THE BRITISH SIGN LANGUAGE & LINGUISTIC ACCESSWORKING GROUP 2008

THE LONG AND WINDING ROADA ROADMAP TO BRITISH SIGN LANGUAGE& LINGUISTIC ACCESS IN SCOTLAND

w w w . s c o t l a n d . g o v . u k

© Crown copyright 2009

This document is available on the Scottish Governmentwebsite: www.scotland.gov.uk

ISBN: 978-0-7559-1986-4 (web only)

RR Donnelley B59898 05/09

THE BRITISH SIGN LANGUAGE & LINGUISTIC ACCESSWORKING GROUP 2008

THE LONG AND WINDING ROADA ROADMAP TO BRITISH SIGN LANGUAGE& LINGUISTIC ACCESS IN SCOTLAND

The Scottish Government, Edinburgh 2009

The views expressed in this report are those of the Working Group and do notnecessarily represent those of the Scottish Government or Scottish Ministers

© Crown copyright 2009

ISBN: 978-0-7559-1986-4 (web only)

The Scottish GovernmentSt Andrew’s HouseEdinburghEH1 3DG

Produced for the Scottish Government by RR Donnelley B59898 06/09

Published by the Scottish Government, June, 2009

iii

1.0 INTRODUCTION 11.1 Who are Deaf People? 11.2 The Number of Deaf People 31.3 British Sign Language 51.4 An Introduction to Linguistic Access 7

2.0 THE ROADMAP AND THE WORKING GROUP 92.1 Why a Roadmap? 92.2 How to use the Roadmap 112.3 The British Sign Language & Linguistic Access Working Group

2000-2007 13

3.0 WHAT IS A LANGUAGE SERVICE PROFESSIONAL? 163.1 Language Service Professionals working in one language 173.2 Language Service Professionals working in more than one

language 193.3 Access for Deaf People using one language 203.4 Access for Deaf People using more than one language 223.5 Learning British Sign Language 263.6 Bilingual Professionals 263.7 Translating, Interpreting and Communication Support 29

4.0 LINGUISTIC ACCESS AND THE SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT 30

5.0 STRATEGIC AIM: SAFER & STRONGER 345.1 Deafblind People 345.2 Consultation with Deaf Groups 405.3 Advocacy 435.4 Emergency Services 445.5 The 2011 Census 46

6.0 STRATEGIC AIM: HEALTHIER 486.1 Access to Health Services 496.2 Access to General Health Services 506.3 Specialist Health Services for Deaf People 526.4 Delivery Framework for Adult Rehabilitation 546.5 Audiology Services 566.6 Lipreading Provision 586.7 Hundreds of Thousands of Deaf People Denied

Communication Access 61

CONTENTS

iv

CONTENTS (continued)

7.0 STRATEGIC AIM: SMARTER 637.1 A Scottish Centre of Excellence 647.2 The Deaf Students Working Group 657.3 Deaf Children and Families 657.4 Communication Support in School 667.5 Education 677.6 BSL as a Subject in Schools 697.7 Transitions to Adult Life 707.8 BSL in Further and Higher Education 717.9 Scoping Study: Linguistic Access to Education for

Deaf Pupils and Students in Scotland 73

8.0 STRATEGIC AIM: WEALTHIER & FAIRER 818.1 Indigenous Languages of Scotland 818.2 Employment 868.3 The Economic Impact of Insufficient Interpreters 898.4 BSL Teachers 91

9.0 STRATEGIC AIM: GREENER 959.1 Information Provision 969.2 Digital Inclusion 979.3 Television 999.4 Telecommunications 1009.5 BSL on the Scottish Government Web Site 1019.6 The Scottish Parliament 103

10.0 NEXT STEPS: HOW WILL THE ROADMAP BE TAKENFORWARD? 10410.1 BSL & Linguistic Access Working Group 2008 and beyond 104

11.0 LIST OF APPENDICES 107

1

1.1 WHO ARE DEAF PEOPLE?

Deaf people are all around us as neighbours, colleagues, as members of ourfamily and we ourselves may be deaf or become deaf in later life. They havethe same diverse range of characteristics as us all in gender, age, ethnicity,sexual orientation and religion. Whilst deaf people are present in all parts ofthe community they are often excluded from many day-to-day activities andfrom the advantages enjoyed by others because of barriers which impede theiraccess to activities which we take for granted.

Deafness is a general term* which conceals very real differences between thegroups of deaf people. A brief description of each of the major groups is givenhere but more detail about the access needs of each group is covered throughoutthis report.

The major groups include people who:

i) become hard of hearing in later lifeThe largest group of deaf people are those who lose their hearing as theyage, often gradually, so that they may not seek help and advice for manyyears. Becoming deaf in later life is usually characterised by a loss of highfrequency sounds which makes it difficult to hear the beginning and endof words. Hearing aids and lipreading are helpful, especially if introducedearlier rather than later.

* A word about the terminology used in this document. The term deaf is used when referring to allof the different groups of deaf people (Deaf, deafened, deafblind and hard of hearing people). Thecapitalised Deaf is used to describe those people whose first or preferred language is British SignLanguage. In adopting the social model of disability the document rarely uses hearing impairmentor similar terms except where this will aid clarity or the terms are used by others, such as in legislation.

1.0INTRODUCTION

THE LONG ANDWINDING ROADTHE BRITISH SIGN LANGUAGE & LINGUISTIC ACCESSWORKING GROUP 2008

ii) acquire profound deafness as adultsThis group may become severely deaf suddenly in adult life, such as after ahead injury, or their hearing may deteriorate over time to a point where ahearing aid is not useful. Timely intervention with this group and with theirfamilies is critical in supporting a positive adjustment to their newsituation. These adults rely heavily on lipreading and the written word forcommunication, for example, using a notetaker at meetings.

iii) are born profoundly deaf or become deaf in the early years of lifebut do not use British Sign Language (BSL)The impact of deafness on this group affects their family life,communication, education and life opportunities which all have asignificant influence on them throughout their lives. Hearing aids are notgenerally helpful for speech, although younger people are increasinglyhaving cochlear implants. They mostly rely on lipreading, visual clues andwritten communication.

iv) use British Sign Language as their first languageThis group are those who are profoundly deaf from birth or early life andwho have BSL as their first language. They are an indigenous languageminority group, with a shared identity and they belong to the Deafcommunity. This group is confident in BSL, some may have English asa second language but many are not confident with written English.

v) are deafblindThis category comprises a number of different sub groups, from those whoare born deafblind to those who lose both senses in old age (see page 33,for more detail about deafblind people). The age of onset and the severityof the deafblindness greatly influences the communication used by theindividual. Some people hear with a powerful hearing aid at close quarters,others will need signs within a restricted visual field (e.g. within a smallervisual frame than usual) and others use deafblind manual alphabet, wherethe letters of the alphabet are tapped onto their hand.

There are other groups that could legitimately have been included in theroadmap, but in the interest of focussing on the central issues have not been.Some of the groups have highly specialised needs and it was felt the roadmapcould not do justice to them by taking a broad brush approach to linguistic

2

access. Deafblind children are not included for this reason, for informationabout this group see www.sense.org.uk. For similar reasons, people withwider communication support needs, such as after a stroke, are also notincluded. Communication Forum Scotland have produced a Toolkit forengaging with people with communication support needs, aimed at serviceproviders and decision makers and it is available on the CFS websitewww.communicationforumscotland.org.uk, click on Talk for link.

1.2 THE NUMBER OF DEAF PEOPLE

Precise numbers of deaf people in the different groups described in thisroadmap are not known. In a review of the community care and mental healthneeds of adults with a sensory impairment the difficulty of finding accuratestatistics was described:

“One of the clearest messages to emerge from the literature review was thecurrent absence of routinely collected, reliable data relating to the numbers ofDeaf, deafened, blind, partially sighted or dual sensory impaired adults inScotland. This appears to be particularly acute for those with hearingimpairments or deafblindness.”

(Skellington et al. 2006)

This is a good illustration of the type of issues e.g. gaps in statistical knowledge,which are highlighted in this report. Without accurate data service planning ismade more difficult. The statistics provided here on the population prevalenceof deafness are most helpful in capturing higher incidence groups, such as olderpeople, but less useful for estimating smaller groups such as Deaf peoplewhose language is BSL.

