New Page 1

Exploring Ethics:

A Case for Revising the Code of Ethics
Dennis Cokely, PH.D.

“The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes, but in having new eyes.” ~Proust~

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to examine some of the fundamental assumptions and perceptions underlying current Codes of Ethics that have been put forward for Sign Language Interpreters/Transliterators. While the hope is that the discussion and analysis that follows may be applicable to all such Codes, the specific focus will be the Code of Ethics put forward by the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, the professional organization of Sign Language Interpreters and Transliterators in the United States of America. Specifically this paper questions whether the assumptions and principles that were at work in formulating the current Code of Ethics continue to hold validity for the profession and the communities which Interpreters and Transliterators seek to serve. This paper also suggests that, in contrast to the current Code’s focus on the interpreter’s duties, a fundamentally different approach to developing a Code of Ethics might more appropriately recognize and acknowledge changes in the social milieu in which Interpreters and Transliterators now work. This paper suggests that rather than a duty-based approach to our Code of Ethics, Interpreters and Transliterators and the communities with which they work might be better served by adopting a rights-based approach to our Code of Ethics.

Introduction1
As the oldest national organization of Sign Language Interpreters and Transliterators, the decisions and programs of the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (RID) have often served as models (both positive and negative) for other national organizations of interpreters/transliterators. Perhaps nowhere is this more apparent than the manner in which the RID’s Code of Ethics has been emulated and imitated (see, for example, the codes of the Scottish Association of Sign Language Interpreters, the Association of Visual Language Interpreters of Canada, and the Massachusetts Medical Interpreters Association). Although re-examination of our professional (and, to the extent that they can be different, our personal) ethical foundations should be an unheralded and routine on-going process, a number of developments make such re-examination especially timely. Among these developments perhaps the most striking is the dramatic shift in the route(s) by which individuals now enter the profession. Whereas two and a half decades ago the vast majority of interpreters/transliterators entered the profession via an interactional route, today the vast majority enters via an academic route. The differences between the two are non-trivial. At the risk of over-generalizing and oversimplifying, one could characterize the differences in terms of invitation and offer. In the past an individual would acquire skills in Sign Language by virtue of association with members of the