4 ms·
That approach is best for cases where it works, for example in areas where there is a large minority of speakers of a given language (Spanish in the US, for exa
by not2b 5y ago
That approach is best for cases where it works, for example in areas where there is a large minority of speakers of a given language (Spanish in the US, for example). But if the patient speaks a language that is unusual for the area, finding an interpreter is going to be more difficult, or maybe not possible in some cases.
- pseingatl 5y agoYou have a similar problem with respect to criminal trials of defendants who speak minority languages. You can find a Khmer interpreter easily enough in Los Angeles, but good luck in Miami.
- sokoloff 5y agoCriminal trials are at least scheduled, permitting travel or other advance arrangements.
- pseingatl 5y agoHa! If only it were universally so. How many times have I heard, "Counsel, be ready tomorrow."
- School-Cotton 5y agoI’ve heard anecdotally from lawyer friends that despite how fucked up the US justice system is in so many ways, one bright spot is the lengths to which they’ll go to find interpreters. One Guatemalan defendant who natively spoke a Mayan language had to go through a chain of three court-appointed interpreters: one from his language to a different, more widely-spoken Mayan language, one to go from that to Spanish, and one from Spanish to English. He told my friend (his lawyer) something like: “this is amazing; in Guatemala they’d have just told me ‘sorry, the national language is Spanish’ and I’ve had been out of luck!” I don’t believe it would be legally possible in the US to convict a monolingual Khmer speaker of a crime without providing an interpreter, in Miami or anywhere else.