of the length of the assignment and with no team interpreter present.
A final tenet from the RID Code of Professional Code that applies to this case is tenet 2.3
which states, render the message faithfully by conveying the content and spirit of what is being
communicated, using language most readily understood by consumers, and correcting errors
discreetly and expeditiously (Code of Professional Conduct, 2005). If this interpreter takes on
this work solely by themselves as a 3 hour course, there is definitely possibility of break downs
in the work along the way. Due to the nature of this assignment and its duration, it would be
very difficult for the interpretation to remain precise and accurate the whole time. Due to the
cognitive and mental toll that the nature of an interpreters work takes on your mind, to be able
to have the stamina for this assignment and not have a team member to rely on, leaves room for
error.
There are a few values that could contribute to this case as well. Reasoning for the
interpreter to not accept this position alone would emanate from some of what Kidder explains as
Universal Human Values. Kidder explains both the values of fairness and responsibility
(Kidder, 1994). Both of these values apply to this case as reasoning for the interpreter to not
accept this position and work by themselves over a 3 hour span. The interpreter should value the
idea of fairness in this situation. It would not be fair for the interpreter to put the work at risk for
the deaf student, solely because the pay is more. The interpreter should also honor the value of
responsibility. Due to both fairness and being responsible, refraining from accepting the
position without a team interpreter would be the responsible thing to do in regards to the deaf
student.
All of the parties involved within the case would perceive this issue through a particular
lense. The deaf student may wonder why there is only one interpreter throughout the duration of
the course and feel that they are not receiving the most accurate interpretation. If the interpreter
accepts this position without the assistance of a team interpreter, the community college may feel
that they can continue to offer these positions in this way and cut their cost of interpreters
needed. If that is the case, the future deaf students could potentially suffer from this decision, be
faced with the same situation, and only have one interpreter in their classes when really two are
needed for the best quality of work. Lastly, the field of interpreting and future interpreters would
be affected by this decision, due to the fact that this community college may think this is how all
interpreters would go about accepting reasonable work.

Action and Justification
Overall, I feel that this interpreter should not accept this position without the request of a
team interpreter. I feel that if the interpreter were to accept this assignment and not have a team
interpreter, that the quality of work would be poor. That being said, the deaf student would be
the one suffering because they are not receiving the most accurate interpretation. The other thing
is that if the deaf student does not understand the interpretation or it does not seem extremely
clear, the deaf student may think it is because of their understanding that they are having a break
down. Although what really could be happening is that the break down is coming from the
interpreter due to their stamina and the fact that this assignment really requires two interpreters.
I feel that the honest and responsible thing to do in this situation would be to decline the offer of
this position unless a team interpreter is present as well. That would also make it known to the
community college that situations like these really require two interpreters and hopefully they
would see the need for this for future deaf students as well.





Works Cited
Kidder, R. (1995). How good people make tough choices, resolving the ethical dilemmas of
ethical living. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers.
Kidder, R. (1994). Shared values for a troubled world: Conversations with men and women of
conscience, universal human values. Jossey-Bass Publishers, Inc.
Stewart, K., & Witter-Merithew, A. (2006). The dimensions of ethical decision making: A guided
exploration for interpreters. Burtonsville, MD: Sign Media Inc.
The Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf. (2005). NAD- RID code of professional conduct.
Retrieved from http://www.rid.org/UserFiles/File/NAD_RID_ETHICS.pdf