Interpreters: an asset or a crutch?

Rant alert: Today we were treated (sarcasm intended) to a technology training workshop en masse. As if that weren't irritating enough, knowing that no one's needs were being met that way, the presenters, while well-meaning, were not prepared at all, screwing things up and not having what they needed prepared. That'd fry me all by itself, but something happened that had me absolutely, positively hopping mad before lunch.

We were supposed to split up into several groups for more hands-on training. The guy in charge, who seemed very nice and ill-prepared but inexplicably scared of us, said, "We don't have enough interpreters. One group will be without an interpreter. So maybe we could group all the hearing people together." *doink* Excusez-moi??? Someone stood up and said they'd prefer to be grouped by skill level, not by hearing level and that deaf people are skilled communicators who are perfectly able to communicate without interpreters. The dude looked a bit dumbfounded but nodded and said, "OK. Skill level is fine." He told us where to go for what type of training. I wasn't sure what group I should be in, so I went to one group first. After a few minutes, I realized I needed more advanced training, so I went to another group.

Much to my horror, I saw a colleague of mine interpreting. And the presenter was the guy who had been told interpreters were unnecessary. I wanted to say something so badly for several reasons. One, this guy was such a bad presenter that he'd go off onto a tangent. He didn't answer people's questions. So having an interpreter available wouldn't help communication much. Two, we had plenty of technology available to easily facilitate communication. Three, he had been told there was no need, for the love of Mike. I fumed for the entire thirty minutes then quickly asked a few people what the gol-darn had blinkin' *happened* here.

Apparently what happened was that Mr. Clueless came into the room, blinked, looked around, and asked, "Who's the interpreter?" People were quiet for a while, then Aforementioned Colleague apparently reluctantly volunteered. I didn't say anything because by the time I got there, things were in full swing and I didn't feel it'd be right to get all huffy and demand a change. It looked as if people were OK with what was going on. So who was I to march to the middle of the room, cross my arms, and demand that all interpreting cease? I let it go, though I took the opportunity to draw a picture of a deaf person using a crutch labeled "'TERPS"and entitled something along the lines of "When we accept this, we cripple ourselves."

I've been thinking about it for awhile, trying to figure out just what it is that set me off like that. I'm a fan of interpreters. Don't get me wrong. Interpreters have opened up venues previously inaccessible and unavailable to us. I'm grateful to have the option. However, I'm finding more and more that people appear unable to fathom the idea of not using interpreters for every little thing. Mr. Clueless still expected an interpreter, which was bad enough after he'd been told point-blank it wasn't going to be an issue. The *deaf* people I talked to asked me, "Well, how would we communicate without an interpreter?" This upset me more than anything else. I mean, hel-lo? Type? Write on the board? Gesture? We're not talking rocket science here, just how to use a piece of equipment hooked up to a computer. It's not that hard, people. Professional interpreters have been on the scene for only a few decades and already we're unable to talk to hearing people without interpreters? Give me a break. I'm upset with Mr. Clueless for reasons already delineated above. I'm upset with my colleague for giving in and interpreting, because I believe she was enabling him and other people. It was also a violation of professional ethics in my opinion. I'm upset with the hearing people for letting their colleague go ahead and interpret. I'm upset with the deaf people for just letting it happen and for thinking there was no other solution. I'm also *looking down sheepishly* ...upset with myself.

*sigh* Yes, you heard me. I didn't say anything at the time in order to keep the peace. If I'd said something, I'd have been painted as one of those so-called militants that you hear so much about both in and outside of DeafBlogLand. But it was *wrong.* I'd probably keep mum again if I had a chance to go back to the very moment I walked into that room so I wouldn't make waves. But I'm just upset with everyone involved, including myself.

I pose this question to you, the Teeming Millions: Have we become so dependent on interpreters that we are unable to function around hearing people without them? If not, when do we need them and when is it okay not to have them around? Before you respond, please bear in mind that I agree that there are situations where having an interpreter is important and situations where it is a matter of personal choice. I'm just wondering, generally speaking, what you guys think.