1. Home
  2. Vol 3, No 1
  3. Yuan

Vulnerability, moral concepts, and ethics in interpreting

Xiaohui Yuan

Abstract


While many studies have been conducted to investigate types of role that interpreters take on to represent and advocate for vulnerable populations, interpreters’ vulnerability and its source in this particular type of encounter are rather under-explored. Interpreting for vulnerable populations is conceptualised in this study as a distinct communicative context riddled with institutional, knowledge, and power politics that gives rise to emotive, nuanced, and subjective moral judgements on the obligation of care. Drawing from theories in vulnerability studies and from moral concepts, and employing the interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) methodology, the author, with three professional public service interpreters, explores the key factors contributing to their situational vulnerability, the driving forces motivating their decision to support agency, the adverse effects on the interpreters attributed to the situational vulnerability of moral distress, and how to recontextualise ethics guiding interpreting for vulnerable populations. This constitutes the first study theorising the public service interpreter’s situational vulnerability, and how interpreters’ decisions are influenced by the interdependency between facets of vulnerability and moral concepts.

Keywords


vulnerability; moral obligation of care; moral self; moral distress; interpreting for vulnerable populations; interpreting ethics

Full Text: PDF

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7203/Just.3.27746

References


Anderson, Elizabeth. 1999. “What is the point of equality?” Ethics 109 (2): 287–337. https://doi.org/10.1086/233897.

Anderson, Elizabeth. 2010. "Justifying the capabilities approach to justice." In Measuring justice: Primary goods and capabilities, edited by Harry Brighouse & Ingrid Robeyns, 81–100. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511810916.004.

Bahadır, Şebnem. 2017. "The interpreter as observer, participant and agent of change: The irresistible entanglement between interpreting ethics, politics and pedagogy." In The changing role of the interpreter: Contextualizing norms, ethics and quality standards, edited by Marta Biagini, Michael Boyd & Claudia Monacelli, 122–145. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315621531-7.

Boéri, Julie. 2023. “Steering ethics towards social justice in interpreting. A model for a meta ethics of interpreting.” Translation and Interpreting Studies 18 (1): 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.20070.boe.

Burke, Peter & Janet Stets. 2009. Identity theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195388275.001.0001.

Butler, Judith. 2004. Precarious life: The powers of mourning and violence. London: Verso.

Butler, Judith. 2009. Frames of war: When is life grievable? London: Verso.

Dean, Robyn K. & Robert Q. Pollard. 2011. “Context-based ethical reasoning in interpreting: A demand control schema.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 5 (1): 155–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2011.10798816.

Dodds, Susan. 2013. "Dependence, care, and vulnerability." In Vulnerability: New essays in ethics and feminist philosophy, edited by Catriona Mackenzie, Wendy Rogers & Susan Dodds, 181–203. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199316649.003.0008.

Fineman, Martha. 2008. “The vulnerable subject: Anchoring equality in the human condition.” Yale Journal of Law and Feminism 20 (1): 1–23.

Fineman, Martha. 2010. “The vulnerable subject and the responsive state.” Emory Law Journal 60 (2): 251–275.

Goodin, Robert E. 1985. Protecting the vulnerable: A reanalysis of our social responsibilities. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Graham, Gordon. 2011. Theories of ethics: An introduction to moral philosophy with a selection of classic readings. London: Routledge.

Hamric, Ann. 2012. “Empirical research on moral distress: Issues, challenges, and opportunities.” HEC Forum: An Interdisciplinary Journal on Hospitals' Ethical and Legal Issues 24 (1): 39–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10730-012-9177-x.

Hardy, Sam A. & Gustavo Carlo. 2011. “Moral identity: What is it, how does it develop, and is it linked to moral action?” Child Development Perspectives 5 (3): 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2011.00189.x.

Jameton, Andrew. 1984. Nursing practice: The ethical issues. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Jameton, Andrew. 1993. “Dilemmas of moral distress: Moral responsibility and nursing practice.” AWHONNS Clinical Issues Perinatal and Women’s Health Nursing 4 (4): 542–551.

Kherbache, Alexandra, Evelyne Mertens & Yvonne Denier. 2022. “Moral distress in medicine: An ethical analysis.” Journal of Health Psychology 27 (8): 1971–1990. https://doi.org/10.1177/13591053211014586.

