Chapter 4

When Values Collide: Conflict Resolution as a

Part of Ethical Fitness

Chapter Preview

What do you do when values collide? What do you do when you see something differently from some­one else? How do you feel in the midst of conflict? What strategies do you employ to resolve conflict? Understanding the nature of conflict and having

strategies for resolving and managing conflict are an important part of ethical fitness.

Not all conflict is ethical conflict—there are differ­ent types and sources of conflict. Conflict is a part of everyday life and typically emerges because of varied perspectives on a situation, differing belief systems and values, and differing objectives or interests (Melamed, 2006). In the course of an average week, we are all involved in situations that produce conflict and result in some type of response or reaction from us. As well, there will be times where we are called upon to resolve ethical dilemmas as part of our work as an interpreter—and these times can also create conflict.

In this chapter we will look at both personal and professional conflict and how to approach resolv­ing each. The fitness required to "choose the right and live by it" (Kidder, p. 57) can be enhanced by understanding the nature of conflict and having strategies available that you can apply for coping with conflict—that is what this chapter will explore. By evaluating conflict according to the type of conflict it is, you can begin to determine the causes of a con­flict and determine resolution strategies that will be the most effective.

This chapter will introduce you to:

·            Stereotyping, bias and prejudice as factors con­tributing to our interpretation of events

·         Types of conflict

·         Sources of conflict

·         Strategies for addressing and resolving conflict

·         Application of conflict resolution to ethical decision-making

Terminology

In this chapter, the following terms will be used, and represent some of the key concepts associated with this chapter.

·         Bias — an inclination for or against something or someone that inhibits impartial judgment. Webster's II New College Dictionary (1999).

·         Conflict — a state of disharmony; the intersec­tion of opposing impulses, desires, or tendencies. Webster's II New College Dictionary (1999).

·         Ethical Decision — a situation that requires a choice between two or more right choices. (Kidder, 1995).

·         Ethical Dilemma — a situation that requires a choice between two or more evenly balanced eth­ical (right versus right) options (Kidder, 1995).

·         Resolution Strategies — techniques, ideas, methods, and principles that can result in a course of action to reduce or eliminate conflict. Webster's II New College Dictionary (1999).

·         Stereotypes — an oversimplified opinion, con­ception, or belief that results in the classification of individuals as fitting an unvarying pattern of behavior. Webster's II New College Dictionary (1999).

Case Study 4: "In the Best Interest of the Children"

J. Smith has four children; three of the children have different fathers, one of whom is incarcer­ated. Ms. Smith is D/deaf, as are two of her children. Ms. Smith lives in subsidized hous­ing, is unemployed, and attending school. She receives AFDC. Three years ago, she received treatment and completed a program for drug addiction. One of her children has difficulties in school and is in a special class. The young­est child is two years old and Ms. Smith may be pregnant again. Ms. Smith's family lives nearby. Her mother lives alone in government housing. The rest of her family lives within a ten-mile

radius, two brothers and two sisters. Ms. Smith's two-year-old D/deaf son is in a nursery program. Nursery program workers called the Department of Social Services to report that the two-year‑

old was being brought to the nursery for the last week in soiled diapers and dirty clothes. When the assigned investigative worker went out with you (as the interpreter) to discuss the situation

with Ms. Smith, Ms. Smith refused to speak with her. The DSS worker is now considering filing a court petition for the child to be placed in protective custody.

Discussion Questions:

1.            What kind of feelings do you immediately experience when reading this scenario?

2.            What do you predict is Ms. Smith's educational background?

3.            What would you identify as the main issues in this family's situation?

4.            What assumptions come to mind about Ms. Smith, the father(s), and/or her family regarding the following?

·                     Marital Status

·                     Economic Status/ Class

·                     Family Background

·                     Future Prospects

·                     Parenting Abilities

·                     Ethnicity

5.            Is the investigator from DSS correct to bring this family's situation to the attention of the court?

6.            What cultural differences might account for some of the facts in this scenario?

7.            What core cultural values influence your observations about this scenario?

NOTES: Use this space to write down your thoughts related to the previous questions. Use a separate sheet of paper if necessary.

Supporting Discussion

Consider your answers to the case study in terms of the following factual basis for the Smith case.

Factual Basis for the Smith Case

Ms. Smith is currently married for the second time. Her husband was let go from a very good job almost a year ago due to a re-location of the company to another state. He has been without work for the whole time, although actively look­ing for permanent work as a brick mason. For the past three months, he has been working, doing roofing with his cousin in another city. He comes home at least every other weekend to help take care of household bills and visit with the fam­ily. They have a two-year-old who is D/deaf and they may be expecting another child. Ms. Smith's first husband died several years ago in a severe auto accident. She and her first husband had one child together, plus adopted an older child who was abandoned by a member of the family. Ms. Smith was injured in the accident that killed her husband and suffers today from the pain of a broken back and numerous other injuries. She had become addicted to painkillers, but is now clean. She participates in a Pain Clinic program to help her manage the pain she experiences everyday. She has started a new quarter at the community college, where she is entered in a computer tech­nology program. Her first class is at 7:30 AM. Her older son, who is 17, agreed to help her out by taking the other two kids to school each day. He drops the two-year-old at his daycare pro­gram at 8:00AM each day and picks him up after school. He drives himself and his sister to school by 8:30AM. Ms. Smith's family is very close—her mother is 87 and a retired schoolteacher who was married to her dad for almost 60 years. Her brothers and sisters are all married, work, have children, and live in different parts of the city. They are Caucasian.