You could put it this way:

� Almost one in five of Scotland’s adult population suffers from ameasurable deficit in hearing which is likely to lead to difficulties inunderstanding speech, particularly in noisy backgrounds.Draft Quality Standards for Adult Hearing Rehabilitation Services Scottish Government 2007

� 1 in 7 of the adult population has some kind of hearing lossRNID fact sheet 2008

� 730,000 adults in Scotland have hearing loss, of whom 533, 000 wouldbenefit from NHS hearing services…NHS Audiology Review in Scotland Public Health Institute of Scotland 2003

3

� 8,600 per 100,000 population. The international prevalence estimates forhearing impairment/deafnessCommunication Support Needs: a Review of the Literature Law J, et al Scottish Executive SocialResearch 2007

However you put it, it is clear that:

The population prevalence of hearing impairment increases exponentially withadvancing age. Changes in population demographics will, therefore, haveimportant implications for the future as the number of older people inScotland increase. (Draft Quality Standards 2007)

and

Research is clear that the prevalence of hearing impairment in Scotland isexpected to rise, the actual rate being age-related. Current figures show thateighty percent of hearing impaired people are now aged over 60 years and,given no change in prevalence rates over the next 20 years, the demographicstructure of the UK will increase the number of hearing impaired people byabout 20%. (Skellington 2006)

Hearing loss

It is estimated that 730,000 adults in Scotland have hearing loss with 80%being over 60 years of age.

Acquired Profound Hearing Loss (APHL)

APHL is a severe disability and LINK (now Hearing Concern/LINK) state; It isestimated that there are between 15,000 and 30,000 adults currently livingwith APHL in Scotland, many of these resulting from accident or illness. APHLhas wide-reaching and often devastating impact on the lives of individualswho become deafened and also their close family members, friends andcolleagues. Without help, it can take years to develop successful copingstrategies or social support. The majority of deafened people do not use signlanguage and do not develop a Deaf identity. Their needs are different frompeople who are born Deaf and also from those who can still use hearing to asignificant extent.

British Sign Language Users

The number of Deaf people using BSL in Scotland is the most difficult figure tocapture but is usually estimated at between 4,000 and 6,000.

4

1.3 BRITISH SIGN LANGUAGE

What is British Sign Language?

British Sign Language (BSL) is one of the hundreds of sign languages used worldwide. Sign language is not universal and each sign language is indigenous toits geographical location and as with spoken languages, there are regionalvariations. The variations can at times cause comprehension difficulties butthese tend to be more significant for learners of BSL than for Deaf peoplethemselves. BSL is a visual-gestural language with its own vocabulary, grammarand syntax. It is the first language of a community of Deaf people and is usedby their families and others who wish or need to communicate with them. Majorresearch by linguists on sign languages, which established them as languages,emerged during the 1950s. The seminal work in the UK was undertaken atMoray House in Edinburgh by Dr Mary Brennan during the 1970s.

One important difference between minority language speakers and signlanguage users is that Deaf people who use BSL are less likely to be bilingualand this has huge implications for policies and for services. It is not simply thatDeaf people prefer BSL to English, as many Scots Gaelic, Welsh or Irishspeakers may prefer their own languages to English: it is that Deaf people arenot in a position to acquire English in the usual way. Hence the singular powerof Deaf people’s adherence to their language. (Brien1992)

Deaf not Disabled

Deaf BSL users consider themselves a distinct language group and not disabled.They have a unique culture, history and life experience as a language minorityand feel that actions to improve their inclusion in society should be based onexactly the same language approach to other groups, such as speakers of Gaelicor of Welsh. In some instances Deaf people and their organisations are includedin policy forums alongside other language groups, for example as members ofthe Scottish Government’s Translation, Interpreting and Communication Group,where the group includes BSL when considering spoken languages. This is thetype of arena in which Deaf people wish to be involved and in this instance theyare, but more often they are excluded. It should be noted that the majority ofdeafened, hard of hearing and some deafblind people who are not part of alanguage minority accept the term disabled. Notwithstanding these importantperspectives all minority groups have experiences in common which presentthem with barriers to full participation in society. Disability legislation

5

encompasses all disabled and deaf people and offers them ways to redresssome of the disadvantage they experience.

With all of the caveats already mentioned the best estimates of deafpeople in Scotland are:

6

Group Estimate SourceAll adults with hearing loss 730,000 Draft Standards in Audiology

Adults with acquired profound/severehearing loss

15,000 (>-30) LINK Centre

Deaf people using BSL 4,000 (>-6) Creating Linguistic Access

Deafblind adults 5,000 Deafblind UK

Children 3,000 NDCS on RNID factsheet

1.4 AN INTRODUCTION TO LINGUISTIC ACCESS

We all need access to services nearly every day of our lives, whether this isaccess to education to help us realise our potential or to health care or to anyof the other services we constantly use. The way we access these services isinfluenced by how well they are able to meet our communication needs andfor the majority of people in the community this is through spoken or writtenEnglish. Deaf people often find that their communication needs are notcatered for. If they are hard of hearing or deafened or deafblind people theywill need adaptations to communication such as clear speech, loop systems orinformation will need to be written down. If they are BSL users or deafblindpeople they will need communication in a different language (BSL) or mode(deafblind manual) and many will not find written English effective.

Illustration of Need

Many reports and research refer to the barriers deaf people face in trying togain access to services and two are mentioned here:

i) Creating Linguistic Access for Scotland (SASLI 2002)

The report succinctly captured the situation at the time:

“Currently deaf people do not have full linguistic access to any single areaof life outside of their own community. Their opportunity to be included insuch key areas as education, employment, social work services, the justicesystem, health and medical services is greatly diminished by the lack oflinguistic access and the ignorance and discrimination inherent in thesesystems. While it is unlikely that personnel in any of these areas activelywish to discriminate against deaf people, their lack of knowledge of thelinguistic requirements of deaf people may make such discriminationinevitable.”

7

This description is very similar to descriptions of institutional discrimination fromelsewhere and which are now acknowledged as real, requiring robust action byorganisations to counteract them. Whilst in the years since the report waswritten some real progress has been made, there will be many deaf peoplewho will have not noticed and would say, so what has changed? The reportrecommended a strategy for improvement based on the premise that toimprove access to all areas of daily, public and social life for deaf people inScotland we must increase the numbers of appropriately trained personnel.http://www.sasli.org.uk/documents/trainingstrategy2.pdfhttp://www.ssc.education.ed.ac.uk/resources/deaf/sasli/intro.html

ii) An Investigation of Access to Public Services in Scotland using British SignLanguage (Kyle 2005)

This later research confirmed how little had changed since the earlier report in2002. The study reinforced two central messages about access to services in BSL:

a) “Deaf people see BSL as their natural language – it is not a service nor adecision in regard to providing service. Deaf people see BSL as a right inthe same way English is seen as the way to access services and they wishto have direct access to services via bi-lingual staff.”

b) “BSL users were almost never able to access public services directly usingBSL. In the absence of staff able to use BSL directly access was limited bythe shortage of BSL/English interpreters.”http://www.scotland.gov.uk/socialresearch

8

9

2.1 WHY A ROADMAP?

The roadmap has been developed to contribute to the knowledge the ScottishGovernment requires in making informed judgements about linguistic accesswhen it is formulating, revising, or implementing, policy. It is intended to be aresource for government and whilst it is primarily aimed at central governmentofficials, it should also be of use to other bodies, such as local authorities. Manyof the desired outcomes of the Roadmap can only be delivered by other agenciesin the community. Some will be disappointed that much of the roadmap isdevoted to the personnel needed to make linguistic access a reality and not toother important aspects of access, but the working group believe the personnelare pivotal and without them linguistic access cannot be substantially improved.This emphasis on personnel should not detract from other significant issueswhich require investment, such as:

� the skills and the confidence of deaf people themselves which underscoreshow they interact in accessing services;

� increasing the bi-lingual skills of key professionals;

� the provision of accessible information.

2.0THE ROADMAP AND THE WORKING GROUP

THE LONG ANDWINDING ROADTHE BRITISH SIGN LANGUAGE & LINGUISTIC ACCESSWORKING GROUP 2008

The roadmap cannot hope to address all aspects of access for deaf people livingin Scotland but it does outline many of the major issues and points to some ofthe ways towards improvement, particularly in public policy. The roadmap isdesigned to assist policy makers to understand the long-term vision of theBritish Sign Language and Linguistic Access Working Group (BSL&LAWG) andto help guide the ways they can work towards the desired outcomes. Theworking group hopes the roadmap will be one way to start a dialogue aboutthe need for change with a wide variety of colleagues across government. Thereport is set within the current legislative framework but it does not rehearsethe legislation, which is the day to day business of officials, except where thisseems useful, but the roadmap will contribute to policy makers being able tocomply with their legal obligations.

The BSL&LAWG and the Equality Unit of the Scottish Government cannotdeliver many of the improvements they know need to be made. Much of whatneeds to be done is the responsibility of other parts of government such as thedirectorates for Education, Health and also of other agencies, such as theScottish Funding Council, Local Authorities and Health Boards. Success inimproving linguistic access will be measured as much by how these directoratesand agencies integrate linguistic issues into their day to day operations as bypractical improvements in delivery. This is because improvements will not besustained unless they are part of the thinking, planning and operation of allthe agencies. It is in the interest of all agencies to devote resources toimproving access to their own services. The BSL&LAWG and the ScottishGovernment will work in partnership with the bodies involved in the hope ofbringing about lasting improvements.

