Question for all of you....
STEVEN T. HARDY--GALLAUDET UNIVERSITY
Due to a recent event that is going to happen on campus an issue has co
me up that has made myself and my friends think deeply about.
Next week there is an entire week of lectures on the Bi/Bi approach and in the
annoucement it was stated that there would be no voice interpreters.
This made some of my freinds here at Gally-some hard of hearing-some deaf, some
hearing -but all were not completely confident in their ASL skills, feel that
they were not completely welcome to attend. The SBG stated that the reasons fo
r this were twofold: 1) they could not afford it 2) One of the speakers
(hearing) requested no voice interpreting for it would bother her to hear her o
wn voice while she is signing ASL. Anyway, the SBG is now looking into the
situation and will attempt to get interpreters for everyone. But the issue
raised an interesting point. Therein lies my question:
Do hearing people have a legal right to demand interpreters?
The three laws that some of us thought might give hearing people thsi right do
not apply. 504 of the rehab act deals with people needing rehabilitation-not
hearing people. 94-142 only applys to handicapped children
and ADA applies to disabled people.
So now if an interpreter truly acts as a conduit between two people-ie hearing
and deaf should hearing people in a deaf environment like Gallaudet have the
same legal right as a deaf person does in a hearing environment? Does anyone k
now of any legal ground for this right of access?
Steve
PS Please don't read this as I am being harsh on Gally-they are happy to resovl
e problems as best as they can but instead look at this as a bigger issue of
access for all people wheter or not they are legally disabled.
*******************************************************************************
Steven Thomas Hardy Was mich nicht umbringt,
12SH...@GALLUA.BITNET macht mich starker
Gallaudet University
800 Florida Ave, NE Box 2635 202/651-5540 v/t
Washington DC 20002 202/651-5747 fax
********************************************************************************
Miriam Clifford
signing deaf, etc., to have a voice interpreter, but I shouldn't thing that
the deaf community, especially a group that is supposedly getting a genreal
(sorry, general) education that will fit them for life in the big world,
would want to cut themselves off further from that world. I think if I
were an employer and heard that Gally was not going to be accessable to
hearing people, I would say, "Well fooey on them! If they can't meet me
part way, I sure don't need them!"
dm...@ecsvax.uncecs.edu dm...@ecsvax.bitnet
Miriam (Mimi) Clifford; 2535 Sevier St, Durham, NC 27705; 919-489-4821
STEVEN T. HARDY--GALLAUDET UNIVERSITY
Miriam,
It is not that Gally is not being inaccessible, they will be providing
the needed interpreters. It is more of a issue that as far as I can read the l
aws-the only people that have a "right" to terps are the disabled. Well terps
are for both people not just the deaf. So perhaps we need to make changes in 1
)our idea of what a disability is and 2) who has rights and when to interp
reters.
Imagine if I (hearing) was being interviewed for a job by a deaf person. Who
is the interpreter for? I want the job, the deaf person simply speaks ano
ther language that I (assuming that I did not know sign) do not, so I am the p
erson that is handicapped without an interpreter. Do I have a right to get o
ne? or must I pay for it myself--thus facing discrimination for being deaf/sig
ning impaired?
I guess that it all depends on your centre of perspective....
Steve
PS These late night thoughts always drive me crazy!!! Maybe I should sleep mo
re often but my graduate teachers (and myself) expect soooo much! :)
CXL...@ritvax.bitnet
used (for sign to voice) or at least made available for hearing
participants. I share his concerns: suppose a deaf oral adult asked for
an oral interpreter, was willing to pay for one, but to ensure equal
access, the people who held the event would provde the sign-to-voice
interpreter. I would think that due to ADA's accessibility guidelines,
my rights have been denied or violated. I have the same concerns, and
am interested to see what would happen.
I'd rather see many choices be provided than just ONE for ALL people...
Anyway, in a like vein, happy thanksgiving and gobbledegooky experiences
to one and all!
Miriam Clifford
with the disability, IF a voice interpreter is not present (and fitted with
an assistive listening device usually). One of the most pleasant and
rewarding contacts we (husband and I) had with deaf signers was at a lunchj
where one of the other hearing people who signed, (actually a terp, but off
duty) was willing to both sign and voice interpret back and forth for us.
We were able to have a flowing, back and forth conversation in a way that
simply had been impossible before. It was wonderful!
Seth Gordon
*not* Bi/Bi, it is Mono/Mono. Actions speak louder, er, more brightly
than words.
I don't know if hearing people have a legal right to interpreters in
that situation, but somebody should remind the SBG that Gallaudet is
heavily subsidized by the Federal Government, i.e., American taxpayers,
most of whom are hearing.
--
seth gordon ... <se...@silver.lcs.mit.edu> ... .sig under construction;
mit bs '91 ... learning ctr 4 deaf children ... pardon the inconvenience
Angelique N Wahlstedt
>Do hearing people have a legal right to demand interpreters?
Sure. (Except for the speaker who didn't want to be voice-interpreted -- her
wishes should be respected, even if her reasons make no sense.)
--
Angeli "Ms. Pepper" Wahlstedt (pep...@shell.portal.com)
"If nobody else was violent, I could conquer the whole stupid planet with
just a butter knife." - Dogbert
Theodore Chen
>Steve Hardy was posing a question about the interpreters not being
>used (for sign to voice) or at least made available for hearing
>participants. I share his concerns: suppose a deaf oral adult asked for
>an oral interpreter, was willing to pay for one, but to ensure equal
>access, the people who held the event would provde the sign-to-voice
>interpreter. I would think that due to ADA's accessibility guidelines,
>my rights have been denied or violated. I have the same concerns, and
>am interested to see what would happen.
i don't know if you're hearing.
the ADA applies only to people who satisfy the legal definition of
disability. although the ADA accessibility guidelines don't
specifically say that they're for disabled people, only disabled
people and the dept. of justice have standing to sue.
since the statement of purpose of the ADA clearly indicates that it's
for disabled people, i doubt you would have much of a chance of winning
on that.
personally, i think we should make an effort to reach out to hearing
people. i think there's a lot to be gained by having a voice interpreter.
i also understand better when i can hear a voice instead of just reading
the lips of an oral interpreter.
-teddy