*This information appeared during Week 10 during Beginning ASL 1.

ADA wasn't the first law to address disparities and inequalities in the way certain groups of Americans were treated (by governmental agencies, by organizations/businesses, and by fellow Americans). The start of Disability Law is rooted in the centuries of Civil Rights unrest and fights for equality! After all, Deaf Americans are also "of color"/minorities, females/other-genders, and of lower socio-economic status (read: "POOR"!).

The first Federal law to address the communication/interpreting needs of Deaf people in America was the Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-333). This provided funding to state Departments of Vocational Rehabilitation ("DVR", but in CA, Department Of Rehab, or "DOR") to support the costs of interpreters with Deaf DOR Clients. More and more Deaf DVR clients wanted interpreters, and DOR had money to pay for them! This created a need for more ASL-English interpreters who were qualified and competent!

A specific Section (Section 504) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (PL 93-112) expanded the 1965 act by adding all agencies and organizations that received Federal funding had to provide accommodations and accessibility services, namely interpreters! In the past, only Deaf and Hard of Hearing students who were receiving DOR services to go to college/university were covered. With this extension, any DHH student in college/university had the right to request ASL-English interpreters—and the schools had to pay for such services.

Then 1990 happened!

Question: What's this ADA thing?

Answer: A Federal law, passed in 1990 (and enacted in 1991) under George H.W. Bush. It has 5 "Titles", or sections:

TITLE I - Equal Employment Opportunity for Individuals with Disabilities

This Title is designed to help people with disabilities access the same employment opportunities and benefits available to people without disabilities. Employers must provide reasonable accommodations to qualified applicants or employees. A reasonable accommodation is any modification or adjustment to a job or the work environment that will enable an applicant or employee with a disability to participate in the application process or to perform essential job functions.

This portion of the law is regulated and enforced by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Employers with 15 or more employees must comply with this law. The regulations for Title I define disability, establish guidelines for the reasonable accommodation process, address medical examinations and inquiries, and define “direct threat” when there is significant risk of substantial harm to the health or safety of the individual employee with a disability or others.

TITLE II - Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in State and Local Government Services

Title II of the ADA prohibits discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities in all programs, activities, and services of public entities. It applies to all state and local governments, their departments and agencies, and any other instrumentalities or special purpose districts of state or local governments. It clarifies the requirements of section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, for public transportation systems that receive federal financial assistance, and extends coverage to all public entities that provide public transportation, whether or not they receive federal financial assistance. It establishes detailed standards for the operation of public transit systems, including commuter and intercity rail (e.g., AMTRAK).

This Title outlines the administrative processes to be followed, including requirements for self-evaluation and planning; requirements for making reasonable modifications to policies, practices, and procedures where necessary to avoid discrimination; architectural barriers to be identified; and the need for effective communication with people with hearing, vision and speech disabilities. This Title is regulated and enforced by the U.S. Department of Justice.

TITLE III - Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability by Public Accommodations and in Commercial Facilities

This Title prohibits private places of public accommodation from discriminating against individuals with disabilities. Examples of public accommodations include privately-owned, leased or operated facilities like hotels, restaurants, retail merchants, doctor’s offices, golf courses, private schools, day care centers, health clubs, sports stadiums, movie theaters, and so on. This Title sets the minimum standards for accessibility for alterations and new construction of facilities. It requires public accommodations to remove barriers in existing buildings where it is easy to do so without much difficulty or expense. It directs businesses to make "reasonable modifications" to their usual ways of doing things when serving people with disabilities. It also requires that they take steps necessary to communicate effectively with customers with vision, hearing, and speech disabilities. This Title is regulated and enforced by the U.S. Department of Justice.

TITLE IV - Telecommunications

This Title requires telephone and Internet companies to provide a nationwide system of interstate and intrastate telecommunications relay services that allows individuals with hearing and speech disabilities to communicate over the telephone. This Title also requires closed captioning of federally funded public service announcements. It is regulated by the Federal Communication Commission.

TITLE V - Miscellaneous Provisions

The final Title contains a variety of provisions relating to the ADA as a whole, including its relationship to other laws, state immunity, its impact on insurance providers and benefits, prohibition against retaliation and coercion, illegal use of drugs, and attorney’s fees. This Title also provides a list of certain conditions that are not to be considered as disabilities. ADA National Network

Question: Where do ASL-English interpreters fall in the ADA?

