Researchers have claimed that centering the role of the interpreter on principles of impartiality and neutrality makes for rigid and insensitive practitioners. We argue that a radical impartiality should be seen as the solution rather than the problem regarding how interpreters can be of service in sensitive and vulnerable situations.
The role of the interpreter is a topic that has received substantial attention in interpreting studies (Anderson, 1976; Gentile, Ozolins, & Vasilakakos, 1996; Hale, 2005; Tebble 2012). In several recent articles, authors have claimed that centering the role of the interpreter around ethical principles of impartial and neutral conduct, makes for a rigid and insensitive practitioner (Angelelli, 2001; Jones, 1985; Murray & Wynne, 2001), particularly in sensitive and vulnerable community settings ( Oda & Joyette, 2003; Bahadır, 2010; Norma & Garcia-Caro, 2016;). Much of the criticism of impartiality stems from examples of lack of empathy in, for example, situations of domestic violence and abuse. In this paper, we argue that a radical impartiality in fact can have the opposite effect: A certified, trained interpreter will enable complete and accurate message transfer from any of the parties, majority or minority language speakers, without judgement or shock or surprise or side commentary. As such, the interpreter can be fully receptive to all messages and transferring them as spoken, making space for the voices of the participants. We ascertain that the best ways interpreters can fully be available and of service to vulnerable clients in sensitive situations, is when they have adequate language skills, sufficient training in interpreting, and carry out their work in a manner that centers impartiality and neutrality as core professional ethical values guiding their practice. In the paper, we explore this based on literature criticizing or supporting impartiality, and provide examples from the field of how impartiality and empathy can be upheld jointly. We argue that radical impartiality should be seen as the solution rather than the problem in the question of how interpreters can be of service in sensitive and vulnerable situations.
