Policy Analysis

Course 4710
18 October 2014
Oliviah Marshall

2
The Deaf culture is an easily overlooked population to many. If an individual is
not directly affected by something, they tend to forget it even exists. Sadly, that is the
reality for the Deaf community: they are forgotten about. Daily lives are a struggle to
communicate and be involved with others outside the culture since there are extreme
limitations through Deaf and Hearing communication. In 2014, Gallaudet University has
estimated from the Census and Annual Disability Statistics Compendium, 552,000 or .
23% individuals are Deaf (cannot hear and understand any speech). Michigan was
estimated to have 6,104,749 people living in the state, with 137,702 or 2.3% having a
hearing disability. Circuit and Probate court case filings, including Court of Claims had
334,439 open cases in the year of 2013. Interpreters and translators across the United
States held about 63,600 jobs in 2012, and only 7% are used in a Government industry.
To address the issue of Deaf persons receiving assistance they need in court, I
have chosen Deaf Persons Interpreters Act. This Act: 204 of 1982 was created to
provide for and regulate the use of interpreters in administrative and judicial proceedings.
According to the Act, Deaf Person is defined by a person whose hearing is totally
impaired or whose hearing, with or without amplification, is so seriously impaired that
the primary means of receiving spoken language is through other sensory input;
including, but not limited to, lip reading, sign language, finger spelling, or reading. The
Act also includes Deaf-Blind individuals: person who has a combination of hearing
loss and vision loss, such that the combination necessitates specialized interpretation of
spoken and written information in a manner appropriate to that persons dual sensory
loss.

3
The basis of social allocations lean more in the direction of cost effectiveness.
Stated in section (d) of the Act, division is addressed. This meaning that the individuals
who benefit from the provider (interpreter) will be less than the number of individuals
who do not use an interpreter in the judicial system. Under this Act, the Judicial System
will provide an intermediary or qualified interpreter to either Deaf or Deaf-Blind. Each
individual requesting an interpreter will need to provide reasonable notice to the
appointing authority of the need of an interpreter before the appearance in court. An
appointing authority may require proof of the persons deafness if they have reason to
believe the request was falsified.
The provisions provide Social Control in Deaf Persons Interpreter Act. Under
Federal Law, should a Deaf or Deaf-Blind individual need an interpreter, the court shall
appoint one. In section 3 of the Act, the rules and when to appoint an interpreter are
addressed. Also, it is stated in this section, that the court proceeding will not be held until
the Deaf or Deaf-Blind can readily communicate with the appointed interpreter. The right
of an interpreter shall not be waived, except by the Deaf or Deaf-Blind individual
themselves, in writing.
The Deaf Persons Interpreter Act displays efficiency. The judicial system has
guidelines to follow when presented with a Deaf or Deaf-Blind individual/case. For
instance, Section 5(2) reads A statement taken from a Deaf or Deaf-Blind person before
a qualified interpreter is present is not admissible in court shall procure a qualified
interpreter. Before an interpreter participates in any judicial action, they must swear by
oath or affirmation; the interpreter is paid a fee by the court. The interpreter shall possess
a quality of assurance certification and renew it annually to be eligible in court

4
proceedings. Should an interpreter misrepresent or violate the Deaf or Deaf-Blind
individual in court, their certification can be revoked, suspended or limited along with
paying a fine. If the interpreter misrepresents themselves, knowing that they do not meet
the qualifications presented in this Act, they will be punished by imprisonment and/or a
fine.
A court appointed interpreter, qualified interpreter, intermediary interpreter or
deaf interpreter shall be paid a fee by the court that it determines to be reasonable
appointing authority other than the court shall be paid a fee by the appointing authority
(Sec. 7 (1, 2). With the court and individual opposing appointing authority the freedom to
decide pay wages for the interpreter, this Act presents methods of financing emphasizing
local autonomy. Expenses for travel, meals and lodging will also be paid for by the
appointing authority in return for available duration of the Deaf or Deaf-Blind persons
judicial proceeding.
The social value the policy appears to emphasize is equality. It demonstrates that
minority groups should have equal rights of communication and representation. The act
also displays social values of justice for each individual in the judicial system, no matter
the disability or barrier of communication.
Deaf Persons Interpreter Act of 1982 demonstrates value of equity, equality and
adequacy. Equity is displayed in the act of trying to create sustainability and balance
between Deaf and Hearing individuals. The idea of Deaf and Hearing individuals given
the same judicial rights in court proceedings creates equality. Most important and fitting
best within the Act circumstances, the value of adequacy is emphasized. Another meaning
for adequacy is sufficiency. In this case, the trust is placed upon the interpreter to