There are numerous examples of excellent short-term projects involving deafpeople which could in the past have been incorporated into mainstreamprovision, but few have been. Deafblind Scotland and Sense provide a goodexample. The objectives of a 3-year healthy living centre project, funded until2007 were described as follows:

10

Healthy Living for Deafblind People

will improve the physical and mental health of deafblind people by:

Encouraging physical activity and providing the appropriate support

Training health and leisure staff on how to make services more accessible

Achieving improved outcomes from medical visits through bettercommunication

Providing a guide/communicator service to enable better access tohealthy living opportunities

Training deafblind support staff to encourage and support healthier lifestylechoices

Encouraging the provision of healthy living information in accessibleformat

… But

The underlying issues, in this example, such as the need to help health staff tomake services more accessible, applies equally to all deaf groups, but specificactions are needed to meet deafblind people’s needs. The voluntary deafblindorganisations working with the health sector should have been able tomainstream the necessary actions, but this was not always achieved. As withmany short-term funded projects the bigger question is, how could suchworthwhile initiatives be sustained?

2.2 HOW TO USE THE ROADMAP

Few readers will wish to consult the entire document as it encompasses a verybroad range of policy. It is more likely they will choose those sections relevantto their policy area. The summary of action points under each of the strategicobjectives are not meant to be comprehensive but are the beginning of aprocess which will add more detail as work towards greater linguistic accessbuilds. The roadmap is not an end in itself but it is hoped it will be a stepforward in influencing a continuing process of change.

11

The Scottish Government and the working group wish to work in partnershipto achieve the long-term vision of the group. It is less about achieving targetsand more about issues becoming part of the daily activities of all sectors ofgovernment from policy making to the implementation of policies. The deaffield has initiated many of the necessary developments but it has startedfrom a deficit position compared to other sectors. There is often anabsence of the expected infrastructure and of the core funding streamsin the relevant agencies on which to base new developments. Thisundermines the sustainability of many initiatives. The roadmap hasidentified many of these and it is hoped that this will help the ScottishGovernment and others to redress the balance.

The aim of any activity is to create shared ownership of the issues and oftenefforts will need to be directed at building the infrastructure or at providing a‘trigger’ to establish the validity of new developments. As with all the activitiesof the Scottish Government’s Equality Unit these should be aimed atestablishing and mainstreaming the activity and should in the long term to befunded by the appropriate sector or body. Progress will be made by takingforward linguistic issues across a wide range of activities and agencies and thearrangements made in the Concordat between central and local governmentshould provide opportunities to influence local services.

The task in the future is essentially about influencing the agenda and changingprocesses which may at times be slow, but taking this approach is essential sothat in 3, or 5 or 10 years’ time linguistic access will be an integral part of thepolicy making and implementation processes across government. The implicationof this is that any significant policy or funding emanating from the ScottishGovernment in the short term should be framed within a process whicheventually leads to mainstreaming of the desired outcomes.

The roadmap begins with a description of linguistic access in Scotland andoutlines the history of the BSL&LAWG and the goals of the group for the nextthree years. Next it sets linguistic access within the context of the ScottishGovernment and refers to the changing legislative equalities landscape. Thereport provides an overview of the current situation and of the personnelinvolved in linguistic access, as these cut across each of the areas which arediscussed later under government priorities. Each of the government’s fivestrategic priorities are then addressed in separate sections in more detail.

12

2.3 THE BRITISH SIGN LANGUAGE & LINGUISTIC ACCESS WORKINGGROUP 2000-2007

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/People/Equality/disability/remit/Access-Working-Group

The British Sign Language & Linguistic Access Working Group (BSL&LAWG)convened by the Scottish Government’s Equality Unit has been in existencesince 2000. The group consists of representatives from national deaforganisations and government officials (see appendix 3 for more detail). Itenables government to discuss and address issues at the heart of linguisticaccess for Deaf, deafened, deafblind and hard of hearing people guided byorganisations with specialist expertise and with day to day contact with thegroups of deaf people mentioned in this report.

The report Creating Linguistic Access for Scotland mentioned earlier whichwas commissioned by the then Scottish Executive (now Government), outlineda strategic approach to improving linguistic access for deaf people which hasguided the work of the BSL&LAWG.

The working group has a robust vision of what needs to be in place to improvelinguistic access for deaf and deafblind people and it maintains a determinedfocus of deploying resources towards long term aims. It envisages a worldwhere deaf people would be automatically afforded the same life chances astheir fellow citizens. In such a world:

� families with deaf babies would be supported to meet the linguisticneeds of their child at the appropriate age;

� deaf pupils would have the same school attainments as their peers;

� BSL would be offered as an educational tool for deaf pupils who prefer it;

� pupils could study BSL and Deaf culture as a curriculum subject, fromprimary school through to university;

� all public services would be deaf and deafblind aware;

� deaf and deafblind people would be provided with timely information;

� information would always be provided in a range of accessible formats;

� the implications of deafness would be understood and valued by society.

13

The working group believes that to fully achieve the world envisaged above,changes will need to be made in many policy areas and in services. This willoften depend on building an infrastructure to sustain activities which haveeither not previously existed or if they have existed they have been short lived.This leads to the next critical step in taking forward the group’s vision, whichwill be to identifymainstream funding so that improvements are sustainable.Government will need to take action across many fronts to achieve this but sowill other agencies such as local authorities and health boards.

Currently deaf people and professionals working with them are often excludedfrom the normal funding streams, with the result that vital services are notavailable. To take just a few examples public funding is not routinely provided for:

� Profoundly deafened or deafblind people to attend rehabilitation courses;

� People who become deaf in adult life to attend lipreading orcommunication tactics classes following diagnosis;

� Training of language service professionals such as lipreading teachers, notetakers, lipspeakers, communication support workers;

� Training of BSL/English interpreters;

� Training of BSL/English translators;

� Training of BSL teachers;

� Sign language courses for deafened people or for parents of Deaf children.

The BSL&LAWG has directed most of its energies towards identifying what needs tohappen to increase the number of professionals who provide linguistic access inScotland, such as BSL/English interpreters, but in many instances this has requireda step backwards before the difficulties could be addressed. This is often becausethere are either no people or very few people who can provide the training forthe professionals. For example, there were hardly any BSL tutors able to teachadvanced BSL, so substantial funding was invested by the Scottish Governmentto provide a Graduate Diploma in the Teaching of BSL Tutors so that there is atrained pool of tutors to train others who can in the future provide advancedBSL teaching. This will lead to more professionals being able to study BSL to usein their work (teachers, doctors) and more potential students for interpretertraining. Building up a route to sustain professional training is essential buttakes considerable time and resources and is not achieved quickly.

14

Having started along the road to address some of the main barriers to linguisticaccess, the working group wished to take their work to the next stage, by usingresources provided by the government. They wished to raise awareness oflinguistic access across government. From April 2007 a BSL & Linguistic AccessProject Manager post was established, initially for 11 months. This heralded ayear of intensive activity by the group in order to produce the information forthe roadmap. The Project Manager worked within government to make linksacross policy areas and to make links between the group and relevant officials.The Project Manager post was extended on a part-time basis for a further3 years (2008 - 2011) to support implementation of the roadmap.

From 2008 the BSL&LAWG reverted to a less intensive round of meetings.Over the next 3 years the group will meet quarterly, with a new single sub-group.This group will focus on planning how the group and the government can makemore robust links with the wider Deaf community.

How will the vision of the working group be achieved? The process of embeddingand improving linguistic access within the daily activity of governmentdirectorates and other agencies will be fundamental to any lasting changes.The roadmap will help support and advise the Scottish Government and itspartners in developing a comprehensive and cohesive approach to improvinglinguistic access. It describes the long-term vision, the current position and thesteps necessary to move forward in a sustainable way. The roadmap is a dynamicwork in progress and will be adapted as goals are achieved or in response toexternal drivers, such as changes in legislation. It is a major challenge for thedeaf sector, for public agencies and for government departments that need tomake changes in policies, in delivery and in many cases in ‘mind sets’.

The BSL&LAWG wish to work with service providers to apply the learning fromshort-term projects into their day-to-day delivery. It is a fundamental approachof the group to all aspects of linguistic access that they should be mainstreamedand funded alongside comparable activity.