Now, consider the following questions:

1.            How do your responses fit given the 'fuller' case facts?

2.            What biases or stereotypes might have been revealed in your responses and those of your peers?

3.            What do you think are the source of your biases or stereotypes?

Types and Causes of Conflict

Stereotyping

Stereotyping can cause conflict and is a part of our everyday life—at work, at home, and in the media. Stereotyping is part of the way we have been social­ized resulting in our cultural orientation, and we use stereotypes in much of our discourse (Walter & Rosenfield, 1982). Consider the way we describe groups (e.g., 'the old', 'the poor', 'youth', 'granolas', `baby-boomers', `minorities'), or how we describe the circumstances of people (e.g., retired, aged, under­age, disabled, middle-aged, HIV positive). Our discourse marks stereotypes for everything from nationalities (e.g., foreigner, WASP, etc.) to hobbies (e.g., athlete, outdoorsman, jock, scrapbookcr, run­ner, biker) to ideas (e.g., conservative, liberal, far-left, far-right, cutting-edge, visionary).

We live in a world where we are bombarded by information from a wide-range of sources. At one level, stereot^ypes may seem to help us keep the vast amount of information we receive 'organized' by pro­viding us with a system of generalizing—allowing us to respond to the information quickly, to fill in the gaps in what we know, to create and recognize pat­terns in behavior, and to draw conclusions (Walter & Rosenfield, 1982). On the other hand, stereotyping can be used to exclude, to diminish the value and worth of certain individuals, and to create insult. Through the negative portrayal of differences, ste­reotypes are a source of injustice and hurt.

Lippmann, (1922) asserts that "Stereotyping is in all of us as a reflection of our culture, our language, and our manner of thinking. (p. 16)" Stereotypes allow individuals to see themselves as having per­sonal attributes and strengths that distinguish them­selves from others. For example, negative images that one might have about people who arrive late for appointments will reinforce one's values concern­ing promptness and responsibility. Negative images that one might have about people who dress casually

or inappropriately in professional work settings will reinforce one's values concerning modesty and con­servative attire for work. Negative images regarding individuals with excessive or liberal spending habits will reinforce one's values about cautious and con‑

servative spending practices. It seems that avoiding stereotypes of some sort is nearly impossible.

If Lippman's assertion is true, an important question is: What motivates us to stereotype?

What causes us to stereotype?

Ryan (1998) indicates that in order to protect a sense of self-worth and control, individuals may stereotype others as being responsible for their own problems and failures. So, for example, the belief that the poor are lazy and incompetent is a way for the non-poor to justify their elevated status and help resist or dis­credit public policies that might change their socio­economic status.

When we categorize someone in a certain way (e.g., extrovert, introvert, fat, short, good, evil, straight, gay) we are most likely to remember the part of their behavior that is most consistent with our view of them (Walter & Rosenfield, 1982). This can lead to bias or prejudice. Ultimately it is the labels we remember and not the specific features that led us to use the label.

" ... Consequently, stereotyping is a problem because it means that individuals are treated as group members who possess a given set of traits rather than as individuals to be judged on their own merits (Walter & `Rosenfield, 1982, p. 116)."

According to Taylor (1989), it is common for people to have a general stereotype of their own in-group as desirable and deserving, and a general stereotype of the out-group as less desirable and less deserving. This phenomenon has been evidenced regarding people who are deaf—the general society sees the identity embraced by Deaf people as less desirable and seeks to make Deaf people more like those who can hear.

Confronting and changing stereotypes is not a sim­ple task! Yet, there are examples of stereotypes that change. Consider the negative stereotypes once asso­ciated with American Sign Language (ASL) and the fact that ASL has now achieved academic recogni­tion in nearly forty (40) states! Consider the negative stereotypes once associated with deafness as a handi­cap and the current number of Deaf Studies pro­grams in colleges and universities across the Unites States. Snyder (1983) indicates another change is the increase in the percentage of Americans who say that they would vote for a woman or a black person over a twenty-year period.

Stereotypes can change when members of different social groups increase their interaction with each

other—such efforts increase your world-view and through critical reflection, can move you towards greater degrees of intellectual arid ethical maturity. Stereotypes can also change when we begin to look inward and discover our own sources of assump­tions and stereotypes that we all hold. We are often unaware that they even exist, but the assumptions and stereotypes we have about others do influence our thinking, our actions, and can perpetuate con­flicts in our daily lives.

Here's an example: An employee of a state agency is on her way to work one day. This employee, a Caucasian female in her late forties, would describe herself as someone who embraces diversity, is open-minded and not prejudiced. On the 5th floor of her building is the Welfare Office for the city. The employee enters the empty elevator and begins to press the 7th floor when an elderly, African American woman enters the elevator. The employee looks at the woman and in a kindly voice asks, 5th floor? The elderly, African American woman worked for the Worker's Compensation Board on the 9th floor. The assumption of the employee is that this elderly woman must be on Welfare.

Activity:

Spend a few minutes considering what possible stereotypes you may hold and explore how you might change them. Use a separate sheet of paper if necessary.

When Stereotyping Leads to Bias and Prejudice

Dr. Clayton Tucker-Ladd, in chapter 7 of his textbook entitled Psychological Self Help provides a poignant discussion about prejudice, stereotypes, and discrimination (http://wwwpsychologicalsepelp.ore. With his permission, the following excerpt is included as part of this discussion. (NOTE: Readers are encouraged to go to Dr. Tucker-Ladd's website and read his textbook in its entirety, as well as explore the variety of resources related to self-awareness and conflict as your time and interest allow.)

