From FASOCIDE we endorse and support respaldamos y apoyamos what FILSE stated in this communiqué.
For the whole group of professionals, but also for us, deafblind people group, it is very important not to lead to confusion between the different profiles and, above all, not to generate training that detracts from the quality of this work.
Currently, the trainings for both communicative mediation and rinterpreation or guide-interpretation, are egulated and clearly differentiated.
Below is the image of the communiqué and its transcription for an accesible reading.
COMMUNIQUÉ ABOUT THE INITIATION COURSE IN SIGN LANGIAGE INTERPRETATION FOR COMMUNICATIVE MEDIATORS.
Four years ago we —– in which the difference between the professional profiles related to sign languages were explained. Specifically, special emphasis was placed on the distintion of Interpreter of Sign Language and Guide-Interpreter and Communicative Mediator. Both figures are needed but different, with different origins and not sustitutable for each other.
In particular, the following was mentioned:
“The training of sign language interpreters and guide-interpreters originated in sign language courses and acreditation exams carreid out by entities belonging to the deaf and deafblind people’s association movement, became formal training with the appearance of the Higher Level Training Cycle corresponding to the degree of higher Technician in Sign Language Interpreting, now extinct, and was transferred tothe university level, becoming a Degree.
The training of communicative mediators is currently included in the Higher Level Training Cycle corresponding to the degree of Higher Technician in Communicative Mediation.The precedents of this degree can be found in teh training given by the entities of the associative movement of deaf and deafblind people that have developed the professional figures of Agent of Development of the Deaf Community (Adecosor) and mediation with Deafblind people. These professionals develop their work of communicative mediation in the different areas of intervention in which their support is detected as necessary”.
In face of training offers such as the initiation course in LSE interpretating for communicative mediators organised by ASPANPAL, we feel the need to recover the content of this manifesto to pinto ut that the existing difficulty in finding sign language interpreters and guide-interpreters should not be used as an argument to promote training alternatives that are misleading or that encourage the confusion that already exists between the two profiles.
The only training that currently qualifies as a sign language interpreter and guide-interpreter is a university degree and there is no training that complements the communicative mediation cylce in order to work as a sign language interpreter.
The training of sign language interpreters and guide-interpreters is, and must be, at university level, as it is for any other language, because signed languages deserve the same consideration and status as spoken languages. The recognition of the value of sign languages and their protection is the responsibility of all of us, but above all of those of us who use them in our daily lives.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS