Advantages And Disadvantages Of Interpreters

For people who use interpreters, managing everyday tasks is made more difficult by not having access to the predominant language of the region. Since so many aspects of their life require an interpreter, it seems reasonable that they would want to work with an interpreter that they trust as the interpreter will be privy to much of their private information through their interactions. Trust is often a deciding factor in whether people, herein patients, choose a family interpreter or a professionally trained interpreter. However, studies have shown that professional interpreters perform better in interactions in terms of accuracy of information communicated to either party (Flores 269; Rosenberg et al. 92). Professional interpreters are the better

While professionals do offer the better alternative for patients, both types of interpreters have good and bad qualities. First, considering family interpreters, they are often preferred by patients because of the trust they share (Edwards et al. 89). As Edwards and her colleagues’ study finds, patients feel more comfortable in the interaction when their interpreter is someone they know and are familiar with, rather than a stranger (89). This is the main benefit of having a family interpreter over a professional interpreter, and though it is one factor to be considered, patients were found to give trust significant weight in their consideration of interpreters even when their family members were not as competent in the actual interpretation (Edwards et al. 81, 90). Using family was also easier for patients, both in access and lack of monetary compensation (Edwards et al. 88). However, the use of family interpreters does cause some problems. Patients were sometimes concerned with the level of confidentiality in interactions with family members despite the trust they have in them (Edwards et al. 89). In this same vein, family

The main drawback for patients is again the lack of trust they feel is shared in this relationship, as patients often considered them strangers (Edwards et al. 89). One way that was found to combat this is for the same interpreter to pair up with the same patient for several interactions in order to develop a relationship (Edwards et al. 87). While this seems a relatively easy fix, we will discuss more below about the challenges of building trust, especially in relation to conflicting goals in the interaction. Another issue patients had with professionals was the lack of access to interpreters as opposed to the availability of their family members, whether that access was in regards to available interpreters of their own language or simply access to information for acquiring an interpreter (Edwards et al. 86). As Rosenberg and her colleagues have found, interpreters had similar views of the access to information, feeling that there was no place for them in the health care clinics (90, 92). There is also the question of who the interpreter is helping or working for. In the best case scenario, the interpreter is there for both participants, helping both sides to communicate with each other. However, patients have often felt that the interpreter is on the side of the doctors or other specialists (Edwards et al. 87). Hsieh and her colleagues’ study of