"Prejudice is a premature judgment—a positive or a negative attitude towards a person or group of people which is not based on objective facts. These prejudgments are usually based on stereo­types that are oversimplified and over-generalized views of groups or types of people. Or, a prejudg­ment may be based on an emotional experience we have had with a similar person, sort of our own personal stereotype. Stereotypes also provide us with role expectations, i.e. how we expect the other person (or group, like all Japanese) to relate to us and to other people.

Our culture has hundreds of ready-made ste­reotypes: leaders are dominant, arrogant men; housewives are nice but empty-headed; teenagers are music-crazed car fanatics; very smart people are weird, and on and on. Of course, sometimes a leader or housewife or teenager is somewhat like the stereotype, but it is a gross injustice to auto­matically assume they all are."

Prejudice, in the form of negative put-downs, justifies oppression and helps those of us "on top" feel okay about being there. Prejudice can be a hostile, resentful feeling—an unfounded dislike for someone, an unfair blaming or degradation of others. It is a degrading attitude that helps us to feel superior or chauvinistic. Of course, the mis­judged and oppressed person resents the unfair judgment. Discrimination (like aggression) is an act of dealing with one person or group differently than another. One may be positively or negatively biased towards a person or group; this behavior does not necessaril^y reflect the attitude (prejudice)

one feels towards that person or group. You might recognize your prejudiced feelings are unreason­able and refuse to act in unfair ways. Common unfavorable prejudices in our country involve blacks, women, Jews, Arabs, Japanese, Germans, poor (welfare), rich, farmers, rednecks, obese, handicapped, unattractive, uneducated, elderly, Catholics, Communists, atheists, fundamentalists, homosexuals, Latinos, Indians, and lots of others.

When we are prejudiced, we violate three standards:

·            Reason

·            Justice, and/or

·            Tolerance

We are unreasonable if we judge others negatively without evidence or in spite of positive evidence, or use stereotypes without allowing for individual differences.

We are unjust if we discriminate and pay men 1/3 more for the same work as women, or select more men than women for leadership positions, or pro­vide more money for male extra-curricular activi­ties in high school than for female activities.

We are intolerant if we reject or dislike people because they are different, e.g., of a different reli­gion, of a different socioeconomic status, or if they have a different set of values.

We violate all three standards when we have a scapegoat, i.e., a powerless and innocent person we blame for something she/he didn't do.

This discussion is only a cursory exploration of the implications of stereotyping, bias, and prejudice on the relationships between people. You may find it useful to explore these topics in more depth. The fol­lowing website is an excellent resource for exploring bias and prejudice. It includes a variety of tests you can take to explore possible hidden biases you might have. There are also many other resources available on the site. http://www.tolerance.org/hidden_bias/

As well, the following website provides rich insight to the conflict of prejudice and discrimination. There are a variety of readings and resources that illuminate this subject in clear and impacting ways. http://www. colorado.edu/conflict/peace/problem/prejdisc.htm

Another Case Study

The next page contains an example of a situation in which conflict occurred. This case focuses on a criti­cal incident that occurred between Deaf Community members and interpreters who had assembled together for a conference. A critical incident occurs when core cultural differences become evident dur­ing an interaction. These incidents, if analyzed, can create opportunities for increased self-awareness and insight.

Case Study 5: "Stop the Music"

A regional interpreter conference was held in the United States. The conference theme focused on how interpreters and Deaf people could experi­ence more unity and collaboration. There were numerous keynote speakers—both Deaf and hearing—and a variety of workshops. The con­ference concluded with a banquet and entertain­ment. The entertainment consisted of several skits put on by the Deaf Community—most of which were humorous enactments of inter­preter blunders and behavior from the Deaf point of view. Most everyone enjoyed the skits tremendously—although some interpreters were offended by the perceived negative manner in which interpreters were being characterized.

Another portion of the entertainment was an interpreter who signed music. The selections of songs included some show tunes from musicals, and in between songs, the interpreter would incorporate some commentary. One commentary related to the AIDS epidemic and the inter­preter encouraged everyone to use safe sex. The manner in which the commentary was executed was common to stand-up comedy routines that are a part of American society. Some mem­bers of the audience were uncomfortable both with the interpreted songs and the style of the commentary.

The emcee for the event was a Deaf person who is a well-respected and strong activist in the Deaf Community. She read the audience and determined that the interpreter's routine was not being well received—particularly by the Deaf

audience members. After the fourth or fifth signed song, the emcee politely thanked the interpreter (cutting her show short), proceeded with several drawings for door prizes, recogni­tion of individuals who had contributed to the conference, and wrapped up the banquet.

Many conflicts occurred. The planning com­mittee was upset with the emcee for stopping the performance. They felt the emcee acted independently—without consulting the planning committee. They had invited the interpreter to perform and felt both embarrassed and upset that her routine had been disrupted. Additionally, they were not sure there had been any direct indication that the audience was unhappy with her routine.

Their observation was that many people were enjoying the show. The Deaf Community mem­bers were up in arms about the insensitivity of the planning committee to include so many interpreted songs. They believe that the act of song singing is exclusive because D/deaf people can't participate in the experience in a manner that is equal to non-Deaf people. In other words, signed music in a mixed group was in poor taste. They were delighted when the emcee took charge and stopped the music. The emcee was offended that her judgment was questioned and felt the conflict was the result of differences in cultural norms and expectations. The interpreter was initially hurt and offended. She had worked hard. But, she also wanted to understand why what she was doing was at issue.