Llewellyn-Jones, Peter & Robert G. Lee. 2014. Redefining the role of the community interpreter: The concept of role-space. Lincoln, UK: SLI Press.

Mackenzie, Catriona. 2013. "The importance of relational autonomy and capabilities for an ethics of vulnerability." In Vulnerability: New essays in ethics and feminist philosophy, edited by Catriona Mackenzie, Wendy Rogers & Susan Dodds, 33–59. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199316649.003.0002.

Mackenzie, Catriona, Wendy Rogers & Susan Dodds, eds. 2013. Vulnerability: New essays in ethics and feminist philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199316649.001.0001.

Mason, Ian. 2009. "Role, positioning and discourse in face-to-face interpreting." In Interpreting and translating in public service settings. Policy, practice, pedagogy, edited by Raquel de Pedro Ricoy, Isabelle A. Perez & Christine W.L. Wilson, 52–73. Manchester: St. Jerome.

Miller, Sarah C. 2012. The ethics of need: Agency, dignity and obligation. New York: Routledge.

National Register of Public Service Interpreters (NRPSI). 2016. Code of professional conduct. https://www.nrpsi.org.uk/for-clients-of-interpreters/code-of-professional-conduct.html#:~:text=The%20Code%20prescribes%20standards%20of,to%20the%20public%20at%20large.

Nussbaum, Martha C. 2006. Frontiers of justice: Disability, nationality, species membership. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1c7zftw.

Popper, Karl. 1994. The open society and its enemies: New one-volume edition. NED-New ed. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Reader, Soran, ed. 2005. The philosophy of need. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rogers, Wendy, Catriona Mackenzie & Susan Dodds. 2012. “Why Bioethics needs a concept of vulnerability.” International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 5 (2): 11–38. https://doi.org/10.3138/ijfab.5.2.11.

Rudvin, Mette. 2020. "Situating interpreting ethics in moral philosophy." In Ethics in public service interpreting, edited by Mary Phelan, Mette Rudvin, Hanne Skaaden & Patrick Kermit, 24–84. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315715056-2.

Scully, Jackie L. 2013. "Disability and vulnerability: On bodies, dependence, and power." In Vulnerability: New essays in ethics and feminist philosophy, edited by Catriona Mackenzie, Wendy Rogers & Susan Dodds, 204–221. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199316649.003.0009.

Sellman, Derek. 2005. “Towards an understanding of nursing as a response to human vulnerability.” Nursing Philosophy 6 (1): 2–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-769X.2004.00202.x.

Sen, Amartya & Bernard Williams, eds. 1982. Utilitarianism and beyond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611964.

Skaaden, Hanne. 2019. “Invisible or invincible? Professional integrity, ethics, and voice in public service interpreting.” Perspectives 27 (5): 704–717. https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676x.2018.1536725.

Smith, Jonathan, Paul Flowers & Michael Larkin. 2009. Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Theory, method and research. London: Sage.

Smith, Jonathan & Isabella Nizza. 2021. Essentials of interpretative phenomenological analysis. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000259-000.

Stryker, Sheldon. 2002. Symbolic interactionism: A social structural version. Caldwell, NJ: Blackburn Press.

Tiselius, Elizabet, Elizabet Hägglund & Pernilla Pergert. 2020. "Distressful situations, non-supportive work climate, threats to professional and private integrity: Healthcare interpreting in Sweden." In Handbook of research in medical interpreting, edited by Izabel E.T. de V. Souza & Effrossyni Fragkou, 54–79. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-9308-9.ch003.

Wiggins, David. 2005. “An idea we cannot do without: What difference will it make (e.g., to moral, political and environmental philosophy) to recognize and put to use a substantial conception of need?” Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements 57: 25–50. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1358246105057024.

Yuan, Xiaohui. 2022a. “A symbolic interactionist approach to interpreter’s identity management.” Interpreting and Society 2 (2): 141–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/27523810221100990.

Yuan, Xiaohui. 2022b. “A symbolic interactionist model of interpreter-facilitated communication—Key communication issues in face-to-face interpreting.” Frontiers in Communication 7: 8–17. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2022.1000849.

Yuan, Xiaohui. 2024, forthcoming. Public service interpreter’s identity management and identity crisis. New York, NY: Routledge.

 


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Bookmark and Share