Answer: The ADA considers ASL-English interpreters as "auxiliary aids" for someone with a disability (including deafness) to request, in order to access businesses, organizations, facilities, etc. (public accommodations). Interpreters are one form of access, although Deaf and Hard of Hearing people may have different ideas of what "access" looks like for them. Maybe it's preferential seating (better visibility or better sound). Maybe they need captioning by a live captionists/writer (CART - Computer-Aided Real-Time Captioning). Maybe they need audio description of an event or movie (blind consumers). Or maybe they need alternative print menus (blind or low-vision consumers in restaurants) or scripts (a museum tour).

The first incarnation of the ADA wasn't as robust or clear in some senses, as the years passed and situations arose that weren't clearly addressed. In 2010, President Obama passed "Section 1557 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" which strengthened the requirement of "qualified interpreters" as auxiliary aids in medical/healthcare settings. Additionally, guidance documents for Section 1557 stated that the hospital/service provider (Covered Entity) was to work WITH the recipient of accommodations services (Deaf/HH patient), allowing the patient to "give primary consideration when fulfilling the request". This meant that Deaf people could request specific interpreters whom they deemed most qualified and effective for their healthcare interpretation needs!

Question: Which one of those Titles applies to me at my job (or out in public)?

Answer: Title I discusses employment (hiring, firing, promoting, etc.). If you're in management, then this Title might apply to your business practices and policies. HR usually understands the company's obligations under Federal, state, and local laws regarding non-discrimination and will guide you.

Title II applies to you if you work in a state or Federal governmental agency. ADA applies to all of these agencies and they cannot discriminate against Deaf/HH applicants, employees, or former employees based on their hearing status, communication needs, etc.

Title III applies to "public accommodations" or regular businesses. This means customers of those businesses AND employees of those businesses are covered under the ADA.

Titles IV and V most likely will not apply to you at GoodRx.

Question: Wait, who's paying for interpreters? That's got to be expensive!

Answer: The business (store, theater, organization, club, group, school, doctor, dentist, hospital, or other "public accommodation") is responsible to provide access to the public, including those with disabilities—like Deaf or blind individuals. The Americans with Disabilities Act (1990, 2000, 2010) requires that accessibility is paramount for Americans with Disabilities. It also puts the onus of paying for such access on federal, state, and municipal agencies/departments, as well as on the private business (called "public accommodations" in the law.

No one with a disability can be billed for the price of access (just as you wouldn't bill people in wheelchairs for building ramps, bill blind people for Brailling all signage and notifications, or bill the Deaf person for hiring an ASL-English Interpreter). To deny them services because of their disability (or "extra cost") is discrimination and if proven by the person with a disability, the business would be liable and could be sued.

This applies to Deaf teachers (who need ASL-English Interpreters for weekly/monthly/regular staff meetings, evaluations, in-service trainings, after-school meetings, etc.)—the cost of the interpreter cannot be "taken out of the Deaf employee's regular pay", nor can their wages be garnished to pay for "emergency requests" or other fees/charges/docking of perks.

The spirit of the ADA Law is to level the playing (employment) field and make up for centuries of oppression, ignorance, neglect, and discrimination. There are still business owners, managers, co-workers (and customers!) who try to defend their paltry position of "We can't afford an interpreter for this event!" by denying the request for access: "Uhhh, we don't have anyone on staff who can sign, so sorry!"; lying about their fiscal health: "Our current budget doesn't have any money for interpreters."); or pretending that getting a volunteer with little-to-no ASL fluency is good enough: "One of our employees' daughter learned her ABCs in Girl Scouts...she can sign for you during the meeting."—all of these approaches and responses to complying with ADA Accommodations requests are illegal and breaking the law!

Question: What if we're a non-profit (or religious) organization and really don't have the funds??

Answer: Non-Profits aren't "no profit" businesses. They make money, they plan, they have budgets. It's a simple forward-thinking choice to start saving up funds for potential future access needs. Saving up before the request comes in means that the business is truly focused on people, on effective communication, and on inclusion. Reaching out to potential Deaf clientele also matches the spirit of the ADA Law and most organizations' mission/vision statements!

