Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2012 Oct;89(1):158-62.
doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2012.07.001. Epub 2012 Jul 31.

Medical interpreters as tools: dangers and challenges in the utilitarian approach to interpreters' roles and functions

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Medical interpreters as tools: dangers and challenges in the utilitarian approach to interpreters' roles and functions

Elaine Hsieh et al. Patient Educ Couns. 2012 Oct.

Abstract

Objective: This study explores the tensions, challenges, and dangers when a utilitarian view of interpreter is constructed, imposed, and/or reinforced in health care settings.

Methods: We conducted in-depth interviews and focus groups with 26 medical interpreters from 17 different languages and cultures and 39 providers of five specialties. Grounded theory was used for data analysis.

Results: The utilitarian view to interpreters' roles and functions influences providers in the following areas: (a) hierarchical structure and unidirectional communication, (b) the interpreter seen as information gatekeeper, (c) the interpreter seen as provider proxy, and (d) interpreter's emotional support perceived as tools.

Conclusion: When interpreters are viewed as passive instruments, a utilitarian approach may compromise the quality of care by silencing patients' and interpreters' voice, objectifying interpreters' emotional work, and exploiting patients' needs.

Practice implications: Providers need to recognize that a utilitarian approach to the interpreter's role and functions may create interpersonal and ethical dilemmas that compromise the quality of care. By viewing interpreters as smart technology (rather than passive instruments), both providers and interpreters can learn from and co-evolve with each other, allowing them to maintain control over their expertise and to work as collaborators in providing quality care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Dysart-Gale D. Communication models, professionalization, and the work of medical interpreters. Health Commun. 2005;17:91–103. - PubMed
    1. Rosenberg E, Leanza Y, Seller R. Doctor-patient communication in primary care with an interpreter: Physician perceptions of professional and family interpreters. Patient Educ Couns. 2007;67:286–92. - PubMed
    1. Fatahi N, Hellstrom M, Skott C, Mattsson B. General practitioners’ views on consultations with interpreters: A triad situation with complex issues. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2008;26:40–5. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hsieh E. I am not a robot!” Interpreters’ views of their roles in health care settings. Qual Health Res. 2008;18:1367–83. - PubMed
    1. Hsieh E. Provider-interpreter collaboration in bilingual health care: Competitions of control over interpreter-mediated interactions. Patient Educ Couns. 2010;78:154–9. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms