Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Scott refers to the paper's stance as condescending, apparently because of the article's emphasis on therapeutic
intervention strategy. This illustrates another misunderstanding of the intent of the article: "Family Therapy with Deaf
Persons: The Systemic Utilization of an Interpreter." Its objective is to describe how to utilize an interpreter
psychologically, given specific kinds of treatment considerations for specific kinds of families that are experiencing specific
kinds of problems that necessitate family treatment. In this case, the presence of an intepreter is often perceived as symbolic
of their Deaf child. One may explain this phenomenon as stimulus generalization or transference. The interpreter, affiliated
with Deaf culture and competent in Sign Language, is most similar to their Deaf child; he or she also represents precisely
what these particular parents have been taught by the school system to deny and avoid. Consider a clinical example of one
mother who, in this case, requested with ambivalence that the therapist sign and that the family use an interpreter in
treatment. During one session, as the interpreter began to sign, she commented, "You know? I just realized that my
[18-year-old] son is Deaf!" and reported feeling relieved. Realistically perceiving him in this manner enabled both of them
to enjoy a much happier and productive relationship.
In contrast, families that continue to deny the implications of deafness are clearly in pain; day to day family life is often
tinged with feelings of frustration and being overwhelmed. Such parents are frequently shocked, when interacting with the
educational system, to find out that "my 19-year-old Deaf child is reading at only the fourth grade level." (That is the
average reading level of Deaf adults in this country [14]). Given communication barriers that limit incidental learning and
given this extremely low level of reading achievement, it becomes apparent that Scott's suggestion that the average Deaf
child "learns as many people do without being taught" is erroneous and misleading.
Scott's interpretation of how an interpreter can modify the balance of power in the family? "just through sheer numbers,
a therapist and an interpreter and a child who sign are more powerful than two parents who do not"? suggests this
complicated and subtle process to be a simple game of "tug of war." It is not. By the therapist demonstrating empathy with
each family member, eliciting his or her strengths, and skillfully shifting coalitions, he or she can facilitate accomplishing
the goal of this process, which is to help families resolve the pain that necessitated treatment. To resolve pain often
necessitates changing behavior. Given what family therapists have learned about cybernetic processes such as homeostasis,
it should come as no surprise that change is often difficult and happens slowly.
In regard to persistent parental perceptions of helplessness, I have received several phone calls from parents who do not
want their 25-year-old Deaf "child" to own a car and drive, or who report that "my daughter is immature because she never
understands my directions." An interpreter enables the Deaf child to communicate clearly and succinctly with his or her
parents ("deep communication"); repeated demonstrations of effective communication of thoughts and feelings enhances the
Deaf person's status in the family. To label these parents' behavior toward maintaining homeostasis (perceiving their child
as helpless) as incompetent or callous would be incorrect and condescending; to correctly label it as indicative of fear of
change, fear of the future, or fear of "letting go" is to pave the way for an "open family system" and consequent family
growth and happiness.
The correct definition of an interpreter is important in the field of deafness. Scott's description of an interpreter as one
"who signs" and the implication that "a trusted friend" or "family member" can interpret is an extremely serious professional
misconception. The Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (RID), a national evaluation system established in 1964, has
clearly distinguished interpreting from signing(15). A fully certified interpreter (CSC) is one who has obtained an
extremely high level of proficiency with at least two different types of Sign Language? Signed English and American Sign
Language; who is able to accurately interpret/transliterate back and forth between these two languages and spoken English;
and who has taken additional course work in audiology, cross-cultural issues, linguistics, and ethical considerations. A
signer is simply one who can sign at varying levels of proficiency. Because many counselors have navely utilized signers as
opposed to interpreters in treatment, R.I.D. has established stringent certification requirements so that what Scott terms
"muddling up communication" will not occur. "A trusted friend" or "member of the family" may be qualified to sign but
certainly not to interpret. Scott's assertion is akin to stating that anyone who has taken one undergraduate counseling course
is qualified to do psychotherapy.
It further seems psychologically unreasonable to expect that a family member would accurately interpret what the Deaf
member is signing. On the contrary, as with hearing families, the level of distortion and misinterpretation would be
expected to be in accordance with the explicit/implicit rules of communication between the parent and the Deaf child and to
increase in direct proportion to the level of conflict between them. I am reminded of an incident in which a Deaf male was
receiving a psychiatric evaluation, with his father serving as interpreter. After a while, it became puzzling to the psychiatrist
that the Deaf son would seem to sign for several minutes, whereas his father voiced only brief sentences. When asked about
this, the father replied, "Oh, don't worry, doc? most of what he was saying was gibberish."