Discussion Questions:

1.            What issues exist within this case study?

2.            What values paradigm—as discussed by Kidder—is involved in this case study? What cultural differ­ences exist? What facts support your observations?

3.            Create a list of the main points of difference between the cultural perspectives of the D/deaf individuals in this case and the American Mainstream cultural perspective in this case.

4.            What are some other possible options that could be exercised in this matter?

5.            What can be learned from this case study? How might things be done differently the next time a similar conference is held?

NOTES: Use this space to write down your thoughts related to the above questions. Use a separate sheet of paper if necessary.

A Closer Look at Conflict

Simple Conflict

Simple conflict is a difference of opinion that indi­viduals recognize, acknowledge, and accept. The conflict may be over how to share limited resources, who is expected to do what, or what constitutes the best location for an event. In the case of simple con­flict, it is typically sufficient to agree to disagree in a mature manner. If the issue is minor, it is easier to compromise or accommodate. Our ability to do this is based on our frame of mind at the time of the conflict, our emotional maturity, and our general personality and temperament. However, if the con­flict is major, it requires more attention and analysis to resolve.

Types of Conflict

Understanding the types of conflicts, the sources of each type, and strategies for resolving or managing conflict are important elements of ethical fitness. At a very general level, conflicts can be categorized as humankind in conflict with one of the following:

·            another person

·            society (problem with the laws or beliefs of a group)

·         nature (problem with a force of nature)

·         him/herself f (problem with deciding what to do or think)

Beyond the general level, there are other models of categorizing conflict. According to Melamed (2002), there are five types of conflict:

·         relationship conflicts

·         data conflicts

·         interest conflicts

·         structural conflicts

·         values conflicts

The following is the description of each, as offered by Melamed, with examples adapted to the work of interpreters and some of the case studies explored in this workbook.

Relationship Conflicts

"Relationship conflicts occur because of the presence of strong negative emotions, misperceptions or stereotypes, poor communication or

miscommunication, or repetitive negative behaviors. Relationship problems often fuel disputes and lead to an unnecessary escalating spiral of destructive conflict. Often this is because of our egos. We are emotionally invested in the decision or outcome. We may believe that if others disagree with us, they are rejecting us. Thus, we become stubborn, willful, and proud (Melamed, p. 1)."

The first case study, "In the Best Interests of the Children" contains elements of a relationship conflict centering around stereotyping and poor communica­tion that resulted in actions that appeared to be based on bias and prejudice. There may also be some cul­tural differences impacting this case.

Sometimes relationship conflict is actually a pseudo­conflict—a misunderstanding in which the partici­pants perceive there is a conflict, when actually there is none. For instance, there may be two interpreters who agree on a point but not realize it because they are not actively listening to each other. They may interpret one another's messages as being counter to their own messages because of faulty listening skills or poor communication. By trying to avoid assump­tions and asking questions when in doubt, these pseudo-conflicts can often be avoided or quickly resolved.

What are ways to address relationship conflicts? Recognizing that conflicts occur even between the best of friends and that no one will agree all of the time is a good starting place. Disagreements arc not an indication that a relationship is 'in trouble' but

rather, that there may be different perspectives that impact any given situation. "Supporting the safe and balanced expression of perspectives and emotions for acknowledgment is one effective approach to manag­ing relational conflict (Melamed, p. 1)." This can be achieved by striving toward the following:

·         Create an atmosphere that supports the control of negative expressions through establishing procedures and ground rules for discussing the conflict.

·         Promote a process that legitimizes the feelings of all participants. Legitimizing occurs when participants feel their feelings and perceptions have been heard and acknowledged—not neces­sarily agreed with.

·         Clarify the perceptions of participants through occasionally restating what has been expressed and asking questions when needed. This builds positive perceptions among participants.

·         Improve the quality and quantity of communi­cation by scheduling regular opportunities to talk and to exchange relevant information.

·         Block negative repetitive behavior by changing the structure in which participants relate. For example, instead of communicating directly, individuals may benefit from having a mediator or neutral third party involved in facilitating a discussion between them.

·         On a personal level, show grace if you have been obstinate and recognize when you have been wrong. Learn to apologize and take responsibil­ity for creating a relationship conflict due to ego, misunderstanding, or poor communication.

These strategies encourage positive problem-solving attitudes related to relationship conflicts. Consider again the first case study and how these strategies might have been applied to reduce conflict.

Data Conflicts

"Data conflicts” occur when people lack information necessary to make wise decisions, are misinformed, disagree on which data is relevant,

interpret information differently, or have competing assessment procedures. Some data conflicts may be unnecessary since they are caused by poor commu­nication between the people in conflict. Other data conflicts may be genuine incompatibilities associated with data collection, interpretation, or communication. Most data conflicts will have data solutions'—meaning finding alternative or compatible data options will eliminate the data conflict (Melamed, p. 1)."

An example of a data conflict could arise from the cost set for interpreting services—how fees should be determined, what is fair and equitable, who is responsible for paying, and other related data. This conflict would likely be compounded in the event that more than one interpreter was needed to fill an assignment.

Another example could be the conflict that arises around standards set for skill performance measure­ments determined by a Department of Education—perhaps a 3.5 or higher on the Educational

Interpreter Performance Assessment (EIPA). Practitioners and government personnel may not agree on what constitutes an entry-level score—or what specific performance-based data should be evaluated.

When approaching the resolution of data conflicts, the following strategies are useful.

