Language Access Policy

Over 1.8 million residents of New York City are limited English proficient (LEP), meaning they do not speak, read, write, or understand English well enough to communicate effectively with health care providers about sensitive information regarding their health and well-being, or to understand their diagnosis and treatment.1  After more than a decade of advocacy by the New York Immigration Coalition (NYIC) and partner groups such as the New York Lawyers for the Public Interest (NYLPI) and Make the Road NY, in September of 2006 New York State passed the Hospital Language Assistance Law, a new set of communication regulations for all private and public hospitals statewide. These regulations were intended to improve LEP patients’ access to health care and protect them from medical harm that can arise due to communication issues at area hospitals. 

We are well past the five-year mark of the passage of this important legislation.  The good news is that this law has already led to a dramatic improvement in language access to health services citywide.2 Unfortunately, NYIC’s nearly 200 member groups statewide are finding that, despite these important regulations, LEP patients are often still left to rely on family members, untrained interpreters, or no interpretation at all.  The lack of language assistance services can result in serious problems with diagnosis and treatment, in accessing health services, and in unwarranted medical bills.  In the most severe cases, denial of language access services can result in tragic medical consequences, including the loss of life.  As such, the provision of quality language assistance services is a vital necessity for complying with state, local and federal laws, for avoiding costly litigation, and for providing the best possible care for LEP patients. 

This project seeks to assess the status of implementation of language assistance laws and regulations in New York City hospitals and to learn about best practices at exemplary hospitals.  By conducting in-depth studies of a sampling of hospitals in different boroughs, we have developed a set of best existing practices for the provision of language access at hospitals and recommendations for state and local policies to improve LEP health care.  These recommendations include: standardizing certification, testing and training for medical interpreters, developing qualified volunteer pools to provide medical interpretation, increasing public funding for hospital language access services, and utilizing a combination of modalities, including in-person/face-to-face interpreters and  telephonic interpretation, in addition to considering new remote interpretation technologies.  By adopting these policies and best practices, New York can improve LEP access to city hospitals, thereby improving health outcomes for immigrant New Yorkers and creating a healthier New York.

From their practical experience at the Federal Courts of Guarulhos (where the great majority of defendants are foreigners involved in international drug trafficking), the authors (a federal judge and a court interpreter) analyze the role of interpreters at criminal hearings. Initially, they addressed the precariousness of the current model, with interpreters being assigned to court procedures without any prior investigation into their linguistic expertise or specific background, completely unaware of what is expected from their performance. Accordingly, this article highlights the importance (primarily from the constitutional point of view) of properly understanding what the role of the court interpreter is, bringing to light the difficulties created by the federal judges themselves, who often ignore the basic rules and techniques of court interpretation. Subsequently, the three modes of interpretation commonly used in the legal environment are analyzed (simultaneous interpreting, consecutive interpreting and sight translation). Finally, the authors suggest/propose the adoption of an official screening and training program for interpreters as well as some guidance for judges, encouraging compliance with a proper code of ethics and professional standards for court interpreters.

This article gathers research from three studies conducted by industry stakeholders in US court interpreting – research which provides a blueprint for prioritising quality in courtroom language access and which concretely links court interpreter training to policy decisions in the areas of language access and interpreter certification testing. The first study examines training experiences of Spanish/English court interpreters in one US state (Wisconsin); the second surveys practising court interpreters in the same state to demarcate specific skill domains and content in which court interpreters wish to receive training; and the third study examines failure rates on the state-level oral court interpreting exams on a national level over a 15-year period, suggesting some key strategies to mitigate such failure. In light of the aforementioned studies, as well as in response to the National Center for State Court’s recent publication entitled A National Call to Action, this article represents a further call to action, beseeching educators and policymakers to create meaningful training opportunities, to acknowledge the relationship between lack of training and widespread oral exam failure, and to reward and incentivise training and credentialing through proactive policy decisions.

The purpose of the Miranda rights in the USA is to ensure that suspects know their fundamental rights under the law, yet even native speakers of English do not always understand their rights (Rogers et al., 2010, 2011). To evaluate their understanding, Grisso (1998) developed Miranda Rights Comprehension Instruments (MRCI), normed with native speakers and widely accepted in the legal community. Comprehension of second language (L2) speakers of English, on the other hand, is inferred based on their L2 proficiency but no studies to date offer the scientific basis for causal connections between L2 proficiency and understanding of the Miranda rights. The purpose of the present study was to compare understanding of the Miranda rights among native (n = 82) and advanced L2 speakers of English (n = 183) to determine whether standardized assessments of L2 proficiency can predict comprehension of the Miranda rights.

Judiciary interpreters have been indoctrinated to think that the linguistic abyss between English-speaking and non-English speaking criminal defendants can actually be bridged by providing interpreters whose performance meets a certain-and very high-threshold of accuracy in order to protect said defendants' constitutional rights in a court of law under the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments. This brief article questions that assumption and proposes an alternative performance standard for judiciary interpreters that takes into account the listener's ability to comprehend the message being rendered, rather than a strict adherence to the Source Language that renders an unintelligible Target Language message, therefore yielding a meaningless interpreting act.