Religious entities and organizations are not required to follow the ADA Law (and can choose NOT to provide access). I like to think that when a religious entity tells you who they are, what they believe in, and who they think belongs—just believe them. If that statement is INaccessibility and lack of respect/acceptance for diversity, diverse abilities, and individual requests, I go in the opposite direction!

Businesses can declare "undue hardship", meaning they cannot fiscally afford the cost of providing Interpreters/access. Even for sole proprietors, it can be difficult to prove to a court that you couldn't afford $100 - $500 (in a single fiscal year) to provide interpreters/access. You would probably have to prove that your business was so tiny, you earned only $500-$1,000 that year. So it would be "undue hardship" to use 1/10 th to ½ of your profits, and potentially damage your business.

But the worst offenders are usually the ones who should know better (Lawyers), those who have more than their fair share of access to income (Doctors/Dentists/Medical Providers), and even those whose job it is to provide education and learning (colleges and universities)! As is usual with American Laws, until someone is maimed, dies, or can prove significant oppression/injury to their well-being and potential future, the law usually has no teeth. And the ADA Law requires that Deaf people sue for discrimination under the law...with proof of discrimination.

How does the Deaf person know the office staff were talking to each other and planning to NOT call for an interpreter? Do Deaf people have access to emails and voice mails where supervisors and managers are discussing NOT hiring them because of the added costs for interpreters, captioning, extra devices/technology for the Deaf person's work space, etc.? There are many situations where Deaf people know they've been discriminated against, but can't prove it. Death by 1,000 paper cuts. :-(

*Businesses can receive deductions on their taxes for providing accommodations and accessibility, every tax year! Prior amounts were up to $10K, though that amount may have changed. You should discuss the possibility of writing-off your business' payments for accessibility services!

Background

Deaf individuals have the right to request the interpreter that they think fits their communication, personality, and topic/setting needs. And according to ADA law, they cannot be charged for interpreting services covered by the law. This means that when Deaf people need interpreters for doctor appointments, meetings with lawyers, college and school classes, work interviews/meetings/trainings/evaluations, seeing live theater productions, etc., they cannot be billed for the price of the interpreters. Nor can they have their wages garnished or be charged an additional fee that hearing people are not similarly assessed in the course of normal business. The goal of the ADA is to provide equality and accessibility "as if" it were a hearing person (but with the provision of accommodations and aids for access).

Perks

Businesses are entitled to a certain credit on their taxes (up to a fixed amount paid out during that tax year), if they work with a knowledgeable and competent tax preparer. Ultimately, the goal would be to provide services and business to the greatest number of customers, treating everyone equally by reducing barriers to their services/programs.

CHALLENGES

Unfortunately, many private American businesses are myopic about their overall liability under the law. They see the interpreting expense as "cost prohibitive" and an "unfair levy" to their low-margin businesses. (Starbucks, Apple, Microsoft, Lowe's, and other large businesses balk at providing regular interpreters for the life cycle of the Deaf employee, not realizing that the budget pricing is a minute percentage of their overall annual budget, they will/can receive the tax credit at the end of the year, AND knowledgeable/proficient Deaf employees = profit, efficiency, and happy workers!

(Federal agencies—including state and municipal agencies—are also notorious for cutting corners, negotiating down the fees to sub-par amounts, and even lying to avoid providing access to Deaf Americans!)

Non-profit organizations and religious-affiliated businesses try to avoid abiding by the ADA, citing "lack of profits" and/or church tax-exemptions. While this may apply in some cases, non-profits don't mean that the organization never makes ANY PROFITS. It just means that they should try to run a net-zero business overall. Many non-profits receive federal/state/municipal funding, and therefore must be accessible to the public (and that means Deaf people!). Some religious institutions also received federal/state/municipal funding which may require them to abide by such related laws and regulations. (Doesn't it seem ironic that those religious institutions that tout "acceptance of all", "come as you are", "all are ___'s children", and "help the poor/less fortunate" may attempt to avoid providing interpreting services??? Oh, the hypocrisy of a some that taints the piety and inclusiveness of several others.)

