14 Oct The Reminder on Consideration for Team Interpreting
Have you ever been on assignments that booked you for a hearing but turned out to be a full-length trial? One that involves extensive evidence submission and multiple witnesses. These situations are inevitable as sometimes thing changes at the last minute. But what can we do about this? What can we do to raise awareness on the issue so everyone can benefit from having the interpreter in the room?
Even as a seasoned interpreter, solo interpreting over sixty (60) minutes greatly affects the interpreter’s mental capacity. Verbal exchanges between attorneys are not simple conversations between colleagues. They are carefully crafted arguments, probing questions, and legal citations. All of which require the interpreter’s intense concentration to accurately convey the actual meaning from one language to another.
A report by the Scientific Expert Panel on Air Traffic Controller Safety, Work Hours, and Health outlined that ATCs are not to work alone for over two hours. This is mainly due to the nature of their job which involves the safety of the passengers.
Similarly, a legal procedure is no different. It can affect a person’s life and livelihood. Can and will the judicial system afford that? As administrator of justice, can you afford to have an exhausted interpreter misinterpreting in court? This is something that can be prevented and should be carefully considered if we are doing our best to serve justice to all parties involved.
Citing NAJIT’s position paper, TEAM INTERPRETING IN COURT-RELATED PROCEEDINGS,
“The length of time an interpreter can effectively focus on processing complex information delivered at high speeds and render it accurately and immediately into another language is finite. An interpreter suffering from mental fatigue is more likely to make mistakes that could negatively affect the integrity of the interpretation which, in turn, could be extremely detrimental to defendants, litigants, witnesses, victims, and the judicial process in general. Having reached the point of cognitive fatigue, the interpreter’s ability to self-monitor and self-correct is compromised, thus jeopardizing a faithful and complete interpretation”
NAJIT’s opinion on the issue of interpreters’ mental fatigue is one of many cases circling the web. Yet, at times, it is still an uphill battle for court interpreters to ask for fair work conditions that will foster good results for all parties involved, not set them up for failure.
The interpreter’s commitment to the court and the LEP is to provide a “faithful interpretation” from one language to another, to assist the judicial system to fairly administer justice and to provide the LEP with the constitutional rights (6th and 14th amendments) they are entitled to. Language access is essential to their ability to understand the legal proceedings. Having an incompetent interpreter or one at risk of delivering inaccurate interpretations will not only delay the process for all parties involved but can be seen as an obstruction of a fair trial, due process and language access.
When the situation calls for two interpreters and the court does not schedule for team interpreting, it is the interpreter’s responsibility to point out to the court the importance of a second interpreter. Limitations such as administrative issues, cost, or knowledge of the person assigning interpreters, etc. can be the reason. It is always helpful to check if you have a partner for team interpreting when scheduled to interpret in trials and long hearings. If cases arise when you need to work alone, requesting a break after 20-30 minutes is crucial to protect you and the quality of your interpretation. Don’t feel bad for wanting to do something right as the opposite can cause more unintended harm. A flight delay due to fixing a mechanical error is always better than the pilot taking the chance to fly an aircraft that will put everyone at risk. You cannot make everyone happy but safer is always better.
Ann (Jiraporn) Heath-Huynh grew up in a bilingual Thai-English household, using both languages in day-to-day life. Having lived on four continents, she now calls the U.S. home. Following the birth of her daughter in 2010, the chance to work in the language field afforded her an opportunity to change career directions; what began as a part-time job became a career that she is passionate about. After being added to the Maryland Judiciary’s roster of interpreters in 2015, many opportunities opened up to her, eventually leading to Department of State Conference Interpretation for Thai and English. Although she works mostly as a conference interpreter, she has always considered Maryland courts to be her home. Whenever an assignment is offered, she is always pleased to accept it and proudly wear her first-ever interpreter’s badge as a Maryland Judiciary Court Interpreter. Contact: ann.h.huynh@gmail.com
Main Graphic Photo by Priscilla Du Preez on Unsplash, Body Photo by NordWood Themes on Unsplash
I LOVE your analogy about delaying a flight due to mechanical issues. I just might steal that, if you don’t mind.
Thank you!
Certainly! Sadly flight delays has been a common addition to the travel day these days so it’s relatable to many!
I appreciated the piece on team interpreting in lengthy trials, but would like to see more about how multiple interpreters should be used. It is not unheard of for interpreters to be assigned to a witness and an accused, respectively, and then neither of them get a rest! In cases where a witness’ testimony occupies a whole day, the two should be taking turns, and court officers should be made aware of this.
And I can’t agree with you more. Sadly, not only the choice for using multiple interpreters are not (always) utilized, but for some of us it’s not even an option, for multiple reasons of course. Whether availability, cost or lack of awareness. Sadly, in some courts, not only we don’t have the option for multiple interpreters, team interpreters are not even considered unless it’s over 3 or 4 hours. I have been THAT interpreter working for both side before and have made the court aware to get an answer that “it’s under two hours” We all need to raise the=is awareness so all parties involved are educated and understand the importance of the issue. Accuracy should be a priority, specially for interpretation done in the court of law but in order to achieve that, there needs to be surrounding factors that help promotes that success not set us up for failure.
I second you on that. It makes no sense to have two fatigued interpreters when they could easily team for the benefit of everyone involved. Most courts I’ve worked for do not have two interpreters of the same language in the same room interpreting the same source message at the same time. Kudos to the courts that place more importance on justice (providing a fair trial with the least language barriers possible) than on saving some cents at the cost of potential injustice and the interpreter’s wellbeing. Speak up colleagues. we should also encourage more team interpreting for depositions.
Thanks for chiming in! These problems we are facing made me wonder how long the fight will be, and if we will make it before the profession is finally gets taken over by AI. While I understand certain constraints, budget and circumstances, but it should be the norm and standards that all the courts strives to observe. After all, the main concern should be to promote equitable access to the law and judicial system.
Very well written and on point Ann. In situations where an interpreter feels that they are not performing to an acceptable level they must inform the court, just as a pilot should call an emergency when there is a risk to safety affecting themselves or others. Even if the interpreter thinks they can push through that last 30 minutes when they are mentally drained, the holes in the Swiss cheese may line up and result in devastating consequences for the interests of justice. Remember, the interpreter is not the only one who is prone to make errors in the courtroom when they are fatigued. Lawyers and other participants are under pressure and their mistakes may represent holes in slices of the Swiss cheese. Everyone has an obligation to ensure they do not cross the threshold of compromising their obligations to the court. If you feel you cannot interpret competently as required by your code of ethics and professional responsibilities, then it’s time to make it known to the court in the interests of justice.
Ann, I loved the analogy you made! Just as pilots, we are responsible for the plane. Even if it means respectfully declining an assignment, we must follow practices we know are best.