·            Participants can agree on what data are impor­tant in advance and make sure the relevant data is available and accurate   when needed.

·            Participants can agree on the process for collect­ing the relevant data in advance.

·            Participants can develop common criteria for assessing the relevant data.

·            Participants can use third-party experts to get an outside opinion or interpretation of the data or to break any deadlock that exists.

For example, in the instance of setting interpreting fees, a competitive fee structure that allows 'purchas­ers' of interpreting services to make choices about cost based on specific need and affordability will help to reduce conflict. The competitive fee struc­ture could be developed by practitioners based on agreed upon criteria, such as education, experience, certification and specialization. In the case of setting entry-level performance standards, having practitio­ners and state personnel collaborate on the criteria to be evaluated, could reduce conflict.

Interest Conflicts

"Interest conflicts” are caused by competition over perceived incompatible needs. Conflicts of interest result when one or more of the participants believe that in order to satisfy his or her needs, the needs and interests of someone else must be sacrificed. Interest-based conflict will commonly be expressed in posi­tional terms. A variety of interests and intentions underlie and motivate the position any one partici­pant may attempt to further—and in these situations, each participant should be given the opportunity to clarify his or her interest.

Interest-based conflicts may occur over substan­tive issues (such as money, physical resources, time, etc.); procedural issues (the way a situation is being handled); and psychological issues (perceptions of trust, fairness, desire for participation, respect, etc.) (Melamed, p. 1)."

Here are some examples of interest conflicts that could arise related to interpreting. An example of a substantive issue for interpreters could be the length of time they are expected to work without rest breaks versus the need of consumers to complete a transac­tion as quickly as possible. An example of a procedural issue for an interpreter could relate to how a specific agency goes about distributing work opportunities for interpreters and whether all interpreters are receiving equal opportunities to work. An example of a psycho­logical issue for an educational interpreter might arise

out of the perception that their work is not valued or respected by the educational team—perhaps they are excluded from IEP meetings and other decision-making processes impacting their work, or perhaps their working conditions are very poor.

"For an interest-based conflict to be resolved, par­ties must be assisted in defining and expressing their individual interests so that all of the compet­ing interests may be jointly addressed (Melamed, p. 1)." Interest-based conflict is best resolved through a commitment by all participants to a model of Win­Win—supported by positive intentions and the desire for a good outcome.

Strategies to keep in mind for resolving interest conflicts are:

·            Focus on issues (substantive, procedural, or psy­chological), not positions

·            Look for objective criteria for evaluating issues

·            Look for solutions that meet the needs of all participants

·            Search for ways to expand options or resources that can be used for resolving interest conflicts

For example, in the instance of adequate rest-breaks, educating participants about the limitations of inter­preting, the potential for over-use, and the impact on accuracy that results from a lack of rest-breaks can

help participants work towards a solution that meets the needs of the interpreter and the time limits of the participants. One possible solution would be to hire more than one interpreter in order to allow the participants to go for a longer period of time without a break.

Structural Conflicts

"Structural conflicts” are caused by forces external to the people in dispute. Limited physical resources or authority (e.g. power inequities, ownership inequities), geographic constraints (dis­tance or proximity), time (too little or too much), organizational changes, and so forth can make struc­tural conflict seem like a crisis. When structural conflicts occur, participants may fall into a pattern of destructive behavior patterns—like blaming, accusing, or coercion—in response to a sense of power­lessness in addressing the real source of conflict or accepting the real or perceived limitations (Melamed, p. 1)."

Examples of structural conflicts arise from unequal power/authority, unequal control, ownership, or distribution of resources. Examples that relate to interpreting might occur in the instance of an agency employing a team of interpreters without giving con­sideration to team members the interpreters want to work with, or a court ordering an interpreter to not interpret a portion of the proceedings, or an agency writing policies and procedures impacting the work of interpreters without involvement of practitioners.

It can be helpful to assist participants in conflict to appreciate the external forces and constraints bear­ing upon them. Structural conflicts will often have structural solutions. Participants' appreciation that a conflict has an external source can have the effect of bringing them together to address the imposed dif­ficulties.

Strategies to apply when working to resolve struc­tural conflicts include:

·            Clearly defining and changing roles to create more equity

·            Reallocate ownership or control of resources

·            Establish fair and mutually acceptable decision-making procedures

·            Change physical and environmental relations

·            Replace destructive behavior patterns by focusing on what can be changed versus what cannot

So, for example, in the case of the court ordering an interpreter to not interpret a portion of the proceed­ing, the interpreter could learn to rely on the attorney for the deaf client to defend the right of the deaf per­son to be involved, or to explain to the client after­wards what transpired during the portion that wasn't interpreted. On a long-term basis, educating the court system about the role expectations and issues of inclusion and access could result in a different deci­sion in future cases.

Value Conflicts

"Value conflicts are caused by per­ceived or actual incompatible belief systems. Values are beliefs that people use to give meaning to their

lives. Values explain what an individual perceives and holds as good or bad, right or wrong, just or unjust. Differing values need not cause conflict—but often do. People can live together in harmony with differ­ent value systems through developing self-awareness and respect for diversity.

Values conflicts are caused by participants using dif­ferent belief systems for evaluating ideas or behavior, having different ways of life, ideology, and religion, and holding what they perceive are exclusive intrinsi­cally valuable goals.

Value conflicts arise when people attempt to force one set of values on others or lay claim to exclusive value systems that do not allow for divergent beliefs. It is not possible to change value and belief systems during relatively short interactions. It can, however, be helpful to encourage each participant to express their values and beliefs in order to acknowledge that core value differences exist (Melamed, p. 1)."