15

16

Language Service Professional (LSP) is the collective term used to describepersonnel who facilitate communication between deaf and non deaf people.There are different types of LSPs depending on the communication preferenceof the deaf person or people involved. The term is usually used to refer toBSL/English Interpreters, Lipspeakers, Notetakers (Manual) or (Electronic), SpeechTo Text Reporters (STTR) and LSPs – Deafblind Manual. They are expected tohave obtained a professional qualification and standard in a relevant skill,thereby giving them eligibility for professional registration, however, differentgroups are at different stages of professionalisation. Each group will be discussedin more depth later but a brief overview is given here to set the scene. It isclear that the shortage of Language Service Professionals and thegenerally low skill levels of skill in Scotland are major inhibitors toimproving linguistic access.

Registration of Language Service Professionals

Systems for the registration of BSL/English interpreters in the UK have been inplace for more than 20 years. Interpreters not only have to be qualified but alsohave to meet professional standards before they can be registered to practice.Qualifications are awarded by a number of bodies, such as universities, nationalcharities and awarding bodies. The Independent Registration Panel (IRP)registers interpreters and other LSPs in the UK and in Scotland, the ScottishAssociation of Sign Language Interpreters registers interpreters. There is a UKonline Register of Communication Professionals at www.nrcpd.org.uk.

3.0WHAT IS A LANGUAGE SERVICE PROFESSIONAL?

THE LONG ANDWINDING ROADTHE BRITISH SIGN LANGUAGE & LINGUISTIC ACCESSWORKING GROUP 2008

3.1 LANGUAGE SERVICE PROFESSIONALS WORKING IN ONELANGUAGE

In addition to a brief description of the personnel involved, registration statuswill also be mentioned here as it an important way of ensuring a professionalstandard of service.

Lipspeakers

A lipspeaker repeats silently what a speaker is saying, with clear speechmovements and natural rhythm supported by appropriate gestures and facialexpressions. This may be aided by some fingerspelling, if this is agreed with thehard of hearing or deaf person involved. If the pace of a speech is very fast, askilled lipspeaker will present the language in a shortened version whilstretaining the original meaning. There is emerging evidence that many deafpeople are now turning to electronic notetakers, especially for larger meetingsrather than lipspeakers.

Registration

The Independent Registration Panel (IRP) maintains a register of lipspeakers witha CACDP (see appendix 1) certificate at either Level 2 or Level 3. There is noequivalent register held in Scotland although interpreting and communicationagencies have their own lists of the small number of people who are available toprovide lipspeaking.

Notetakers

Notetakers write down what is being spoken so that the deaf person can readit. Increasingly they use a computer and they are then referred to as anelectronic notetaker (ENT). There are also Speech To Text Reporters (STTR) whoalso use computers, but they have specialised software, which allows them totype in speech phonetically, which is quicker. The computer then producesEnglish script. An individual or a small group of deaf people may read anindividual laptop computer and in larger gatherings the script is displayedon a large screen, as it is typed.

17

“The SQA is in the process of establishing an award in electronic notetaking.One course has taken place within the last year, at the Scottish SensoryCentre and it is understood that the award will become part of the SQA’sprovision in the near future. The SSC hopes that there will be at least twocourses provided annually. The Association of Note-takers do not currentlyrecognise this qualification, as the qualifying typing speed is less than thatrequired by CACDP.” (Grimes 2008)NB: SQA = Scottish Qualifications Authority

Registration

The IRP established a register for both manual and electronic note-takers inApril 2008. CACDP currently expects that ENTs will have achieved the ‘Level 3Certificate for LSPs Working with Deaf and Deafblind People (Notetaking)’.SASLI believes that there are 11 ENTs at this level currently working in Scotlandand the Association of Notetakers report 8 Scottish members at Level 3. Atpresent SASLI does not have a register of notetakers.

Deafblind Manual Interpreter

When communicating with a deafblind person using Deafblind Manual, eachletter of the alphabet is fingerspelt on to the hand of the deafblind person.This is changing spoken (or written) English into a different format.

Guide-communicator for Deafblind People

Guide-communicators act as the eyes and ears of the deafblind person,relaying what is seen and heard. This includes spoken, non-verbal, written andenvironmental information using the preferred communication method of thedeafblind person. In addition to the manual, this may be the use of speech atclose range for a hearing aid user or block letters traced on the palm.

18

3.2 LANGUAGE SERVICE PROFESSIONALS WORKING IN MORETHAN ONE LANGUAGE

Communication Support Workers (CSW)

Communication support workers are not always included as LSPs as there is noagreed qualification for the group. They often work with deaf students in thefield of education, see page 89 of the Scoping Studyhttp://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2009/02/11155449/0 for a detaileddiscussion on CSWs. While some aspects of their work may be similar to thatof an interpreter, their role may differ. For example, they may be expected toexpress their personal opinion as a member of the educational team or toprovide additional support to the student, e.g. in explaining certain terms ornotetaking. In the UK, a CSW may undertake interpreting tasks even thoughthey have a lower level of language and interpreting skill than a registeredinterpreter. In some countries employees with similar roles in the field ofeducation are called educational interpreters.

The newly formed Scottish Association of CSWs (SACSW) estimate thatbetween 200 and 300 CSWs are working in Scotland, approximately half ofwhom are assumed to be in education, but this figure has not been verified.

Registration

No CSWs in Scotland are fully registered with the Scottish Association of SignLanguage Interpreters (SASLI) as a BSL/English interpreter but one has traineestatus. It is not known how many of the registered BSL/English interpreterswork in educational settings on a regular basis.

Deafblind Interpreters

Deafblind interpreters use modified BSL depending on the communicationpreference of the Deafblind person. Some will compress the signing space intothe visual frame of the deafblind person, or will use hands-on signing where theDeafblind person follows the signs by placing their hands over the hands ofthe signer.

Registration

All the personnel working with deafblind people can be registered with the IRPif they have the required deafblind qualifications. Currently in Scotland only thosequalified as BSL/English interpreters may apply for registration with SASLI.

19

BSL/English Interpreters

BSL/English interpreters work between two languages to enable communicationto take place between those who only know English and those who onlyunderstand BSL. They take the source message in one language and transfer itto the target language, without any loss of meaning. They also aim to matchthe register and style of the languages. It is highly complex task.

Registration

In Scotland SASLI registers BSL/English interpreters who meet their standardsas full members, as trainees or as affiliates. The IRP registers 3 levels ofinterpreters, member of the register, trainee or junior trainee.

3.3 ACCESS FOR DEAF PEOPLE USING ONE LANGUAGE

The BSL&LAWG has sought for some time to establish within disability policy, amore sophisticated understanding of the issues influencing access in modifiedEnglish for deaf people. Deafened, hard of hearing older and some deafblindpeople use English as a basis for linguistic access, together they comprise asizeable group. Access through English may involve amplification from ahearing aid or other equipment, the person may lipread spoken English, theymay read written text or they may use finger spelling (the manual alphabet) allbased on English. Many of the issues raised by access in English are commonto other disabilities, e.g. the need for accessible written information provisionand for communication technology. The barriers to access in English need tobe addressed by being mainstreamed alongside disability access across allgovernment policy.

For the purposes of this report we are concentrating on the personnel needed tofacilitate communication. A CACDP consultation document (TARO 2008)makes a telling point:

“Whilst awareness of sign language interpreters is reasonable, othercommunication support services including speech-to-text are much less so –and this despite services such as these serving by far the greater proportionof deaf people. This is in turn reflected by the numbers registered, andwill require sensitive management to ensure that an increase in demandresulting from agreements with government departments and increasedawareness amongst service users is not to disappoint.”

20

When first diagnosed deaf people are rarely informed about the existence ofcommunication support which would facilitate access to services and they willnot know to ask for it. Couple this with the reticence of many older people toask for help and the demand level is latent and access to services is severelyrestricted. To take advantage of any communication facilitation which is availabledeafened, hard of hearing and some deafblind people not only need the servicesof Language Service Professionals, they also require early diagnosis of theirdeafness and a timely rehabilitative services to equip them with the emotionaland practical skills to make best use of any communication support available tothem. Without a rehabilitative approach to improve their own communicationskills people who become deaf are less able to benefit from any communicationarrangements, thereby undermining actions to improve access.

Not only do we have large numbers of deaf people who do not know about theexistence of LSPs and, therefore, do not request them, we also have shortagesacross all of the professional groups. For an estimate of the number of LSPs inScotland and in the UK see below.

i) The Estimated Number of Language Service Professionals inScotland 2007

In addition, there are also interpreters living in Scotland who are registered withbodies outside of Scotland. There are 7 of these registered with the IndependentRegistration Panel and 3 registered with the Association of Sign LanguageInterpreters, both organisations based in England. Interpreters may be registeredwith more than one body.