5
adequately present information from the Deaf or Deaf-Blind individual. The
communication chain of claims will suffice in the judicial court hearings for the organic
statement that would have come from the Deaf or Deaf-Blind person directly.
LEGISLATOR INTERVIEW
The participating legislator is Brian Banks, District 1. The cities of Grosse Pointe
Woods, Harper Woods, Village of Grosse Pointe Shores and part of Detroit and Wayne
counties are represented by Mr. Banks. I had emailed every representative for the state of
Michigan, and Mr. Banks was the first of two in responding to my request. Though
Representative Banks was unable to directly email me, his legislative assistant, Brian
Schmidtke, J.D. completed the reply. Our conversation is as follows (B. Schmidtke,
personal email communication, October 2014):
Do you support Deaf Persons Interpreters Act ? Why? If you do not support Deaf
Persons Interpreters Act, why?
Yes I support the Deaf Persons' Interpreters Act, individuals with disabilities are
entitled to have reasonable accommodations made for them so that they may fully
participate in society.
What are some of the strengths of Deaf Persons Interpreters Act?
One of the biggest strengths is the requirement that a deaf individual be permitted
to have an interpreter in any court proceeding. This is critical so that the individual can
fully understand and participate in the matter in front of the court.
What are some of the weaknesses of Deaf Persons Interpreters Act?
The fact the fees paid to interpreters are paid a fee by the court that it determines
to be reasonable, I would rather see a statutorily defined fee schedule that would be paid

6
based on the time and expertise of the interpreter.
What specific changes would you make to the policy to make it more effective?
It would be nice to see the act expanded to include interpreters to be required at
other government branches were citizens frequently do business like the Secretary of
State Branch Offices and City/Township Clerk Offices.
Do you have any final comments about Deaf Persons Interpreters Act that you
would like to share with me?
Overall I feel this is a very well written Act that fills an essential need.
I agree with Representative Banks in his response to compensation being a fixed
amount for each interpreter instead of the court or appointing authority paying the
qualified interpreter different reasonable amounts. The ability to provide
communication between two worlds, and relay statements correctly is a very important
role, especially in court hearings. The pay wage should not be taken lightly, because
without the interpreter, there would be no reliable way to effectively communicate. Also,
it is a very wise idea to have interpreters in other settings such as secretary of state.
Hearing is a factor of life many take for granted, but when you have no way to
communicate, life can be a struggle. Helping minority populations such as Deaf and
Deaf-Blind individuals in everyday societal settings would improve equality values for
all.
In the process of finding an Act to analyze, I learned much more about the United
States government system. I realized that representatives want you to believe that your
idea and issues matter, but when I received limited responses to my request; it showed the
opposite. Also, I was not aware that many Bills, Laws, Policies and Acts are passed for

7
hidden reasons. To the majority population, who does not have the education to
correctly read a policy can easily be misled by the intentions of it. I am now able to
benefit in knowing that each bill must be carefully analyzed to understand its true
meaning. Amendments can be just a few words or statements inside the entire document
or pages of revision, which I found interesting.
In regards to the Deaf Persons Interpreter Act, I was interested in the rights and
communication barriers between the Deaf and Hearing communities. I am pleased to
have learned that there are Laws in place protecting and providing assistance to Deaf and
Deaf-Blind persons, especially in the judicial system.

References

Harrington, Tom. (2004-2014). Local and Regional Deaf Populations. Gallaudet

University. [Retrieved from Census.gov and Annual Disability Statistics
Compedium].
http://libguides.gallaudet.edu/content.php?pid=119476&sid=1029190
Michigan Legislative Website. (2014). Deaf Persons Interpreters Act 204 of 1982.
Retrievedfromhttp://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(fpk2pmz32sotgijzihttjh21))/mileg
.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=mcl-Act-204-of1982&queryid=13839703&highlight=Deaf

Michigan Representatives. Michigan House of Representatives: Find your

Representative. (2014).
http://www.house.mi.gov/mhrpublic/
Michigan Supreme Court Annual Report. (2014). Lansing, MI. Report Retrieved From
http://courts.mi.gov/Administration/SCAO/Resources/Documents/Pu
blications/Statistics/2013/2013MSCAnnualReport.pdf
Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook,
2014-15 Edition,

Interpreters and Translators. Office of Occupational

Statistics and Employment Projections. Washington, DC

http://www.bls.gov/ooh/media-and-communication/interpreters-andtranslators.htm