The "Stop the Music" case study centers on values conflict. Each community held specific values and beliefs that collided in the form of the entertain­ment—the Deaf Community's value of full inclusion

and collaboration came in conflict with the inter­preting community's value of individual achievement and local autonomy. In terms of the four values para­digms discussed in Chapter 3, this case is an example of the Individual versus Community paradigm. It is right for individual achievement to be valued and recognized, and it is right for decisions impacting a group to be made in a manner which sustains the interests of the group as a whole.

When striving to resolve values conflicts, it is useful to:

·       Avoid defining the conflict in terms of values—as this can lead to competition regarding which set of values is

        `better'

·         Allow participants to agree and disagree

·         Create a sphere of influence in which some combined set of values can be applied

·      Search for a broader goal that all participants can agree to

So, for example, in the case of the "Stop the Music" case study, focusing on the goal of full inclusion for all participants for the purpose of the conference—given the theme and purpose of the conference

could have provided the broader goal for everyone to focus on.

Consider the "Stop the Music" case study more thor­oughly. Consider the specific differences in perspec­tives that emerge, and using the learning from this discussion about types and sources of conflicts deter­mine the specific elements of the cases.

Case Analysis: Values Conflict

Values Conflict in "Stop the Music"

Consider the underlying values, right vs. right paradigms and sources of conflict that motivate and influence each perspective in this case study.

Values Conflict regarding Cochlear Implants

Consider another example of values conflict, the differences in perspective that exist between the general American Society and the Deaf Community. This particular conflict relates to whether deafness should be viewed through a medical model lens, in other words deafness is undesirable and something to be cured, versus the view that deafness is desirable and marks membership into a unique and highly valued linguistic and cultural community.

Whether we see deafness as a benefit or disadvantage determines the side of the issue we support. These types of conflict can quickly become polarized, with

individuals on each side of the debate viewing the other side as 'wrong'. Only when we can step back from the issue and examine the conflict from both perspectives can we begin to appreciate the true

nature of Right versus Right Dilemmas (Kidder, 1995).

The chart on the next page is designed to give a broad look at both sides of the issue. You may wish to explore and learn more about how non-deaf and Deaf people view this conflict. There are two films which focus on this issue. One is the Academy Award nominated film, "Sound and Fury" by Josh Aronson (2002). The other is a film available through Dawn Sign Press called, "Cochlear Implants: Covering the Basics", by Phil Bravin.

Values Conflict Regarding Cochlear Implants

Resolving the Conflict

What is the likelihood that this collision of values can be resolved by one of the strategies defined ear­lier? In some instances, the best that can be achieved is the acknowledgement that both perspectives are valid and that each position held stems from what the individuals believe is right. Sometimes, it is pos­sible that through discussion and education, values can change. So, for example, it may be that D/deaf people can come to appreciate the value parents place on their ability to advance the status of their children through such surgical procedures. Likewise, parents can come to appreciate that being Deaf is seen as desirable and that there are options available to their child that do not involve surgery.

Another Case Study

The next page contains a case study that relates specifically to interpreting. After reading the case, answer the associated questions, and then review the chart that contrasts the two opposing perspectives on the case. The goal of this process is to expand your awareness of the types of conflict that can emerge in any given situation, in an effort to identify pos­sible strategies for solution. As well, analyzing cases allows you to continue to consider the conflict para­digms discussed in Chapter 3. Such activities help you to recognize the importance of the differing perspectives on a given issue. This will help you to evaluate the implications of the decisions you make.

Case Study 6: "Is There An Interpreter In The House?"

A national conference of math educators is com­ing to town and several of the conference par­ticipants are Deaf. A local referral agency has contacted a pool of six interpreters to work the conference and asked them to participate in a planning meeting. The interpreters selected are seen as good, competent interpreters within their community. One member of the team, Felicia, has a mentorship relationship with Rebecca, who is also on the team. Felicia is also the only non-certified member of the team, although she is scheduled for the exam in the near future. She feels a little intimidated, but is a good team player. During the planning meeting, attention is given to the schedule and the division of work assignments, deciding who will team together, and reviewing copies of the papers that will be presented. Additionally, as team assignments are made, they discuss how they will collaborate with each other as team members.

The referral agency interpreter coordinator also emphasizes that the consumers for this confer­ence have specified that they want interpretation versus transliteration services. Felicia expresses some concern about her ability to interpret, as she is a transliterator. Rebecca assures her she will be fine. Felicia expresses again some ques­tion about her ability to meet the expectations of the consumers—particularly related to math con­cepts. The general consensus of the team is that they will all strive to do their best and that is all that can be expected.

When the conference begins, there is a plenary session, which is interpreted by four members of the team. Afterwards, the group of Deaf consumers approaches the team and asks if they could please use ASL. The interpreters indicate that they believe they are using ASL but will try

to do more so. The issue comes up again later in the day, as the breakout sessions are interpreted. The consumers, in a respectful manner, indicate their request for interpretation versus transliteration. During one break, the interpreters confer in the lobby about the situation, spend­ing most of their energy reassuring one another, defending their behavior, and characterizing the expectations of the consumers as unrealistic. They believe they are doing their best, and have already cleared their schedules to accommodate this three-day conference. Felicia states that her worst fears have been confirmed and that she feels she should withdraw from the team. Rebecca insists that this is not the solution and that the team should seek the assistance of the referral agency to help resolve the matter. The team agrees that Rebecca will call the referral agency and advise them of the situation.