21

Guide-communicators with deafblind peopleDeafblind interpreters (manual)

508

Deafblind Communicators Total 58

Level 2 lipspeakers 2

Electronic Notetakers 4

Communication Support Workers(not confirmed, mostly working in education)

200

There are no Speech To Text Reporters (STTR)

SASLI registered BSL/English InterpretersSASLI associate members

5510

Total SASLI Interpreters 65

If you exclude the 65 BSL/English interpreters from the table of LSPs in i) thenumber of professionals estimated to be providing linguistic access todeafened, hard of hearing and deafblind people is 260. The vast majority ofthese (said to be 200 CSWs but not confirmed) are based in education, so it isabundantly clear that the number of individuals working with adults in thecommunity is insignificant compared to the thousands of deaf people.

As reported above there could be between 200 and 300 CSWs in Scotland, butit is not clear if this includes some of those who are also counted as notetakersor as interpreters. It will be important in the future to establish the differencebetween the job titles, the skills and qualifications of those concerned. It will beimportant to clarify roles and agree training routes for people working as CSWsin Scotland. There are currently exploratory meetings being held in Scotland toplan a training pathway and registration process for communication supportworkers and electronic notetakers.

3.4 ACCESS FOR DEAF PEOPLE USING MORE THAN ONE LANGUAGE

BSL/English Interpreter

Setting the situation in Scotland into the European context a recentconsultation report reflected:

“Were the UK to aim to reach the European median of one interpreter toevery 45,000 people then it is estimated that another 1000 people wouldneed to be registered. There are signs of encouraging progress towardsthat aim in both Scotland and Wales where both devolved Governmentshave committed to raising the number of sign language interpreters.However as the table below indicates there are at present (1 April 2007CACDP/1 Jan 2008 SASLI) significant regional variations within the UK asregards the availability of LSPs.” (TARO 2008)

22

ii) UK Language Service Professionals

The Future of Registration A Report to CACDP TARO Consultancy LtdJanuary 2008

KeySLI = sign language interpreters: L3/L2 = BSL level: DB(M) = Deafblind manual:STTR = Speech to text reporter

For European comparisons see appendix 4 which indicates that countries withcomparable populations to Scotland have many times more interpreters(Finland had 600 and Norway had 500 when Scotland had 27). Scotland hassteadily increased its interpreter numbers from the 27 in 1989 to 65 in April2008 but this is still some way behind the ratios for the Scandinavian countries.The number across the UK has also increased with the IRP having 582interpreters registered in April 2008.

23

Region SLI L3LS/L2LS DBI(M) STTR TotalsScotland 64 2 2 0 68

N Ireland 16 0 0 0 16

Wales 26 7 0 2 35

North 17 2 2 0 21

Yorkshire 41 3 0 0 44

East Midlands 42 0 0 0 42

West 59 6 5 3 73West Midlands 76 3 5 1 85

East Anglia 19 4 5 3 31

Central 16 5 1 5 27

London 55 9 3 7 74

South East 58 5 1 0 64

South West 36 5 2 0 43

525 51 26 21 623

In Scotland at April 2008 there were 65 interpreters, 55 full members of theregister and 10 associates (those who are qualified and working towards fullprofessional registration) registered with SASLI. More associates are expectedto register as they graduate from the interpreting course at Heriot-WattUniversity (5 students were awarded Certificates in July 2007). As mentionedearlier there were also 7 members of the Register of Sign Language Interpreters(MRSLI) registered with the Independent Registration Panel (IRP) in England,plus 3 members of the Association of Sign Language Interpreters (ASLI) wholive in Scotland, but some interpreters may be registered with more than oneprofessional association. Not all of those registered will be available to work asinterpreters, for a variety of reasons, including that they have other employment.

Since 1977 the single route for interpreters to qualify and to becomeprofessionally registered in Scotland has been provided through Heriot-WattUniversity and through SASLI. The university awarded 62 Certificates inInterpreting Studies and Skills (BSL/English) between 2000 and 2007. In addition,51 other students – including some Deaf students completed Level 1 of thecourse (one calendar year); or BSL modules only or attended some modules(1997-2007). The course is delivered part-time over 2 years (mostly atweekends) and is equivalent to a one-year full-time course. It was establishedat a time when there was much less acceptance of the need for BSL/Englishinterpreters to be trained and it has been delivered over the decade since withminimal resources allocated to it. The course was designed to enable would-beinterpreters who were often working full time, to be able to attend. There havebeen several challenges for potential students in taking the course, which haveimpacted on the numbers and the skill levels of applicants.

The course changed in 2006 to a Diploma in Interpreting Studies & Skills(BSL/English) a SCQF Level 10 course. Heriot-Watt University could accept 20students per year on the course if 20 people presented with appropriate levelsof BSL, however, the usual intake is nearer to half of this number, due to someof the following factors:

� Students have to fund themselves as there are no bursaries available;

� Lack of higher level BSL courses limits the numbers eligible to reach therequired entry standard;

� Some students living and working outside of the central belt have foundthe travel time involved unsustainable;

24

� Incompatible with domestic arrangements for those students with caringresponsibilities.

Numbers of current students and recent graduate numbers can be found inappendix 5.

Unlike in some other areas of the UK, Heriot-Watt University has not receivedany central funding to run this course which has been partly funded by studentfees but is now under severe threat due to the necessity of all university coursesbeing fully economically costed. It is unlikely that the course would be able tocontinue in the future if there are fewer than 15 students per year group.

Registration of BSL/English Interpreters

Once BSL/English interpreters in the UK have achieved a recognisedqualification they must meet professional criteria to be registered with therelevant professional association. In England there are a number of trainingbodies providing qualifications and a single registration body, the IndependentRegistration Panel which covers the UK. There is also a separate professionalbody, the Association of Sign Language Interpreters. Interpreters across the UKcan gain qualifications through the academic route by attending university orthrough the NVQ route. Since the latter was introduced by CACDP in 2001,101 interpreters have achieved the NVQ qualification, of these, 90 weremembers of the IRP register in 2006-7.

In Scotland there is a single university course at Heriot-Watt University and asingle professional association SASLI which also maintains the register ofinterpreters in Scotland. The NVQ route to qualification is recognised by SASLI forregistration, as is Approved Prior Learning (APL). The first opportunity to take ataught route to the NVQ qualification has only recently been offered in Scotlandand there is no SVQ equivalent route in Scotland. SASLI had until recently twomembership categories, members and associates but it has been agreed theywill expand registration categories from 1st April 2008 to include:

� interpreting students as Affiliate Members;

� a new category for non-practising interpreters;

� changing the Co-opted category to Supporter and widened to includeorganisations;

25

� Associate category is to be changed to Trainee and will include studentsenrolled in qualification routes that SASLI recognises as APL.

3.5 LEARNING BRITISH SIGN LANGUAGE

As the opportunities to learn BSL at higher levels (Level 3 and Level 4) expand,greater numbers of people will be able to apply to train to become BSL/Englishinterpreters and to join other professions where they can use BSL. A string ofelective BSL modules (beginners) have been offered at Heriot-Watt Universitysince October 2007 and 27 students registered for the first module in the firstyear. A new BSL module offering the next stage of study is being planned from2008. In the past one English university (Wolverhampton) found that when itoffered BSL classes these were more popular than spoken language classes.Ideally applicants for interpreter training should achieve BSL Level 4 prior tostarting interpreter training. The reality is a total of 1,026 candidatesundertook CACDP BSL assessments in Scotland during 2006, of theseonly 11 were at L3 and none at L4.

BSL Qualifications

A coherent suite of BSL qualifications with identified funding would do much tounderpin many of the improvements suggested in this document and wouldreduce the training gaps which currently deter progress. A suite of qualificationwould also offer a progressive ladder of qualifications for learners.

3.6 BILINGUAL PROFESSIONALS

Deaf people would prefer services they are using, especially in the public sectorto be delivered to them in their own language BSL (Kyle 2005). However, if thestandard of BSL offered by the professional is not sufficient for the task thenusing an interpreter is essential. Public agencies are not always clear on the skilllevel needed for the different aspects of their services. It is acceptable for examplefor reception staff to have a limited but specific knowledge of BSL (how to greet,give directions, elicit what the enquiry is about). On the other hand it would notbe acceptable for a doctor delivering a life threatening diagnosis to have anythingbut fluency in the language. Increasing opportunities for professionals to accessL3/4 BSL courses will be crucial in achieving this goal and offering introductoryBSL during professional training may be a useful model, as demonstrated bythe RNID input to GP training in Northern Ireland.

26

A number of agencies have staff who bring with them fluency in BSL, forexample, those who have grown up in a Deaf family. These staff can be veryhelpful in raising awareness about how to deal appropriately with Deafcustomers but there are also a number of pitfalls which should be avoided.Members of staff may:

� be acting outside of their role remit;

� may have excellent BSL but they have not undertaken interpreter training;

� be unsupported if ethical dilemmas arise;

� know the Deaf person personally;

� not have the language skills in either BSL or in English for certain situations.

