Deaf Connections JDSG Involvement Event
Justice Disability Steering Group
Deaf Connections Involvement Event
Friday 9th October2009
- Background to the event
- Results of discussions
2.1.Communication and attitudinal Barriers / 7
2.2.Information Barriers / 14
- Summary of ideas for action
- Continuing involvement
The Justice Disability Steering Group (JDSG) was set up in 2007 by the organisations representing the justice sector in Scotland. It is comprised of the Scottish Government, the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland, the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, the Scottish Court Service, the Law Society of Scotland, the Scottish Legal Aid Board and the Scottish Prison Service.
The aim of the JDSG is to develop ways in which disabled people can be involved in helping to improve access to services across the justice system in Scotland and to draw on their skills and experience to improve the Scottish justice sector for all. The JDSG contracted Capability Scotland to manage a project of involvement events to find out from disabled people the barriers they encounter in accessing justice. Capability organised seven public involvement events across Scotland in Autumn 2009 in partnership with other disability and race organisations.
On Friday 9th October 2009 the Deaf Connectionshosted an involvement event in partnership with Capability. Deaf Connections is the oldest charity in Scotland representing adult Deaf people and the leading voluntary organisation delivering specialist services to the Deaf and hard-of-hearing community in the West of Scotland. Deaf Connections are committed toenabling Deaf people to participate fully in the community whilst making equality and fairness a normal feature of their everyday lives.
This event took place at Deaf Connections on Norfolk St in Glasgow. The event was attended by 45Deaf and hard-of-hearing people.
Experience of the justice system within the group was wide ranging and included being a witness in a criminal case, being a witness in civil case, being cautioned by the Police, being arrested, being asked to go for Jury Duty, attending a benefits tribunal to appeal a DLA award and reporting a crime.
The involvement day was designed around the main three barriers that the Deaf community face when interacting with the hearing community:
- Communication and attitudinal Barriers
- Information Barriers
Scenarios were used for each areain the morning session and adapted so as to capture matters of importance to Deaf people in order to prompt discussion and bring the issues to life.The scenarios were discussed by two workshops of BSL users each supported by a BSL interpreter and 1 smaller workshop of hard-of-hearing people who spoke English and were supported by an electronic note-taker. In the afternoon session participants gathered in one large group supported by the whole interpretation team, people came to the front to describe their experiences of accessing justice and questions were also asked from the audience.The key areas of concern and ideas for action are detailed below.
2.1.Communication and attitudinal Barriers
A lack of communication support, BSL interpreters for BSL users and note-takers for Deaf and hard-of-hearing English speakers, is the main barrier experienced by the Deaf community in terms ofaccessing Justice
BSL users described in detail the numerous barriers they have faced communicating with the Police. ‘I was arrested for being violent, I think the police thought I was drunk, but I was just signing to my friend in the pub, I had been wrongfully accused and still they didn’t get an interpreter, no-one told my family what was happening or even when the charges had been dropped’. One participant described being assaulted by a Police Officer who broke his arm whilst trying to restrain him from signing. The wider group suggested that ‘abuse of Deaf people was easy to get away with’.
A number of participants who were BSL users described having mistrust of the Police after poor experiences of reporting a crime, being cautioned or being arrested. One participant described being put in the cells over the weekend for an assault that he didn’t commit, no interpreter was provided and he didn’t know what was happening. He kept trying to tell officers that he was Deaf but they ignored this.‘They had no idea how their body language stopped me from being able to understand them’.One participant explained that the police have worked hard to provide translation services to hearing refugees and asylum seekers who do not speak English at all, or speak English as an additional language, and that this was a really positive development ‘why can’t the same work be put in to assisting BSL users. As an ethic minority we should also benefit.’
A number of Deaf people who communicate with BSL described being stopped by the Police for speeding but then not being charged by Police once officers discovered they were Deaf. ‘I went through a red light. The police stopped me. I opened the window. The Police Officer shouted. I said I was Deaf. They kept talking at me. They had a discussion and didn't believe I was Deaf. I said to them to write it down and I wrote stuff down. They said: you were going too fast. They started laughing. They asked my name. I live in King's Park I said. I waited for half an hour. They checked through their screens. Yes I am Deaf I said: can you see that? Why were you speaking? I wanted it written down. Then they let me go. It wasted half an hour of their time. I don't know why they were laughing. They just let me go. I wanted to know what they were laughing about. I felt it was discrimination. They could have been saying anything and laughing at me. That has happened on many occasions; they just let you go.’ Another participant had a similar experience. ‘There was a filter lane. It went to ‘go’ so I went. I said I am Deaf. You went through a red light, they said. Are you blind too, they said. That was very ‘personal’, unpleasant and impolite. Usually I am very polite but with that attitude I ended up emulating that bad attitude and mistrusting the police.’