As they begin to return to their next breakout session, Felicia is approached by two of the Deaf participants and asked to interpret a phone call to the referral agency. The Deaf participants also want to ask for assistance from the refer­ral agency. It is a very uncomfortable moment. When contacted, the referral agency tries to assure the consumers that the interpreters are qualified to do the work, and that it would be unlikely that replacements could be found at this stage of the process. The coordinator also encourages the interpreters to meet the needs and requests of the consumers, reminding them of the original notification regarding consumer expectations. Little actually changes regard­ing the nature of the work being delivered, and the remaining days of the conference are tense. Everyone leaves the experience with a sense of dissatisfaction.

Discussion Questions:

1.              What issues exist within this case study?

2.            What type of conflict emerges in this case? There may be more than one. What evidence can you glean from the case that supports your observation(s)?

3.            What right vs. right paradigm is involved in this case study? What, if any, cultural differences exist? What facts support your observations?

What did you discover through your analysis? How do your findings compare or differ from those of your peers? Discuss the similarities and differences with your peers in your online forum or classroom discussion group. When you are finished, consider your findings in relationship to the following chart that contrasts perspectives.

Case Analysis: "Is There An Interpreter in the House?"

Main Points of Difference Between the Deaf Perspective and the Interpreter Perspective

Here is another case study followed by the chart that contrasts perspectives. Again, read through the case study, and then, respond to the associated questions.

Case Study 7: "Now is the Time for All Good Men to Come to the Aid of Their Country"

Alex and Harvey have worked together as a team in a broad variety of situations. They feel com­fortable with one another and have developed a good reputation as an effective interpreting team. They are scheduled to interpret a linguis­tic conference, along with two other interpret­ers—Sara and Kate. Sara and Kate have worked with each other before, as well as with many other interpreters, in a team capacity. The four meet and discuss the division of work respon­sibilities. Several of the presentations are being given by members of diverse cultures, such as a panel of African-American researchers. Since Alex and Sara are both interpreters of color, Sara suggests that they interpret these sessions. Alex states that she prefers to team with Harvey for all assignments due to their established work­ing relationship. Sara and Kate are surprised, as their assumption was that there would be cross-collaboration within the team. However, since Alex is insistent, Sara and Kate form a team.

Later, they meet the five consumers, one of which is African-American. She expresses delight at having interpreters of color on the team and asks if Alex and Sara would collaborate to interpret her presentation, scheduled for the third day of the conference. Alex explains that they have agreed to work in partners and that either she and Harvey, or Sara and Kate would be delighted to work with her. The consumer asks why it would not be possible for cross-col­laboration for her presentation, and possibly some others. Harvey reinforces Alex's goal of providing the best services, based on their long­standing working relationship, and assures the consumer that either team could do an adequate

job. Sara indicates to the consumer that she had suggested the same idea, but agreed to honor Alex's preference to work with Harvey. The con­sumer is puzzled, but agrees to work with Sara and Kate for her presentation.

The conference proceeds as scheduled. Usually, the group of five consumers collaborates on which two breakout sessions they are most inter­ested in during a given timeframe and the inter­preting teams agree amongst themselves which of the two they will interpret. However, on one day, the consumers ask if the teams would be willing to divide so that they could participate in three breakout sessions versus two. There are two breakout sessions that have been added to the schedule that are of particular interest to one of the consumers. Harvey and Alex insist that they cannot, due to established working condi­tions and the need to have adequate rest breaks. Sara and Kate feel it is a workable option for this one-day since it only involves two breakout ses­sions that last one-and-a-half hours. Ultimately, in an effort to resolve the matter, the consumers attend two versus three sessions.

At the conclusion of the conference, the four interpreters sit down to reflect on the process. All four express frustration that the team was not cohesive. Alex and Harvey perceive that Kate and Sara did several things to undermine their team process. Kate and Sara perceive that Alex and Harvey are too rigid in their approach to team interpreting. The D/deaf consumers left the conference perceiving that interpreters are too competitive, self-serving, and not open to feedback or direction from D/deaf people.

Discussion Questions:

1.            What issues exist within this case study? What might be some of the reasons that Alex and Harvey are so insistent about working conditions and maintaining their team relationship? What beliefs, values, and assumptions could be contributing to their perspective?

2.          What type of conflict arises in this situation? There may be more than one. What evidence can you glean from the case that supports your observation(s)?

4.            What are some of the resolution strategies the interpreters or D/deaf consumers could exercise in this matter?

What did you discover through your analysis? How do your findings compare or differ from that of your peers? Discuss the similarities and differences with your peers in your online forum or classroom discussion group. When you are finished, consider your findings in relationship to the following chart that contrasts perspectives.

Case Analysis: "Now is the Time...."

Main Points of Difference Between the Deaf Perspective and the Interpreter Perspective

Now, try a few on your own. Read the case study, answer the associated questions, and create your own chart contrasting the differing perspectives that might exist related to the case study. Feel free to discuss your obser­vations with your peers and to collaborate on the chart of perspectives. Depending on the case study, you might be considering the perspectives of hearing individuals as opposed to D/deaf individuals, interpreters as opposed to D/deaf individuals, interpreters as opposed to hearing individuals.

Case Study 8: "Almost Like Winning the Lottery!".

For over a year, a seasoned interpreter worked with an elderly couple and their attorney related to a civil law suit they filed involving damages from an auto accident. Both the husband and wife had sustained some serious injuries and had a strong case from the outset. However, as is often true with the legal system, there had been several postponements and delays, and the case was finally heard five weeks ago. The outcome of the case was in favor of the elderly couple, who received a substantial settlement. Promptly after the trial, the interpreter was paid the negotiated rate by the law firm.

