Page 191 - Reading Between the Sign Intercultural Communication for Sign Language Interpreters

176 Reading Between the Signs

Is There Audism in RID?
So far we have examined some subtle behaviors by which we, as
individual interpreters, may take the power of self-determination
out of the hands of the Deaf. We may find ourselves embarrassed
to admit that we have consciously or unconsciously acted in ways
that could be judged audist. But, what about our national organi-
zation, RID? Let us take a brief look at its beginnings. In Silver
Threads, Lou Fant states that the Deaf and hearing people (most
of whom were from Deaf families) who founded the organization
in 1964 “were of like mind in [their] attitude toward deaf people
and shared a common vision about the role of interpreter” (Fant
34). The charter members were divided into two categories: in-
terpreters and “sustaining members,” which was the designation
for the Deaf people present. It is ironic that the word sustaining
has several meanings. We cannot guess which of the definitions
listed in Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language
the Deaf members were expected to fulfill: “maintaining or keep-
ing in existence,” “carrying the weight or burden of,” “enduring,”
“suffering as in an injury,” “strengthening the spirit of,” and “en-
couraging.” As it turned out, probably a little of each.
Carl Kirchner, president of RID from 1972 to 1978, explains
(in a personal communication) that there were several events that
gradually created a rift between the Deaf and hearing members
of RID. The real rift, however, came in relation to issues involving
testing and certification.
In RID’s original format for testing interpreters, candidates
were interviewed and evaluated by teams made up of three Deaf
and two hearing evaluators. The organization felt the need to re-
tain its Deaf members to help with these evaluations. The Deaf
members, however, began to resent the fact that, other than for
these testing purposes, they were not asked to work much as in-
terpreters. In effect, they were helping the hearing interpreters
make money while they themselves were not enabled to do so.
Meanwhile, as the seventies progressed, so did interpreter train-
ing programs. A new generation of interpreters, who had not grown
up in Deaf families, were becoming involved in RID, bringing with
them values that were different from those of the original group
that had founded it. Kirchner explains that these new interpreters
focused more on “professionalism,” whereas the older genera-
tion had focused more on “service.” The new group questioned
the value of having Deaf people on the evaluation teams, some-

07 MINDESS PMKR 176 10/18/04, 12:02 PM