The wider group discussed police interventions in incidences of domestic violence between Deaf couples, and mixed relationships between a Deaf person and a hearing person. The group had strong feelings about this and described incidences of domestic violence going unreported or investigated, particularly violence against Deaf women by hearing partners because Police are untrained, cannot deal sensitively with the matter or won’t get interpreters in.
BSL users discussed problems seeing Lawyers without interpreters, as one participant described ‘about 4-5 weeks ago I had to have a lawyer. Not for a crime, for a different matter. I needed a lawyer that had some Deaf awareness. I went onto Typetalk. I phoned up Edinburgh, the Law Society. I asked them for a lawyer in Glasgow with some Deaf experience. I was told to hold on. I waited. They said sorry there is no-one in Scotland with that type of experience, in working with Deaf people. I was shocked they had no-one for Deaf people.’
All of the participants using BSL called for Deaf Awareness Training and more ‘relay’ or stand-by interpreters for Police, Courts staff and Lawyers. BSL users spoke of often having a preference for interpreters who are not on registered lists so registration needs to be expanded. ‘You might not want that particular interpreter. Maybe they should give us the option of who to pick. They just pick for you. You might want a particular person. It is important to be given a choice of interpreter. You should make the decision, not the courts. This is important.’
Hard-of-hearing people spoke of the need for lip speakers and particularly note-takers in court for Deaf and hard-of-hearing people who read English. One participant said ‘We never see electronic notetaking in court systems. This is a big issue in terms of equality.’
One participant who was a Deaf English speaker described being shown around court in Inverness, after being involved in a car accident. She thought she would have to give evidence and was concerned she wouldn't be able to follow proceedings due to her hearing loss and the fact that people move about in court a lot making lip-reading difficult. The other drivereventually admitted liability for the accident so she didn’t actually have to testify but she said she would have been very concerned about doing so. She had been told there was a loop system but there was no-one to support her or discuss communication support like her need for a note-taker. She explained that It was scary not knowing the system and what was there to support her ‘if you don't know what is available you don't know what to ask for’.
The workshop with participants who were hard of hearing discussed having to rely on family members to communicate with the Police and with Lawyers. ‘My husband was my support with the hearing world for years until I came here’. One participant described taking her daughter with her to see a lawyer so that she would know exactly what was being said. The whole group was adamant that hard-hearing people should not have to rely on family members to provide communication support in these circumstances ‘My daughter is only 3, she can’t help me with a lawyer! We need notetakers’. Another participants who was hard-of-hearing suggested that Fingerspelling would be useful in police stations ‘Fingerspelling would be useful so that we can understand complex words quickly and it is quick to learn. In Australia they learn it at school. It is printed in the phone book’.
Court Systems do not allow Deaf and Hard-of-hearing people to undertake Jury Duty, this should be reviewed
The issue of Jury service for Deaf and Hard-of-hearing people was discussed at length by the wider group. Many participants had been called for Jury Service on numerous occasions, even after they had produced evidence of medical exemption to the Courts Service on grounds of hearing impairment. Whilst some participants were unsure how they would cope in a court setting the strong feeling in the room was that Deaf and Hard-of-hearing people should not be denied the opportunity of serving on Juries and that this was essential for making them representative.
‘We should have interpreters and note-takers in court, I know that there are concerns about this but something needs to be done, we feel that it is discrimination at the moment’. One participant suggested to the group that ‘there should be all-Deaf Juries for trials involving Deaf people.’ This raised a lot of interest in the group and a lot of BSL communication between participants on this went unrecorded, but there was concern that the Deaf community in Scotland might be too small to allow this to work. The overriding message was that if the correct communication support was provided in Court Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing people would welcome the responsibility of Jury Service.
