“It’s like I am not really there“: Ethical reasoning skills and the interpreting profession
Since its beginning, the sign language interpreting profession has made moral and justice claims as its raison d’etre. That is, interpreters claim to provide access to deaf people. Interpreters also claim to make decisions that claim we can empower Deaf people. Further, interpreters claim to be allies, and of recent distinction, we have raised concerns for social justice. However, when comparing our justice claims to our typical discourse norms, interpreters appear to fall short. In an earlier presentation, these discourse norms (i.e., use of heuristics) were highlighted as theoretically problematic. In this presentation, we consider the data behind this claim.
For decades, the Center for the Study of Ethical Development has been collecting data on how people from around the world respond to an instrument that measures moral development and ethical reasoning. This measure, The Defining Issues Test (DIT) uses ethical scenarios in combination with a rating and ranking scheme to measure a respondent’s justice-reasoning, or the ability to reason beyond the conventions and to consider cooperative, collaborative, and shareable ideals.
The DIT was administered to a cohort of 25 sign language interpreters in the US. This presentation reports on the DIT data that suggests that our heuristics do indeed impact our ethical reasoning. Normative data for different age, educational, and professionals also show that interpreters may lag behind those individuals they work with (doctors, lawyers, etc.).
Although the Live streamed event was Interpreted unfortunately the interpreters were not recorded for the Webinar.
The Webinar will be available for viewing until June 30, 2022.