SOLUTIONS

Deaf people in America are quite aware of and disappointed in the consistency of interpreting service provision (in their education, their employment, and in their access to mainstream America!), as well as the dearth of available qualified and "good" interpreters. BUT, the fact is that the interpreters are usually more important for the hearing consumers, and not the Deaf consumers! Yes, Deaf people will struggle to understand the information being communicated to them, but they've struggled with that all of their lives and have compensated amazingly well, with grace and honor. Look at how they deal with their biological family on a daily basis! Deaf people have knowledge, wisdom, and amazing insights to share with their colleagues, co-workers, and businesses. They are untapped resources, AND they bring a diverse and different sensory approach to everything.

Providing qualified, effective, and "good" interpreters means that the hearing businesses and employers learn about barriers to quality service, opportunities for growth, and ways to leverage their Deaf employees' know-how to the benefit of their businesses/programs! Why wouldn't any American business not want to diversify their customer base, reduce barriers for consumers, and provide opportunities for their employees/students/partners to flourish?

Addendum

Deaf people still fight for access under the law (without being billed for it, stigmatized, or labeled as "that uppity/demanding Deaf person"), which was established to right the wrong of barriers and inaccessibility for hundreds of years. Hearing Americans rarely know the ins and outs of the ADA law, their liabilities and responsibilities under the law, and their recourse for not being able to pay!

When Obama passed and authorized the ACA ("Obamacare", the Affordable Care Act), he added in a much-needed, but still loosely interpreted, addition (which was finalized in 2016 by the Dept of Health and Human Services) that the patient requesting accommodations/special needs is the one to decide upon effectiveness. This particular update mentions the difference between "competent" and "qualified", with many legal scholars interpreting the intent of "qualified" to be equivalent to "certified".

I am not a lawyer, but read and research, and know that slowly, inch by inch, Deaf consumers who prefer ASL-English Interpretation are winning more and more access, with protections and laws/regulations removing barriers. It's a process though...and still many miles left to go.

In the past (prior to wide-spread Interpreter Training Programs at the Community College and University levels), Deaf individuals were the gatekeepers to the Interpreting Community! Deaf people met hearing people (or were related to them!) and taught them sign language, asked them to "sign for them" at informal events and important appointments/classes/job meetings. The Deaf Community "grew" their own Interpreters! They knew who was qualified, who was ready for which settings, and which interpreters truly cared for them, ASL, and their united goals.

Quid Pro Quo

A "Quid Pro Quo" system was established, similar to a pre-currency Barter System. A Deaf person would ask an Interpreter (they deemed qualified and capable) to interpret a Doctor Appointment, without pay. In return, the Deaf person might have been handy, and offered to do handy work around the Interpreter's home. Or maybe was a grease-monkey and promised a free oil change/tune-up to the Interpreter. In more rural areas, getting a dozen eggs, a homemade pie, or even a covered-dish/casserole from a Deaf family was a regular occurrence because the interpreter "signed for church", "helped out at a job interview", or "interpreted for someone in county jail for drunk and disorderly", etc.

It wasn't unusual for this system, since many interpreters were not full-time or even part-time. As CODAs (or other hearing family members), clergy, or Teachers of the Deaf, they "helped out" when they could, in their free time. The Deaf network and community was extensive and very closely-guarded, since all they had was themselves. Interpreters who were allowed into this tightly-knit community were invited to family celebrations, community events, even Deaf sporting events and Deaf Club nights.

When Interpreting Programs (ITPs) popped up all over the country (most with very little curriculum research and linguistic/professional foundational content), the demographics of the graduating "Interpreter" changed. Up until the mid 1990s, most ITPs were only 2-year AA-level programs. Then a few 4-year BA-level Programs were established (CSUN, Gallaudet). Now, most states have at least 1 BA-level Interpreting (or Deaf Studies/ASL) degree, with varying competencies and abilities of recent graduates.

These ITPs usually require Practicum/Internship opportunities, making sure students get out into their local Deaf Communities to interact with and meet the local Deaf ASL-users! Once technology and the Internet came of age in the 2000s, with webcams and streaming abilities, the number of hours required outside in the field could be easily swapped with "online videos", "social media postings", and other distance-ed opportunities. There were interpreters graduating from some programs never having met any other Deaf people other than maybe their ASL 1 or 2 instructor! Everyone else "Deaf" was on a 2-D screen.