A reliance on one type of equipment or method of communication fails to meet the communications needs of all Deaf and hard-of hearing people
Participants from both the BSL using and English speaking groups discussed the problems they have faced reporting crimes, going to court as a witness or as the accused and/or seeking legal advice, because of the reliance of the hearing world on the telephone as the preferred method of communication. ‘The phone is no good for us, we need face-to-face communication.’
A lot of attention was by the wider group to the need for better name-calling systems in Police Stations and Courts, at present Deaf and hard-of-hearing people miss their names being shouted out by staff and can sit for hours not knowing what is happening. One participant said‘I went to the sheriff court. I have been there a few times. When you walk in they speak to you straight away. You say you are Deaf. They point you upstairs. They start speaking to you again. I produced a letter I have to take with me. Go and sit down I am told. Many people are sitting. There are no displays there. You wait and wait for an interpreter to come. It can be one, two, three, even four hours. You are wondering and they say to come back after dinner. There is no information being relayed to us. I go back after dinner. There is no contact being made. You just sit. You ask what is happening. The court is finished. I have been sitting there like a mug, no communication at all.’
An LED ticker-tape machine was suggested for court waiting areas to improve this situation‘I went to hospital to help a Deaf couple recently. The LED lighting coming up announcing it was their time; they could see this from the screen. Hopefully this will spread to other places, e.g. the courts. I have been to hospital before and they just shout your name. It is Deaf friendly to speak to a person to encourage a Deaf person to speak to you. If they just come up and shout and don't use gesture by showing awareness, this is unhelpful.’
Many Deaf people reported being told by Police and court staff that there shouldn’t be a problem with communication because the ‘hearing loop is on’ even if they did not use hearing aids or the loop was not working for them. Many participants described just being told this as though the problem had been solved ‘He just told me the hearing loop was on and that was it, conversation over, as though it didn’t matter that I still couldn’t hear anything being said about me’. Many hard-of-hearing people described the ineffectiveness of loops for them ‘When you spoke about the loop system, I can't manage with that. I learned since coming here to Deaf Connections that everyone's deafness is unique to them. I can't have a hearing aid on one side. I have only one’.
In terms of reporting a crime, or interacting with the Justice System the wider group thought that text messaging would be a good development for Deaf people who used English. ‘The police spoke here one day. They were interested when someone said about getting in touch with them by text. This is important. I can't use the phone. If I saw something, that would be the best way.’
Dismissive attitudes and inappropriate communication by hearing professionals are still problematic for the Deaf community
A participant who was hard-of-hearing described what she called a ‘negative feedback loop’ when communicating with Police Officers and Court Staff after her husband had been the victim of a crime. ‘Hearing people sometimes don't know how to react to you. They shout louder or exaggerate their lips. That is harder for us, it doesn’t help us.Others shout into my ear. That distorts it. I shout back at them. And before you know it you feel angry and frustrated and any trust that they will help you is gone. They ask a question: I don't know the context; they ask again, I don't get it still; they say ‘never mind’ and the matter is closed for them but I still don’t know what is happening. No-one takes the extra effort, maybe they are scared’.
The wider group discussed experiences of being actively ignored, dismissed or insulted by Police Officers, Court Staff and Lawyers. When describing getting legal representation by a solicitor one BSL user explained ‘He wouldn’t even look at me because I was Deaf, I didn’t exist. It was my case, he was representing me but he didn’t once look into my eyes, I hated it.’
Ideas for Action:
- There is a need for more BSL interpreters to be on stand-by for Justice sector organisations
- Justice sector organisation staff urgently need DeafAwareness Training (DAT). This should deal specifically with methods of communicating with BSL users, BSL interpreters and hard-of-hearing people.
- Police officers should train in BSL level one and be familiar with deaf voices
- Note-taking is vital for hard-of-hearing people and useful for BSL users who can read English. It provides an invaluable record of proceedings.
- Finger-spelling training would be very useful for Justice staff when communicating with hard-of-hearing people.
- Interpreters, lip-readers and note-takers need to be provided in court to allow Deaf and hard-of-hearing people to be on Juries.
- LED displays or other visual methods of communication for name-calling systems in waiting rooms of Police Stations and Courts would help the Deaf community.
- Text messaging systems for Police, Courts and Lawyers would improve communication with deaf and hard-of-hearing people.
2.2.Information Barriers