Controversy over ASL “interpreting” program for NYPD officers
Renca Dunn, Daily Moth Reporter: A recent article published by the New York Post on April 20th talked about 600 new NYPD officers who learned basic American Sign Language as part of their training to better communicate with deaf people during emergencies.
[Screenshots of articles from the NY Post and another source showing the police sign training program. The headlines read, “NYPD recruits taught basic ASL as part of training to better communicate with deaf people during emergencies” and “Cop Cadets ‘Sign’ Up To Help Deaf. Recruits will ‘speak’ with hearing impaired.” It shows images of NYPD officers using sign language and an image of a woman posing with the universal gesture of “interpreter.”]
A controversy stirred within the Deaf community because the article mentions that 15 other NYPD officers who are already on the force are CODAs, and they took an 8-week program under an ASL teacher from the College of Staten Island, Jessica Wohlstetter. These officers will be taking a national exam to become certified ASL interpreters. There was a brochure about the 8-week course that explains the pathway to becoming a certified interpreter and mentions the Registry Interpreters for the Deaf (RID) on it. We will show you that brochure that was posted by several people.
(Photo showing brochure. A page reads, “NYPD American Sign Language Interpreter Certification Pathway. Become a ASL Certified Member of Service.” It has a calendar for an orientation that includes, “Overview of RID Certification Process,” “Theory and Practice of Interpreting,” “ASL for Emergency Situations,” “Interpreting 2 English to ASL.” There is an image of A-Z handshapes).
From our understanding, Jessica Wohlstetter is a hearing person and not a certified interpreter. Under the RID database, her name shows up as an associate member, which means that level is like an “advocate” but not certified. That is based on what we can find from the RID database.
This situation is very layered. We have been monitoring this situation closely and asked a few people for an interview to provide their insights. We will try our best to recap the whole situation of what is going on and will share three main concerns that we have observed lately through various discussions.
The first concern is on the 15 CODAs who are already police officers and will become ASL interpreters. Based on the article, it says that those officers, once certified as interpreters, will be able to go to different scenes and take statements from Deaf individuals directly. In other words, they will come as police officers and interpreters at the same time- a dual role. People feel that this does not comply with the ADA as it relates to effective communication.
The second concern is that the article says that those police officers can teach sign language to other police officers. Some people discussed the concern about the accuracy of the signs if a hearing person teaches another hearing person. It was also mentioned that there are many qualified Deaf ASL teachers in New York City who can take the role of teaching ASL.
The third concern is that RID’s company name is on that brochure about the 8-week program, so it seems like RID endorsed this. Based on the comments from those who are RID-certified interpreters, they said it takes years to become certified interpreters. The eight-week course to become certified interpreters is not realistic.
RID posted a Facebook status on April 27th in response, saying that they did not and would not sanction the eight-week training.
(Image of RID’s Facebook post on April 27. It says, “RID is aware of the discussion regarding the NYPD training. Despite what has been published, RID did not and would not sanction this training. We are actively working to have the articles updated and have reached out to the NYPD to advise as well. We appreciate the individuals who brought this situation to our attention.”)
There are more layering concerns and some confusion, but those are the main ones, as we observed. So, we reached out to a few people, including RID. First, we asked RID if they were aware of this. They gave us a detailed response, so I will briefly mention what they said to us and post the rest of their response in the transcript below. They did mention that they were not in contact with anyone who led this program with the NYPD and they were perplexed that their company name is printed on the brochure. Here is a snippet of their response:
“We are aware that there has been misinformation stated in the original NY Post article, and reached out to the editor with the pertinent clarifications needed. The editor has removed information about RID from the article at our request. RID cannot speculate on why our organization’s name would have been printed on any materials, or mentioned in any training, as we do not have accurate accounts from the persons providing this information, including those who are promoting it. We recognize that there are numerous programs and workshops available that are designed to assist individuals with attaining certification. In order to promote excellence in sign language interpreting, RID believes that all interpreters should demonstrate the skills, knowledge, and abilities to interpret effectively in general settings by attaining appropriate certification and credentials.”
We reached out to Sean Gerlis, a nationally certified ADA coordinator for the Board of Elections in New York City and owner of SILAN, an interpreting agency, to share his insights as a community member and explain briefly the timeline of this situation.
