ADA Requirements - Effective Communication

Use of Accompanying Adults or Children as Interpreters

Historically, many covered entities have expected a person who uses sign language to bring a family member or friend to interpret for him or her. These people often lacked the impartiality and specialized vocabulary needed to interpret effectively and accurately. It was particularly problematic to use people’s children as interpreters.

The ADA places responsibility for providing effective communication, including the use of interpreters, directly on covered entities. They cannot require a person to bring someone to interpret for him or her. A covered entity can rely on a companion to interpret in only two situations.

(1) In an emergency involving an imminent threat to the safety or welfare of an individual or the public, an adult or minor child accompanying a person who uses sign language may be relied upon to interpret or facilitate communication only when a qualified interpreter is not available.

(2) In situations not involving an imminent threat, an adult accompanying someone who uses sign language may be relied upon to interpret or facilitate communication when a) the individual requests this, b) the accompanying adult agrees, and c) reliance on the accompanying adult is appropriate under the circumstances. This exception does notapply to minor children.

Even under exception (2) , covered entities may not rely on an accompanying adult to interpret when there is reason to doubt the person’s impartiality or effectiveness. For example:

• It would be inappropriate to rely on a companion to interpret who feels conflicted about communicating bad news to the person or has a personal stake in the outcome of a situation.
• When responding to a call alleging spousal abuse, police should never rely on one spouse to interpret for the other spouse.