Carla M. Mathers, Esquire, CSC, SC: L serves as General Counsel to Viable Inc., a next generation video relay interpreting service in Rockville, Maryland. For 14 years, Ms. Mathers was employed as litigation associate with McCollum & Associates, LLC, in College Park, Maryland. Ms. Mathers is licensed in the state and federal courts of Maryland and the District of Columbia. Ms. Mathers graduated magna cum laude from Howard University School of Law and summa cum laude from the University of Maryland. Ms. Mathers' interpreting degree is from the College of Southern Idaho. Ms. Mathers is a former President and Vice President of the Potomac Chapter Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf. Ms. Mathers sat on the Maryland Administrative Office of the Courts' Advisory Committee on Interpreters Sub-committee on Ethics and Sub-committee on Testing and Training. In 2005, Ms. Mathers received the Region II Judie Husted Leadership Award from the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf. In 2006, Ms. Mathers published Sign Language Interpreters in Court: Understanding Best Practices, a text for interpreters, attorneys and courts to understand the principles underlying ASL court interpreting. Her other writings may be found at www.carlamathers.net.

THE STATE OF THE STATES: Current and emerging trends in the use of deaf interpreters in legal settings A reaserch report by the NCIEC Legal Interpreting Workgroup

This paper presents findings from legal research performed under contract to the NCIEC Legal Interpreting Workgroup. The author analyzed statutory and case law authority regarding the use of deaf interpreters in legal settings and presented findings in a report entitled:

Deaf Interpreters in Court: An Accommodation That Is More Than Reasonable.

The social science research reviewed indicates that a substantial number of deaf litigants are unable to participate in the justice system unless provided with a deaf-hearing interpreting team accommodation. The research demonstrated that a number of factors contribute to the need for a deaf interpreter including the background and the characteristics of the deaf litigant, the quality and skills of the non-deaf court interpreter and the nature of the proceedings. State and federal statutes, in recognition of the unique skills brought to the legal setting by the deaf interpreter, either expressly permit the use of a deaf interpreter, or implicitly permit the court to appoint deaf interpreters. State statutes provide a framework under which the court interpreter should undertake an analysis to determine whether a deaf interpreter would assist, improve or enhance the quality of the interpretation. Using this standard, court interpreters are obligated to inform the court of the need for a deaf interpreter using the standard applicable in the respective state.

Current statutory frameworks are typically certification-based statutes that identify the credential an interpreter must hold to work in legal settings. Current statutes generally also indicate the settings in which qualified legal interpreters are required. Emerging statutes tend to combine a licensing requirement with a definition of the specific settings in which an interpreter holding a specific credential may work. This combination is often seen when an executive agency is responsible for drafting regulations that implement the statute. Another emergent trend is when the legislation refines the definition of interpreter in the Americans with Disabilities Act to indicate that when an interpreter is required by the ADA, in any setting, that interpreter must also be qualified under the state interpreting statute.

This presentation will present the results of the nationwide statutory analysis of the definition of a qualified deaf interpreter and of the standards issued to appoint a deaf interpreter. The presentation will include the results from the extensive case law review of opinions that have considered the issue of deaf interpreters on appeal. The presentation will include a discussion of the current trends in the cases and statutes and suggest emerging developments in legal interpreting statutes. Participants will use the information presented to craft arguments for appointing a deaf interpreter that are based upon statutory and case law authority.