(Begin interview)
Sean Gerlis: I’m involved with DJC, Deaf Justice Coalition. The group has been here for a pretty long time. More than 10 years. It has an independent living center representative, advocates, and lawyers. They are focused on effective communication for deaf, hard of hearing, and DeafBlind in New York City. They often deal with the NYPD. That group has advocated for equal access with the police. There are many deaf people in NYC and there have been communication breakdowns with police. There were several lawsuits in the past with a lot of money involved but things still happen. So this group has been working for a while. We’ve come up with different ideas and strategies on how to help the NYPD serve the community better. Put handcuffs in the front, not in the back. Different things. Communicate. Using placards. We’ve met with NYPD officials to explore possibilities for a collaborative effort. Then things stalled because of coronavirus, obviously. There was not good traction. It moved slowly back and forth. That’s the recap. Then last week, we saw this article from the NY Post about the woman and the contract. Actually, the woman posted on her personal Facebook page. And she linked to the NY Post article. Someone tagged me. Of course, I was gut-wrenched at how it was written. Who? It just came out of thin air. The DJC already had two pilot programs and it was still a work, an effort. But now there’s this thing. Of course, I forwarded it to members of the DJC. Including New York attorneys — public interest (NYLPI). That group does advocacy in legal matters with the NYPD. All of them had no idea about this. I reached out to the NYC Mayor’s Office of People with Disabilities (MOPD) and Commissioner Christina Curry, who happens to be Deaf/DeafBlind and has a mobility disability. She is a great woman and I love her. She also had no idea. I reached out to many people on what we should do. Right now, we are figuring out what is the next step. They announced that it’s an 8-week program with certifications. Did they mean an in-house certification? Or if it is like a real, certified interpreter, that would be a travesty. New York has very diverse people. Some have minimum language skills (MLS) all the way to advanced English. Some are oral. Some are DeafBlind. When situations occur, how can cops deal with emergencies? They will focus with the ear (audio) first and solve things before talking with deaf people. They’re last. No. It should be fair. So this whole thing, is it something to be congratulated? No. We’re not sure what the correct next step is.
The pros are that a CODA (officer) may have knowledge of how to deal with deaf people. That’s a big pro. But a con is communication breakdowns. They aren’t interpreters. They only happen to be CODAs. They’re not interpreters. So in the heat of the moment — deaf people can be dramatic — and things can become overwhelming. Then whatever is told to the lead officer or detectives or whatever — could be completely misunderstood. They need to be held accountable. It causes more harm. So there are a lot of cons. In training police officers, their first priority is safety for themselves, right? They prioritize personal safety. That’s the top thing in a cop’s mind. When they encounter strangers, are they dangerous? Will they hurt me? Once a situation is controlled, if there is no communication, things can go awry. That’s when communication breakdowns happen with police officers. The ADA Americans with Disabilities Act has a section called effective communication under Title II. Police officers are under Title II of the ADA. States, cities, and towns. Since NYC is a city under Title II, it must provide effective communication in the form of pen and paper, interpreters, VRI, or slow and clear speech. There are different ways and auxiliary aids have to be provided. Something must be provided. When cops deal with deaf people, they don’t think of that. They just think about my safety. It’s explosive.
(End interview)
Thank you, Sean.
We also reached out to Carla Mathers, a lawyer who is not in practice now but teaches legal interpreting, including legal interpreting with the police. We asked Carla to share her insights from the legal perspective.
(Begin interview)
Carla Mathers: Here is my view on the pros and cons. The pros is that it’s real nice to see CODAs and diverse cops who can communicate with deaf people. That’s generally nice. But you’ve got to stay in your lane. So, I think it’d be great if you can go to another country and can communicate if you need help but for serious emergencies or dangers or something complicated, with communication, you’ve got to get a professional interpreter. When I read information about this, I had to pause. It looks like the person who is teaching is hearing. Firstly, for many years, we know that it requires a Deaf native-like signer to teach their language. It’s not for us to appropriate and teach others. Respect deaf people and their language. There’s the ASLTA American Sign Language Teachers Association. I doubt that woman is a member. She is not a certified interpreter but teaches interpreting. Also teaches legal interpreting. It’s impossible to do that in 8 weeks. There are many component deaf legal interpreters who would be happy to share. Many around the country could explain why it’s important to have a deaf/hearing team to interpret for police in serious situations and investigations. Without that, it’s very dangerous. Today, most police officers will have video recordings for their interviews. I don’t use the word interrogations anymore because it’s a scary word. I’ve replaced it with “interviews.” With video, if a hearing interpreter or a CODA is standing there, they’ll be in the video. A defense attorney can obtain it and show it to an expert who is competent and find where there were mistakes or omissions. If there’s any bias in favor of the cops, that can be noted in the review. Then during the trial, there can be testimony explaining why you can’t trust that translation. So if police are using cops that are not ready, not skilled, or not certified, that makes their cases weaker. It’s dangerous for themselves and they should see the benefits of using a professional deaf/hearing interpreting team.