In addition, Scott does not appear to understand the role of an interpreter. He states that "language is a complicated
business and the addition of a person who interprets has a potential for muddling up communication." This is precisely why
an interpreter is required! An interpreter has had extensive and specialized training in "demuddling" communication at a
linguistic level.1 Scott also states that "the interpreter can be more beneficial to the therapist in establishing and shifting
coalitions...." Not only is this antithetical to the role of interpreters, but it clearly violates their code of ethics (15).
Copyright 1999 Family Process.
2
The practice of family therapy in general is a complicated business. The therapist must authentically "be with" and
accommodate to each individual person in the room: respect each person's model of reality and elicit, without distortion,
why each person has come into treatment. The therapist must master specific techniques and, in the context of authentic
respect, join the family in eliciting their assets and strengths and in finding solutions to their problems. Finally, the therapist
must be able to achieve a "metaposition" in order to observe all of the participants in the therapeutic interactions, to make
sense out of the "gestalt." The suble art of doing family therapy was not elucidated on the presumption that the readers of
this journal have achieved a certain level of competence as family therapists. I have described elsewhere (7) the process by
which many family therapists learn these skills.
Specifically, with regard to treating families in which there is a Deaf member, four points become evident:
1. Since doing effective therapy is complicated and requires concentration, it is impossible to do therapy and be
concerned at the same time with accurate interpretation or transliteration of at least two different sign language
systems and spoken English. Interpreting is also complicated and requires concentration. Simultaneously providing
therapy while interpreting will cause both to suffer.
2. It is vital for the therapist to respect each person's model of the world, both that of the Deaf and of hearing persons.
Thus, if ASL is the Deaf person's primary and preferred mode of communication, it is my practice to sign in ASL
without the use of voice (while the interpreter interprets in spoken English for the hearing members of the family)
and to use spoken English to communicate with the hearing members of the family (while the interpreter interprets in
ASL for the Deaf member).2 The interpreter also interprets all intrafamily communication for the Deaf and hearing
persons.
3. In order to work with families in which there is a Deaf member, the clinician must be a competently trained family
therapist and be knowledgeable about deafness.
4. Delineating specific treatment considerations and techniques for families with specific kinds of problems certainly
need not, and should not, imply negativism, lack of respect, or condescension.
Scott's list of words like "enjoy, love, friendly, joke, laughter" clearly connote family. But, if the therapist is not able to
integrate what these words represent with how to help families solve the problems that brought them into therapy, they
become empty words that sound good but are devoid of substance.
REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Chess, S. and Fernandez, P., The Handicapped Child in School: Behavior and Management, New York,
Bruner/Mazel, 1981.
Connor, L. E., (1972) "That the Deaf May Hear and Speak," The Volta Review, 74, 518-527.
Denton, D. M., "The Philosophy of Total Communication," Brit. Deaf News, 1976.
Freeman, R., Malkins, S. and Hastings, J., (1975) "Psychosocial Problems of Deaf Children and Their Families: A
Comparative Study," Am. Ann. Deaf, 120, 391-405.
Greenberg, M. T., (1980) "Hearing Families with Deaf Children: Stress and Functioning Related to
Communication Method," Am. Annals Deaf, 125, 1063-1071.
Gregory, S., The Deaf Child and His Family, Halsted, N.Y., Allen and Unwin, 1976.
Harvey, M. A., (1980) "On Becoming a Family Therapist: The First Three Years," Int. J. Fam. Ther., 2, 263-274.
Hoffmeister, R. J., "Deaf Families: A Functional Perspective,"in K. Thurman (ed.), Handicapped Families:
Research and New Perspectives, New York, Academic Press, in press.
Hoffmeister, R. J. and Shettle, C., "Results of a Family Sign Language Intervention Program, Paper presented at
the 50th meeting of Convention of American Instructors of the Deaf, Rochester, New York, 1981.
Jeffers, J. and Borley, M., Speechreading (Lipreading), Springfield, Ill., Charles C. Thomas, 1964.
Levine, E. S., Ecology of Deafness, New York, Columbia University Press, 1983.
Luey, M. S., (1980) "Between Worlds: The Problem of Deafened Adults," Social Work Health Care, 5, 253-264.
Mindel, E. and Vernon, M., They Grow in Silence, Silver Spring, Md., National Association of the Deaf, 1971.
Moores, D., Educating the Deaf: Psychology, Principles and Practices, Boston, Houghton-Mifflin, 1982.
Moores, D., Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, Code of Ethics, Silver Spring, Md., 1976.
"communicate very well" without Sign Language. He cannot have it both ways.
2This is because it is impossible to sign in ASL while speaking in English. They are two completely different languages.