We know Deaf people prefer bilingual professionals but we do not have anyfigures on how many professionals are able to work with Deaf people in BSL.In 2005, the Forum of Social Work Service Providers to Deaf People in Scotlandcollected data on the BSL levels of staff working in social work services withdeaf people. Of 19 staff members with some skills employed by six serviceproviders (covering 13 local authority areas) there were:

� 4 native BSL users (either Deaf people or hearing people brought up infamilies where BSL was the first language)

� 3 staff members at interpreter level

� 2 at NVQ Level 3

� 16 at NVQ Level 2

� 9 at NVQ Level 1.

Considering that specialist social work with deaf people has been one of thefew professions where services have traditionally been delivered in BSL this is avery low level of skill. Only 7 people across 13 local authorities could beconsidered fluent in BSL. The picture amongst other professional groups islikely to be much worse as indicated in the research on access to public services(Kyle, 2005).

27

BSL a Right, not a Service

The Investigation of Access to Public Services in Scotland using British SignLanguage (Kyle 2005) stresses the strongly held view among the Deaf communitythat BSL usage when accessing public services is a right and not a supportservice. Deaf people feel their access is curtailed if they have to be assessedand meet service criteria in order to have an interpreter.

Translation

Translation in the spoken language field usually refers to working betweenlanguages on paper (e.g. the earliest Local Authority interpreters used totranslate written materials as a major part of their role). It is a growing area ofactivity within the deaf field. The market for translation of written materials intoBSL is massive and largely unexplored. For example, if the NHS decided totranslate its national health information into BSL or if we are serious aboutDeaf people accessing degree level education, they will need easy access totranslated materials. Translation from BSL into written English will also growand avenues for making more use of translation resources are emerging.

The BSL&LAWG recognise the need to gather more information on translationservices as they emerge and on the role of Deaf people. The issue of interpreterswho are Deaf themselves has become of interest in recent years and the questionof how or if the role is different from non deaf interpreters has been debated.Some of those involved see the major component of the role as translation (forexample from written English into BSL) but others do not see it as being sorestricted. CACDP has facilitated a meeting of organisations and they are toconsult with CILT (the Council for Interpreting, Languages and Translation). CILT’sdefinition of interpreting is: “one spoken/signed language interpreted intoanother spoken/signed language“, but the meeting referred to above felt thesign for “interpret” has a much wider meaning. CILT are currently working on aDraft Strategy for Languages, Intercultural Skills, Translation and Interpreting.

28

3.7 TRANSLATING, INTERPRETING AND COMMUNICATION SUPPORT

The Scottish Government convenes a Translating, Interpreting andCommunication Support Group which has representation from the deaf field.The Group is drawing up a National Statement to take forward key areas fromthe recommendations in the Scottish Government report Translation,Interpreting and Communication Support: A Review of Provision in PublicServices in Scotlandhttp://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publication/2006/01/25141550/0

Interestingly it demonstrates that for all the real difficulties in the ‘deaf world’ inestablishing and maintaining standards it is in many respects in advance of thespoken language public service sector. Generally there is a more structured andrigorous framework for BSL interpreting, supported by a professional body, theScottish Association of Sign Language Interpreters (SASLI). Many peoplewould like to see this adopted as a model for spoken languages in Scotland.

Key messages from the report mentioned above, were the need for a nationalTICS strategy for Scotland which would provide a coherent TICS policy, theestablishment of a Scottish certification or registration body for public serviceinterpreters and translators, modelled on BSL/English interpreting and the needto develop training provision.

29

THE LONG ANDWINDING ROADTHE BRITISH SIGN LANGUAGE & LINGUISTIC ACCESSWORKING GROUP 2008

4.0LINGUISTIC ACCESS AND THE SCOTTISHGOVERNMENT

The Scottish Government, elected in May 2007, set out its operating purpose, i.e.to focus the Scottish Government and public services on creating a moresuccessful country, with opportunities for all of Scotland to flourish, throughincreasing sustainable economic growth. To achieve this it highlighted fivenational objectives it wishes to achieve in order to create a better Scotland andthese priorities apply to all the people of Scotland. To deliver on these prioritiesthe Government is taking steps to ensure that all parts of Scotland’s variedcommunities can benefit. Creating a Scotland where everybody can benefitfrom the work being taking forward, therefore, means that deaf people areable to access fairly and benefit fully from all the activities of Government. Thismay be when using health and other public services or by maximising theirpotential to contribute to all aspects of life in a modern successful Scotland.

The Disability Discrimination Act and the duties on the Scottish Government(see appendix 6) underpin much of the activity around linguistic access, asdoes the work of the Equality and Human Rights Commission. The DisabilityDiscrimination Act offers a useful lever for policy change which affects the livesof deaf people including, Deaf BSL users. This link with disability does notdisregard the view of Deaf BSL users who wish to be dealt with as a minoritylanguage group, but presents them with opportunities to positively influencepolicy and decision makers.

As the roadmap was being produced new working arrangements were beingput in place between central and local government. The Concordat signed inNovember 2007 agreed on a new relationship between central and localgovernment with substantial changes in the funding arrangements which haveimplications for a number of areas of linguistic access. The Working Group willneed to consider how best to relate to the new structure.

30

Ministers have set out the following overarching purpose and fivestrategic objectives for Scottish Government:

Purpose

To focus Scottish Government and public services on creating a more successfulcountry, with opportunities for all of Scotland to flourish, through increasingsustainable economic growth.

Strategic Objectives

1) Wealthier and Fairer – Enable businesses and people to increase theirwealth and more people to share fairly in that wealth.

2) Healthier – Help people to sustain and improve their health, especially indisadvantaged communities, ensuring better, local and faster access tohealth care.

3) Safer and Stronger – Help local communities to flourish, becomingstronger, safer place to live, offering improved opportunities and a betterquality of life.

4) Smarter – Expand opportunities for Scots to succeed from nurturethrough to life long learning ensuring higher and more widely sharedachievements.

5) Greener – Improve Scotland’s natural and built environment and thesustainable use and enjoyment of it.

The Scottish Government has produced a national performance frameworkwith a set of national outcomes which apply to all of the people of Scotland –for the full set see the Government Economic Strategy 13/11/2007www.scotland.gov.uk/publications

Whilst all the outcomes apply to deaf people as citizens of Scotland there aresome which are particularly relevant.

31

Below are the specific National Outcomes that relate to Equality work

� We have tackled the significant inequalities in Scottish society.

� We live our lives safe from crime, disorder and danger.

� We have strong, resilient and supportive communities where people takeresponsibility for their own actions and how they affect others.

� We have improved the life chances for children, young people and familiesat risk.

� Our young people are successful learners, confident individuals, effectivecontributors and responsible citizens.

� Our children have the best start in life and are ready to succeed.

The Scottish Government has stated it wants to be judged on the differencesthese outcomes make to the quality of services and the real differences theymake to people’s lives. The outcomes are critical for deaf people and offer thepotential to address many of the most fundamental barriers to access that deafpeople have faced over many years. At the same time the Scottish Governmenthas signalled a significant change in delivery of services with the new concordatbetween central and local government and the members of the working grouprecognise the necessity of engaging more with local government. The successor not of achieving these national outcomes for them will be how deafpeople will measure the Government’s record on linguistic access.

The roadmap should go some way towards helping government betterunderstand how to achieve these outcomes.

A Scotland in which deaf and deafblind people are included in all governmentapproaches across all themes will require a step change in improvingcommunication and information. Improving linguistic access for deaf children,for young people and for adults will enable deaf people to make a creativecontribution to achieving the strategic aims of government and to theincreasing success of Scotland but there is a considerable way to go before thiswill be achieved.

32

Up to this point the roadmap has provided general information and anoverview of the context for linguistic access for deaf people. From this pointonwards it groups issues under the Scottish Government’s strategic objectives,to deliver the national outcomes, which relate to the responsibilities of individualDirectorates. Each section contains a summary and it is hoped that this approachwill be helpful to officials with a role to play in achieving the outcomes.

33

34

5.0STRATEGIC AIM: SAFER & STRONGER

THE LONG ANDWINDING ROADTHE BRITISH SIGN LANGUAGE & LINGUISTIC ACCESSWORKING GROUP 2008

Help local communities to flourish, becoming stronger, safer places tolive, offering improved opportunities and a better quality of life.

In a Scotland which is safer and stronger deaf and deafblind people willrequire access to information to equip them to be safer and stronger andaccess to systems which will facilitate their involvement. In building a safer andstronger society they need to be confident that arrangements which will fullyinclude them are in place. This is of even more importance during emergenciesand when dealing with the emergency services. Deafblind people will oftenneed separate arrangements to ensure they have access to services to keepthem safe and strong.

5.1 DEAFBLIND PEOPLE

Deafblind people cannot automatically benefit from mainstream servicesor those aimed at a single sensory impairment due to loss of the secondor ‘compensating’ sense.