It’s hard because again, suppose I was in another country and I’m lost and need help, it would be great to find an officer who could talk in the same language. At the same time, it’s important to understand that deaf people have rights to fully understand cops and have their preferences in what kind of communication aids, be it an interpreter, pen and paper, or a video meeting. They have much more power in interacting with police than what many people think. If you feel discriminated against, you should contact a lawyer.
(End interview)
Thank you, Carla.
-——
Sponsored video by Convo: www.convorelay.com
———
[Advertisement from 988 Helpline]
Exciting News! The 988 Lifeline launched new American Sign Language services for callers who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing. It’s a new resource for people to access help when they need it. Visit 988lifeline.org and select “ASL Now.”
———
We also reached out to a Deaf man named Datrell Morgan, who used to be a police officer. We explained this situation and asked him to share his insight as a former police officer.
Datrell said it is a bad idea for a police officer to also serve as a certified interpreter because of three reasons: liability issues, conflict of confidentiality, and it will cause more issues in court. It is best to hire an interpreter to protect the deaf person and the police officer for accurate information. He said it is fine that the police officer knows basic sign language to start the conversation but definitely not interpret.
Thank you Datrell for your time.
We also reached out to the NYPD office for their response. We asked a few questions, and they did not give us detailed responses. We will show you a screenshot of their responses. First, we asked them about the officers becoming certified interpreters and what was their reason for agreeing to that; their response to us was:
(Screenshot of response #1: “These officers are not being certified. They learned keywords and phrases to help communicate with victims. – DCPI, Spokesperson”)
Then we clarified again and pointed out to the article, and what it said — that they will become interpreters — and their reply to us was:
(Screenshot of response #2: “Only 15 officers, once they sit for, pass the national exam, and become certified ASL interpreters.”)
That is what they said to us. Jessica, the main person that is leading this, did post on her Facebook about this and said she is excited about doing it.
(Screenshot of Facebook post by Jessica Wohlstetter on March 7. It reads, “I’m so excited to finally share some amazing news!! I have partnered with the NYPD and their “American Sign Language Initiative.” I will be instructing current members of the NYPD on how to become an ASL interpreter. We launched last week and I can’t wait to see all of the amazing things that happen! (ILY emojis) A photo shows Jessica sitting on a table in what seems to be a NYPD office)
That post was later removed. We did try to reach out to Jessica for her to share her response, but she has not responded to us yet.
This is a summary of what has been going on, giving you a bigger idea of what has been happening related to this situation.
RID Full Statement:
To answer your questions, RID has not had any contact with the individuals who have implemented this program. We are aware that there has been misinformation stated in the original NY Post article, and reached out to the editor with the pertinent clarifications needed. The editor has removed information about RID from the article at our request. RID cannot speculate on why our organization’s name would have been printed on any materials, or mentioned in any training, as we do not have accurate accounts from the persons providing this information, including those who are promoting it.
We recognize that there are numerous programs and workshops available that are designed to assist individuals with attaining certification. In order to promote excellence in sign language interpreting, RID believes that all interpreters should demonstrate the skills, knowledge, and abilities to interpret effectively in general settings by attaining appropriate certification and credentials. RID’s Certification Maintenance Program (CMP) approves continuing educational activity to support our members who have already earned their certification(s). Our professional development program is designed to further the breadth and depth of knowledge expected of nationally certified interpreters. It is outside of our purview to be involved in, or endorse in any way, a preparatory program or workshop. In more formalized educational programs such as Interpreter Training Programs or Interpreter Preparation Programs, the Commision on Collegiate Interpreter Education maintains the purview of accreditation of those programs.
In respect to Title II, RID cannot speculate on why individuals would mention this. Title II of the ADA refers to state and local governments. RID and NAD have advocacy documents that may be of interest and benefit to this discussion which can be found here: NAD's Advocacy Letter on Police and RID's Position Statement on Multiple Roles. We encourage our members and the diverse ASL using communities to familiarize themselves with these documents in addition to the benefits of sourcing an RID certified interpreter.
RID is committed to protecting consumers through the maintenance of our certification programs, and application of the NAD-RID Code of Professional Conduct through our Ethical Practices System (EPS), our advocacy efforts, as well as the testing mechanisms administered by CASLI.