Extreme gang violence in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras has prompted thousands of mothers and children to seek refuge in the United States. In response to the 2014 migrant crisis, the United States' use of family detention centers represents one of the most controversial aspects of the Obama administration's political response. For-profit detention centers located in Karnes, Texas and Dilley, Texas, are currently housing thousands of asylum-seeking mothers and children beyond capacity (García-Ditta 2015: n.p.). The gravity of the current refugee crisis is only exacerbated by language barriers – one of the direst obstacles to avoiding swift removal processes. A crucial step in the asylum-seeking process is the credible fear interview (CFI), an immigration proceeding in which a person must demonstrate credible fear of returning to his or her home country or be subject to deportation. This article directly locates language mediation in non-criminal immigration proceedings as a human right to which institutional compliance is still unresponsive and ineffectual. The authors aim to offer a descriptive analysis of US immigration proceedings with a brief final discussion which contemplates the unexplored aspects of the legal and ethical grey zone of language access in borderland detention centers. Keywords: interpreting in asylum proceedings; detention centers; credible fear interview; language access in immigration hearings.

ACCÉS A SERVEIS LINGÜÍSTICS PER ALS SOL·LICITANTS D'ASIL EN ELS CENTRES DE DETENCIÓ DE LES ZONES FRONTERERES DE TEXAS
Resum La violència extrema de les bandes criminals d'El Salvador, Guatemala i Hondures ha provocat que milers de mares i nens busquin refugi als Estats Units. Com a resposta a la crisi migratòria del 2014, l'ús que els Estats Units ha fet dels centres de detenció per a famílies representa un dels aspectes més controvertits de la resposta política que va donar l'Administració Obama. Actualment, els centres de detenció privats que es troben a Karnes i Dilley (Texas) allotgen, per sobre de la seva capacitat, milers de mares i nens sol·licitants d'asil (García-Ditta 2015: s. p.). La gravetat de la crisi de refugiats actual es veu agreujada, a més, per la barreres lingüístiques: un dels pitjors obstacles per evitar processos de trasllat immediat. Un pas molt important en el procediment de sol·licitud d'asil és l'entrevista per deter-minar si hi ha un temor creïble (credible fear interview, CFI), un tràmit en l'àmbit de la immigració en què la persona ha de demostrar, de forma creïble, que té por de tornar al seu país d'origen o de ser deportat. Aquest article considera de forma directa la mediació lingüística dins els procediments d'immigració no penals com un dret humà la garantia del qual, per part de les institucions, encara no s'ha fet efectiva. Els autors busquen oferir una anàlisi descriptiva dels procediments d'immigració dels Estats Units que acaba amb una breu reflexió sobre els aspectes pendents d'explorar de la zona grisa jurídica i ètica de l'accés als serveis lingüístics en els centres de detenció de les zones frontereres. Paraules clau: la interpretació en els tràmits d'asil; centres de detenció; entrevistes per determinar si hi ha temor creïble; l'accés als serveis lingüístics en les audiències d'immigrants.

«Nyrebekkenbetennelse er en slags alvorlig urinveisinfeksjon», sier legen tidlig en mandag morgen. Noen timer senere sier barnevernspedagogen: «Nå tenker jeg at det er viktig å ha fokus på tilknytning», og så begynner far å gråte. «Han sa dere trodde det var strølag», sier politibetjenten i politiavhøret om ettermiddagen. «Erfaringslaering er vi opptatt av her», sier førskolelaereren på foreldremøtet i barnehagen litt utpå kvelden. Når du er tolk i offentlig sektor, kan dette vaere hverdagen din, og du må gjengi alt dette på et annet språk, slik at det gir den samme meningen som på norsk. Som tolker får vi vaere der, midt i møtet mellom mennesker som ikke snakker samme språk. For mennesker med et hjerte for språk er tolking drømmejobben. Hver eneste dag består av nye utfordringer, ytringer vi ikke har møtt før, konsepter vi ikke har tenkt på. Dette skal vi gjengi på et annet språk. Utfordringen er å formidle det samme til lytteren på det andre språket som denne personen ville ha hørt hvis hun behersket originalspråket. Til stadighet får vi høre om alt det som ikke kan oversettes. Som tolk kan man aldri tenke slik. Alt kan oversettes. Det er slett ikke sikkert vi klarer det alltid, og da må vi tørre å innrømme det. Ingen har sagt at det er lett. Men alt kan gjengis. Vi må lytte, vi må forstå, vi må gjengi, noen ganger på en annen måte eller med andre ord, men slik at det samme kommer til uttrykk. Det er en enorm utfordring.

Extreme gang violence in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras has prompted thousands of mothers and children to seek refuge in the United States. In response to the 2014 migrant crisis, the United States' use of family detention centers represents one of the most controversial aspects of the Obama administration's political response. For-profit detention centers located in Karnes, Texas and Dilley, Texas, are currently housing thousands of asylum-seeking mothers and children beyond capacity (García-Ditta 2015: n.p.). The gravity of the current refugee crisis is only exacerbated by language barriers-one of the direst obstacles to avoiding swift removal processes. A crucial step in the asylum-seeking process is the credible fear interview (CFI), an immigration proceeding in which a person must demonstrate credible fear of returning to his or her home country or be subject to deportation. This article directly locates language mediation in non-criminal immigration proceedings a...

This monographic section of the Revista de Llengua i Dret, Journal of Language and Law presents the findings of six critical perspectives on translation and interpreting policies and practices in modern societies that pose challenges for public institutions. Taking a critical and empirical stance, the papers provide data and reflections on how language access is critical to fulfilling fundamental rights and ensuring the ability of institutions to implement their mandates effectively. The introductory article reviews the role of public services in present-day multilingual societies and of translation and interpreting in relation to the policies governing language access. It goes on to review conflicting implicit theories of translation and interpreting by providing a brief discussion of the roles prescribed and described for translators and interpreters. Finally, it proceeds to present the papers, which are constructed around two axes: (a) an examination of practices capable of provi...