Deafblind Scotland

Deafblind Scotland estimates that there are about 5,000 people in Scotlandwith a severe dual sensory loss. A definition of deafblindness, 20 years old,continues to be helpful.

“Persons are regarded as deafblind if they have a severe degree of combinedvisual and auditory impairment resulting in problems of communication,information andmobility. The group will include persons who have had severevision and hearing impairment since birth or early childhood, and those whodevelop the dual impairment in adult life.” (Breaking Through, 1988)

More recently it was suggested:

“Issues around identifying adults with dual sensory loss, and monitoringtheir level of need, is compounded by current misunderstanding of thenature of deafblindness and the lack of a consistently applied definitionof the term.” (Skellington 2006)

Access for deafblind people cannot be adequately addressed by approachesdesigned for either deaf or for visually impaired people. Solutions for deafblindpeople have to be tailored to their distinct needs depending on their mode ofcommunication and on the context. For example, a deafblind person will oftenneed a one-to-one facilitator even if they are attending a meeting at whichother LSPs are working. Their communication needs reflect their very differentlife experience.

They may be:

� Deafblind from birth or early life

� Deaf from early life and become blind as an adult

� Blind from early life and become deaf as an adult

� Deafblind in adult life

� Deafblind in old age*

* For more information on this group see SCIE Research Briefing 21: Identification of DeafblindDual Sensory Impairment in older people www.scie.org.uk

35

Deafblind people comprise a low incidence group for which the need to berepresented on all local planning groups represents an almost insurmountablechallenge. Government departments and service providers need to ensure themove to local decision making does not negatively impact on this vulnerablegroup. There are many policy documents which are relevant to improvingaccess to services for deafblind people, of significance are the SensoryImpairment Action Plan and All Our Futures: Planning for a Scotland with anAgeing Population http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2007/03/08125028/1. It is not enough to assume services designed for disabled orfor older people will necessarily meet the needs of deafblind people. A recentsurvey on direct payments found that up to 75 per cent of deafblind people havehad negative experiences with direct payments, according to new researchhttp://www.inclusionscotland.org/news/story.asp?id=1882

Language Service Professionals working with deafblind people may include:

� guide-communicators using speech, or deafblind manual, or BSL, or ‘handson signing’, or touch/gesture or a combination of these;

� clear speakers working at close range, using clear speech (often to ahearing aid user);

� deafblind manual interpreters;

� BSL/English interpreter (using a restricted visual field).

Guide-Communicators

Deafblind Scotland has recruited 50 guide-communicators including 7 seniorguide-communicators and they are contracted, usually on a part-time basis(see appendix 7 for their qualifications). The already limited numbers are inreality even less when you consider the different types of communication skillsneeded for different deafblind people. Of the group of 50 only 5 are qualifiedas deafblind interpreters (manual) to serve the whole of Scotland for deafblindpeople who use the manual alphabet. This severely restricts access to formalmeetings where more than one interpreter is required as described below.

36

Interpreters (Deafblind Manual)

Deafblind Scotland say skilled language modification is a very effective way ofincluding deafblind people, but there is an urgent need to address the needsof a small number of deafblind manual users. “At every meeting/conferencethey are the most poorly served and while we now have qualified interpreters,it takes two interpreters to EACH deafblind manual user, therefore, 5 iscompletely inadequate to serve needs across Scotland. It is not an easyqualification to achieve and the English skills required to undertake training isdeterring many. As BSL interpreting is becoming somewhat easier to access,we must take steps to address this need.”

Training Routes

Guide-communicators are trained in Scotland by voluntary organisations andare assessed by CACDP which has a suite of qualifications in working withdeafblind people. Funding from the Equality Unit for the Deafblind StudiesDiploma Course currently sustains 5 students on the diploma course. Thesenior guides, mentioned earlier, form a major part of Deafblind Scotland’scontingent on the Deafblind Studies Diploma. The course is currently beingreviewed with the aim of being able to access the course in a number of ways.

The BSL&LAWG has actively adopted the principle that improving access for deafpeople will not automatically bring about a corresponding improvement fordeafblind people. To effect improvements for deafblind people, separate, althoughsometimes parallel, action has to be taken. The group will support this principlewhen developing policy and will raise awareness of the special measuresrequired to accommodate the needs of deafblind people wherever possible.

37

The group will alert colleagues and agencies involved with training initiatives outsideof the social care field to include deafblind awareness and communicationmethods within basic training. Social care agencies are involved in training andscoping initiatives for occupational standards by the Sensory Impairment AdvisoryGroup and the Scottish Council for Care Standards. The working group will seekto liaise with colleagues responsible for policy on older people to ensure theyare aware of the impact of deafblindness and of dual sensory loss in olderpeople and that they understand the distinct nature of the solutions necessaryto overcome access barriers. Policy makers have an important role ininfluencing service providers to tailor their commissioning and provider servicesfor high incidence groups such older people with dual sensory loss and lowincidence groups, such as deafblind people below retirement age.

38

39

Summary

SAFER AND STRONGERGroup Issue Action/Considerations1. DeafblindPeople

1.1 To effect improvements fordeafblind people, separate,although sometimes parallel,action has to be taken.

1.2 To improve understanding ofthe distinct nature of the solutionsnecessary to overcome accessbarriers.

1.3 Service providers need help totailor their commissioning andservice provision for high incidencegroups, such older people withdual sensory loss and for lowincidence groups, such as deafblindpeople below retirement age.

1.4 Lack of sustainable funding tosecure ongoing training ofcommunication workers fordeafblind people includingguide-communicators.

1.5 BSL/English interpreters maynot have opportunities to gain skillsand qualifications in interpretingfor Deafblind people.

1.1.1 The BSL&LAWG activelyadopts the principle that improvingaccess for deaf people will notautomatically bring about acorresponding improvement fordeafblind people.

1.2.1 Policy for older people isaudited to ensure they takeaccount of the impact ofdeafblindness and of dual sensoryloss in the older population.

1.3.1 The BSL&LAWG and policymakers can have a positive rolewith service providers to help themtailor their commissioning andprovider services to differentdeafblind groups.

1.4.1 Government Directorates,training agencies and funders towork with Deafblind Scotland todevelop a sustainable trainingframework.

1.5.1 Ensure a system, whichencourages BSL/Englishinterpreters to gain appropriatequalifications. Interpreter trainers,SASLI and Deafblind Scotland toconsider as part of basic andpost-qualifying qualifications.

5.2 CONSULTATION WITH DEAF GROUPS

In advertising a workshop about consulting with older people the ConsultationInstitute wrote:

“Everyone buys into the notion of better consultation with citizens.But, in reality, some members of society are more easily heard than others.”http://www.consultationinstitute.org/

This aptly sums up the position with deaf people as well as for older people.

Consulting with deaf people can be a minefield for the uninitiated and whilstproviding a BSL/English interpreter for a public meeting is becoming morewidespread and is welcome, it may not always be the answer. For example, itwould be inappropriate if the audience are older people who have becomedeaf and do not use BSL. As with so many issues involving deaf people it isnecessary to recognise at the outset which groups you are trying to reach andthen to differentiate the approach and also often the method of consulting.Those wishing to consult have to be aware of what at they need to do to involvedeaf, deafened, deafblind, hard of hearing and Deaf people separately andcollectively. It may be necessary to engage in face to face consultation,particularly with deafblind people and with BSL users, as they cannot accesslengthy documents in English.

The BSL&LAWG has decided that, from 2008, a single sub group will beformed to specifically tackle the issue of engaging with BSL users and intend toproduce a plan of how to involve Deaf people effectively.

40

41

There are publications with useful background information but workingalongside a specialist deaf agency to provide expert advice, at least when firstattempting consultation, is often the best option. Contracting a specialistagency to undertake the consultation on your behalf may be the preferredapproach at times depending on the circumstances. It may be more effectiveto have a separate meeting of Deaf people than booking interpreters forgeneral meetings where it is not known if they are needed. New technologyoffers innovative ways of working with groups and these should be explored.The Scottish Council on Deafness is the umbrella organisation for the deaf fieldand is a vital conduit to reach the different specialist agencies and can offerinvaluable expert advice. There are also groups established in some areaswhich could offer direct contact if this is preferred. These include local Deafforums, Deaf Centres, hard of hearing clubs etc.

Developing engagement and consultation with disabled people across Scotlandis a government priority underpinned by legislation and to this end a group ofpolicy and engagement officers have been funded in key organisations,including a research and policy officer at the Scottish Council on Deafness.