Yesterday the interpreter received an envelope from the elderly couple. She assumed it was a card and was pleased to receive it. Upon open­ing the envelope she found a lovely thank you card. Inside the card were two crisp $100 bills. The note on the card said, "Thanks for all your hard work and assistance! We could not have succeeded without you!!" The interpreter was shocked at receiving this yet touched by the ges­ture. However, she did not know what to do with the money. On one hand, she did not want to return the money and offend the D/deaf couple. Clearly, they were extending appreciation and generosity. On the other hand, she didn't want to be "tipped" like a waitress. At a basic level she felt accepting the money would not be right; you don't tip teachers, lawyers, doctors! Yet, she sure could use the money. What should she do?

Discussion Questions:

1.            What issues exist within this case study?

2.            What type of conflict[s] emerges in this case? There may be more than one. What evidence do you have that supports your observation?

3.            What right vs. right paradigm is involved in this case? What cultural differences exist? What facts sup­port your observations?

4.            What are some of the strategies the interpreter could exercise in this matter?

5.            Which strategy is most appropriate and why?

6.            Is there anything the interpreter could or should have done differently? If so, what?

Case Study 9: "You Can't Be In Two Places At Once!"

A seasoned interpreter is asked to appear in court to interpret for an arraignment hearing dealing with two counts: breaking and entering, and lar­ceny. At this hearing, the defendant is assigned a public defender. At the end of the hearing, the attorney and client meet to discuss the specifics of the case. While describing his involvement in the incident, the defendant names an accom­plice. The accomplice is someone known to the interpreter. In fact, the interpreter has been hav­ing regular contact with the person named as an accomplice. The individual named is currently in jail awaiting trial and has been incarcerated for the past four months. The interpreter knows this information because she goes to the jail on a daily basis to interpret phone calls and other interactions for D/deaf inmates, and is specifically working with the inmate and his attorney in preparation for trial. The interpreter realizes that the person being incriminated could not have been an accomplice to the breaking and entering, and larceny because it occurred several days ago, during a time period when the individual was in jail. Additionally, the interpreter is aware that the inmate has a court-appointed attorney who works in the same office as the public defender involved in the meeting. Although the inter­preter is somewhat distracted by this knowledge, she completes the interpretation of the meeting. At the end of the meeting another appoint­ment is scheduled and the interpreter is asked regarding her availability. She is unsure how to respond.

Discussion Questions:

1.          What issues exist within this case study?

2.          What source(s) of conflict emerge in this case? There may be more than one. What evidence can you glean from the case to support your observation?

3.          What values paradigm is involved in this case? What cultural differences exist? What facts support your choice?

4.          What are some of the resolutions strategies the interpreter could exercise in this matter?

5.          Which strategy is most appropriate and why?

6.            Is there anything the interpreter could or should have done differently? If so, what?

Understanding differences in perspective and sources of conflict increases your appreciation of the impact of your work on consumers. As well, the recommended reading for this chapter looks at other ways to think about resolution strategies, based on Kidder's discussion of moral theory. In the Kidder reading, he briefly discusses moral theory from historical philosophers such as those who developed the principles of utilitarianism, or "ends-based thinking", concepts of the categorical imperative or "rule-based thinking", and the Golden Rule or ^"care^-based thinking." Kidder argues that these theories are deeply embedded in the moral fabric of our soci­ety. As such, we often rely, sometimes unknowingly, on these frameworks for justifying our actions. By becom­ing familiar with these theories, we can learn to identify and evaluate the validity of these moral theories and apply them to our conflicts and choices.

NOTES: Use this space to write down your thoughts related to the above questions. Use a separate sheet of paper if necessary.

Summary

In Chapter 1 you were engaged in an exploration of values clarification and the role of values clarifica­tion in helping you become a self-aware individual, anchored in core values and beliefs. In Chapter 2 you explored elements of identity and personality in order to further increase your self-awareness. Chapter 3 introduced you to a model of intellectual and ethi­cal development and the factors involved in distin­guishing true moral or ethical dilemmas from mere temptations. As well, the importance of internalizing guiding principles in developing good character was introduced and related to the building of your knowledge, skills and desire. Good character helps you to remain balanced between your core values and beliefs, and your daily actions and behavior.

Chapter 4 has focused on conflict resolution by look­ing at the source and types of conflict, and resolution strategies. Each of the elements of ethical decision‑making discussed in Chapters 1-4 form building blocks in your movement towards true ethical fitness. Illustration 4 represents the building blocks that have been discussed so far, and the building blocks that remain to be addressed.

In the next chapter, Chapter 5, you will focus on how various professions, including the interpreting profes­sion, document the beliefs and values of the field and how those beliefs and values govern the behavior of

practitioners. These documents are typically referred to as codes of ethics or codes of professional conduct.

In Chapter 5 and 6 you will explore how codes of ethical standards and practice may impact case study analysis even further. You will have the opportunity to consider yet one more aspect of your decision ­making—how your decisions fit into the standards for ethical conduct promoted by the field of Sign Language Interpreting.

Journal Exercise

Based on your personal experience, journal a specific conflict you experienced in your personal or work life, and then identify what you think was the source of the conflict, the type of conflict it was, and what you would do differently given your new learning.

Write about a conflict situation from your personal or professional life. Use a separate sheet of paper if necessary