This disconnection from the local Deaf Communities, the loss of "quid pro quo" connections and networking, and the lack of interacting 1-on-1 with live Deaf people from all walks of life and backgrounds has created the current plight that is affecting many American Deaf Communities:

• No regular Socialization;

• No continued access to a wide range of "accents", signing/language abilities, and variations in idiomatic language usage;

• No major stake in the Deaf Community (ensuring you have been "approved" by your local Deaf Community and are deemed trustworthy and acceptable);

• No understanding of the Deaf American experience from firsthand Deaf people (instead viewing videos and posts by Deaf and hearing signers).

Most Deaf people now see ASL-English Interpreters as a "necessary evil". They want access, but they also want connection and friendship. They want friends and community members they trust, but they want quality, competence, flexibility, and a good attitude.

Yet the professionalization of the ASL-English Interpreter emphasizes professional boundaries and distancing (like Lawyers, Doctors, Dentists, Mental Health Providers, Social Workers, etc.)...which, in many ways, is counter to the Deaf Cultural experience and expectation! Professionalization = confidentiality and boundaries, non-engagement, psychological neutrality, etc.

Pro Bono

One solution that Interpreters have borrowed from other professions is the idea of "Pro Bono" (in-kind/free) interpreting services for Deaf Community events and specific specialized communities for which they feel affinity or connection. Just like Doctors, Lawyers, and other professions may require their practitioners provide a set number of Pro Bono hours—providing a weekend clinic for "inner city" residents, traveling out of country to provide services, offering services to communities of color/LGBTQIA+, etc.

Similarly, ASL-English Interpreters who claim to be professionals and practitioners of the highest ethical standards should consider how they can volunteer Pro Bono hours towards their passion projects, specialized communities, and/or working with ITP Students and burgeoning, newly-graduated Interpreters.

Some interpreters will help out with providing a certain number of hours for assisting non-profits who hold annual (limited) Tax Preparation services for the Deaf—usually those with 1099-EZ forms. Other options are giving back to partnering with Deaf Community Agencies (interpreting, health and human services, case management, etc.) and volunteering free interpreting services for annual fundraising events. Some will offer several hours a month working with ITP students (Interns who are about to graduate, or recent graduates who seek professional mentors in the freelance field).

Regardless of the opportunity, one should always ask if they are "taking away" a paid position where an ASL-English Interpreter should be provided. If a for-profit business is holding a monthly staff meeting, the business should be paying for professional (probably certified) ASL-English Interpreters. If a non-profit business has a regular monthly Town Hall/Community Feedback Forum, they should similarly provide paid ASL-English Interpreters. Even if a church has weekly services, they should consider providing paid ASL-English Interpreters. And if a theatrical production which charges for tickets and pays its actors, staff, and crew, wants ASL-English Interpreters, they should pay for qualified and competent Practitioners!

The deciding factor: If everyone else (hearing/Deaf) is volunteering and not getting paid, this may be a perfect example of a Pro Bono opportunity. Additionally, if paid work is NOT being taken away from an Interpreter, it may be a good Pro Bono opportunity. Finally, if there's a chance for mentoring/internship/practicum-site learning to occur, and the above criteria are also met, the assignment might be a Pro Bono opportunity.

Ultimately, it is the decision of the ASL-English Interpreter to provide commensurate, fair, and professional services at all times to all consumers, hearing and Deaf. They should follow their gut and put their volunteer/Pro Bono hours towards those assignments and events which spark their passions and match their abilities and competencies. They should never offer free services when the host agency/organization/business is responsible to pay the market rate for qualified interpreting professionals.

It's a fine line between giving back to the Deaf Community, yet respecting and supporting oneself and one's colleagues in their chosen professional field. Offering up too much free/volunteer/Pro Bono work dilutes the value of the services and years of training, honing of skills, and specializations that every ASL-English Interpreter worth his/her/their salt brings to the table. Charging for everything without giving back at all is the opposite end of the spectrum and termed by Deaf People "SEEING DOLLARS" or "SNIFFING MONEY"—selfish, money-grubbing, and in it just for the financial profits.

Moderation, respect for everyone impacted in an interpreting setting (Deaf, hearing, other interpreters, interpreting agencies, the paying entity, etc.), consultation with peers, and sense of fairness and gratitude to the Deaf Community for their language, their guidance, and their acceptance of us in their lives is the best way to demonstrate one's qualifications, competencies, and humanity.