One of the sub groups convened by the BSL&LAWG during 2007 made anumber of suggestions for improving consultation:

� Gather examples of good practice on how organisations involve their users

� Create an expert network of deaf people

� Provide web-based guidance for public bodies (perhaps via SCoD)

� To have more BSL available on the Scottish Government website

� To hold training/information events on how to consult

All of the BSL&LAWGmember organisations have been involved in such activities,often for many years and have high levels of expertise. They feel that often thetime allowed for consultation is too short to make it meaningful and they feelpolicy makers have some responsibility to make material more manageable, forexample by providing summaries of the key points. It may be time for anational forum for policy makers to be developed to consider a more strategicapproach to consultation with deaf groups.

Young People

It is often necessary to adopt different ways to obtain the views and interest ofyoung people and there are a number of good examples in the deaf field. TheNDCS Change Your World project marks the first national discussion about theissues and challenges which affect young deaf and hearing impaired people.The principles of the campaign with its emphasis on encouraging deaf youngpeople from across Scotland to get involved and to influence the agendareflect the Government’s wish to involve young people. In a similar way thegovernment will be working in partnership with Donaldson’s College/RNIDover three years to organise a programme of events with young people to findout directly from young people what they need in order to achieve activecitizenship. The British Deaf Association (Scotland) is hoping to support twodeaf young people to become members of the Scottish Youth Parliament toput forward the views of young deaf people.

42

43

Summary

5.3 ADVOCACY

Advocacy services can contribute to helping people to be safer and strongerby providing them with information and with the self-confidence to assertthemselves. For most deaf people advocacy services are not required if theyhave full access to information, communication and interpreting services. Forthose who do need them, often this is deaf people with additional problems,there is a no independent provision of advocacy in Scotland. Additionalproblems may include deaf people with mental health issues, newly deafenedadults and deaf people with learning and other disabilities. Many voluntaryorganisations working with deaf people take an active advocacy role withand on behalf of the people they represent, but they are often also serviceproviders which may compromise an independent advocacy role. There areadvocacy networks in Scotland and they do deal with deaf people, but nonecater specifically for deaf people. One example of a specialist advocacy serviceis in the north of England, provided by a regional association, which employsDeaf advocates and which is not otherwise a service provider. It may be worthexploring if a network could be established across Scotland. It is noted thatthere is funding channelled into specialist mental health and learning disabilityadvocacy networks, which could provide a suitable model.

SAFER AND STRONGERGroup Issue Action/Considerations2. Deaf People 2.1 Government mostly unaware of

complexities in effectiveconsultation.

2.2 Government consultationdocuments inaccessible to BSLusers and deafblind people.

2.3 Consultation is too late toshape policy.

2.4.1 No national overview andplan for effective engagement.

2.1.2 Take advice from specialistdeaf agencies via SCoD and theBSL&LAWG.

2.2.1 Provide translations (at leastof summaries) in BSL on the web.Offer face to face meetings.Provide summaries of key points.

2.3.1 Use the policy officer at SCoDand the BSL&LAWG to providefeedback from deaf people at anearly stage of policy development.

2.4.1 Sub group of BSL&LAWG toformulate a plan to engage BSLusers in 2008.

Invite policy makers to consider amore strategic approach toconsultation.

44

Summary

5.4 EMERGENCY SERVICES

It is only in recent years that deaf people who are unable to hear a voice on thetelephone have had the possibility of using telephone services, which everybodyelse takes for granted. Improvements in access have been substantial with theadvent of text-phones, with relay services, such as Typetalk and with theexpansion of SMS usage. However, access to emergency services using recentadvances such as SMS are not yet universal and naturally deaf people think thisshould be given the highest priority so that they can be as safe as their fellowcitizens. Many of the emergency services at local level have made arrangementsto adapt their services to suit deaf people for example by using text and fax, byproviding deaf awareness and BSL training for staff and by translating websitesinto BSL. All of this is commendable and much appreciated by local deaf people.It may be helpful if the national picture were mapped to allow the areas wheregood practice is established to inform those where it is not.

Scottish SMS Text Emergency Services Group

The group was convened by the Scottish Government’s Equality Unit and metbriefly in 2006, the members being mostly from the emergency services inScotland and representatives of the various divisions of the then ScottishExecutive. It has not met since that time as its role was largely overtaken bynational developments. The Scottish Government maintains a ‘watching brief’and keeps in email contact with both the Scottish and the UK groups andprovides periodic updates in Scotland.

SAFER AND STRONGERGroup Issue Action/Considerations3. All DeafGroups

3.1 Existing advocacy networks notnecessarily ‘deaf aware’.

3.2 No specialist independentadvocacy network for those deafpeople who need it.

3.1.1 Existing agencies consultSCoD and BSL&LAWG memberorganisations.

3.2.1 Directorates to explore theidea of a separate network for deafpeople who cannot accessmainstream provision.

45

The group in Scotland was formed to address the lack of access to 999 servicesfor deaf people who have historically had to rely on others to contact theemergency services on their behalf. This places deaf people in a vulnerableposition not only having to be dependent on the willingness of others to help butin some situation having to struggle to communicate effectively when in a crisis.

The UK-wide SMS emergency service working group has been meeting regularlyover the past 2 years. They have been working to overcome the technicaldifficulties to providing a UK service and they are now preparing for a trialhopefully during 2009. The committee members are representatives from theDepartment for Communities and Local Government, the Home Office, thetelecommunication companies (Vodafone, Orange, T-Mobile, O2, BT, C&W,Ofcom, BT TextDirect) and RNID.

The UK group suggests that currently there are a number of local schemes forSMS access to emergency services, most of these providing access through a5-digit number. The use of different regional numbers is confusing for usersespecially when travelling away from home and it is hoped existing regionalservices will eventually be replaced by a national service. The scope of theproposed trial will be ‘to assess the technical feasibility of providing an e-SMSservice to mobile handsets that have been registered with the Service’.

Emergency Health Measures

Systems in place to notify the general public about health risk (such as pandemicinfluenza) or indeed any other risk (such as terrorism) generally involve thewritten word or media broadcasts. All of these approaches will fail to reachsome deaf and deafblind people unless specific steps are taken to guaranteethis. These steps need to be included at the planning stage so that localauthorities and others involved know what needs to be done and have arobust network in place to deliver.

5.5 THE 2011 CENSUS

Following a consultation meeting between SCoD members and the GeneralRegister Office for Scotland (GROS) in May 2007, the GROS has, for the firsttime, recommended a question on BSL in the section of the Census dealingwith languages. This will be included in the Census rehearsal due to take placein Spring 2009 with 50,000 households.

To view the question look for Section 4.8.3 Question 18 athttp://www.gro-scotland.gov.uk/files2/the-census/policy/2001_census_recommendations_paper.pdf

There are also questions about ability to read and write English which shouldprovide useful information when combined with the question on language andwith other questions in the Census.

The Public Assistance Service online helpline for the Census will include BSLvideo clips of the questions so Deaf people can access the Census online.

46

47

Summary

SAFER AND STRONGERGroup Issue Action/Considerations4. All DeafGroups

4.1 Deaf people who cannot hearvoice on the telephone cannotcontact the emergency servicesdirectly across the UK.

4.2 Deaf and deafblind people maymiss information broadcast in themedia or provided in writtenEnglish about emergency healthissues.

4.3 Data about Deaf people andBSL is not currently collectednationally.

4.4 Access arrangements for the2011 Census needs to include allgroups of deaf people.

4.1.1 BSL&LA Project Manager toliaise with UK and ScottishCommittees and keep a watchingbrief on the proposed pilot.

4.2.1 SG Directorates, LAs andHealth Boards to include how toreach Deaf and deafblind people inplanning for emergency events.

4.3.1 Questions in the 2011 Censusabout language should rectify thisif included following the pilot in2009.

4.4.1 How to interview Deaf anddeafblind people in the Census isbeing planned in advance.

48

6.0STRATEGIC AIM: HEALTHIER

THE LONG ANDWINDING ROADTHE BRITISH SIGN LANGUAGE & LINGUISTIC ACCESSWORKING GROUP 2008

Help people to sustain and improve their health, especially in disadvantagedcommunities, ensuring better, local and faster access to health care.

Health inequalities, poverty and economic and environmental inequalities, accessto learning, early life experiences, and exposure to risks of crime and dangeroften go together and so reducing inequalities requires a shared endeavouracross Scotland to tackle the root causes. Government actions to tackleinequalities must reinforce and complement each other across a number ofareas of responsibility. For example, by improving employability, housing andcommunities, we will help reduce health and education inequalities. And bygiving our children the best possible start in life we will help reduceinequalities later in life.

A Ministerial Task Force, bringing together a range of relevant perspectives fromeducation and other backgrounds, will refresh our approach to tacklinghealth inequalities with new action ensuring that the work of all therelevant partners and sectors is aligned. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Health/health/Inequalities/inequalitiestaskforce

Deaf people experiencemany of the inequalities outlined above and concerted effortacross government is essential in addressing these and part of the process isthis roadmap.

6.1 ACCESS TO