In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, AND ANSWERS Alan B. Crammatte Editor, Comments The Comment, Question, and Answer department is published as a service to professional readers and parents of deaf children. It is an attempt to provide practical information on the basic aspects of deafness, particularly in relation to education. Although all questions submitted cannot be used, those considered to be of greatest interest to readers will be published. Answers are prepared by competent authorities. Material submitted must contain the writer's name and address. Address questions and comments to: Alan B. Crammatte, 897 Windsong Dr., Arnold, Md. 21012. COMMENT—"Three is a crowd" is the traditional view of the psychotherapeutic situation. Yet deaf folk history is full of instances of horrible misdiagnoses in counseling of deaf patients by psychiatrists unable to communicate with the patient and unknowing about problems of deafness . Inclusion of interpreters has been an amelioration of this difficulty, yet problems remain. A letter from Robert Pollard, Jr., points out one problem. Lucinda Shupe, an interpreter at a nearby mental health center, was asked to contribute the interpreter's viewpoint—ABC. Dr. Michael Harvey's article concerning interpreters in family therapy (yxwvutsrponmlkihgfedcbaYWVUTSRQPONMLJIHGFEDCBA Annals, December 1982) helped fill a noticeable gap between the clinical utilization of interpreters in psychotherapy and the literature which has been published in the area. Of particular interest, however, was Dr. Harvey's assertion that "an interpreter is strictly prohibited from disclosing any feelings or opinions , even if requested . . . by the therapist" (p. 826) which, he claims, is the stance of the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (RID). While attending two recent conferences on deafness and mental health in Rochester, New York, I was struck by the great deal of time which the programs devoted to the specific issue of interpreters in the therapy situation. At both meetings, it was stressed that post-therapy interviews with the interpreter would provide useful information concerning not only problems encountered in interpretation, but would also shed light upon the nature of transference issues which would undoubtedly arise between the client, interpreter, and the therapist. Since such discussion would involve a degree of selfdisclosure of "feelings" and "opinions" by the interpreter, it is apparent that a conflict may exist between the RID Code of Ethics and recommended clinical practice. The use of interpreters in psychotherapy is not specifically addressed in the RID Code of Ethics, though several statements could relate to the therapy situation. Quoting directly from the RID Code of Ethics (1979): Even seemingly unimportant information could be damaging in theywutsronmlihgedca wrong hands. Therefore . . . interpreter transliterators must not say anything about any assignment . . . If the interpreter/ transliterator's own feelings interfere with rendering the message accurately, he/ she shall withdraw from the situation, (emphasis added) These statements seem to leave enough leeway for the unusual dynamics of the therapy situation to allow for therapist/ interpreter discussions of the interpreter's feelings and reactions . Specifically, the therapist is a professional as well, acting in accordance with the American Psychological Association's Code of Ethics and is certainly not the "wrong hands" referred to by the RID. Secondly, the purpose of discussing these feelings with the interpreters would be to address transference and countertransference issues. There is an important distinction between this and the issue of "feelings interfer(ing) with rendering the message accurately." Although these interpretations can be used to refute Dr. Harvey's assertion, the RID Code of Ethics still contains several unrealistic statements concerning the interpreter's "personal involvement": A.A.D. I ¡une 1983 371 Comments, Questions, and Answers He/ she shall not become personally involved . . . (one should possess) the ability to prove oneself unbiased . . . the interpreter/ transliterator may not become personally involved in the proceedings. These goals are admittedly desirable; however , even the most experienced interpreter cannot devoid him/ herself from personal feelings about the interpreting situation, particularly when it involves the emotion-laden content of most therapy sessions. Furthermore, these feelings will influence the dynamics of the therapy situation itself, whether the interpreter is consciously aware of them or not; a viewpoint which is shared by many schools of psychological thought. It is therefore imperative that these important influences be explored and addressed directly, rather...

pdf

Share