The Linguist is a languages magazine for professional linguists, translators, interpreters, language professionals, language teachers, trainers, students and academics with articles on translation, interpreting, business, government, technology
Issue link: https://thelinguist.uberflip.com/i/786024
8 The Linguist Vol/56 No/1 2017 www.ciol.org.uk FEATURES It is vital that victims of female genital mutilation can access qualified interpreting, so how can professionals prepare for such traumatic work, asks Sue Leschen F emale genital mutilation (FGM) has been illegal in the UK since 1985 and it has been illegal to take a child abroad for cutting since 2003. Yet the UK Health and Social Care Information Centre estimates that approximately 20,000 girls in the UK are at risk of FGM each year, with the most common age group being 5-9 years. The World Health Organisation (WHO) defines FGM (also known as female circumcision) as "all procedures that involve partial or total removal of external female genitalia or other injury for non-medical reasons". It is practised in at least 29 African countries, despite legislation and/or decrees prohibiting it, and WHO believes that more than 200 million women and girls alive today are victims of this barbaric practice. As a public service interpreter (PSI), I first came across FGM several years ago, at what I had naively assumed would be just another routine gynaecological examination. While the client could just about cope with being examined by her consultant, I struggled to continue with the assignment, so severe were her FGM injuries. The agency hadn't thought to warn me and I hadn't thought to ask what the appointment was about. Of course, it is possible that they didn't know – in my experience, hospitals tend to be economical with details relating to "difficult to place" PSI jobs involving FGM, abortion, Aids, tuberculosis and so on. We interpreters often have to use our own initiative to try to get as much information as possible rather than accepting jobs with vague descriptions such as "day surgery". Cutting work For me, such jobs have been exercises in maintaining neutral body language when faced with visually upsetting sights. You learn to mask your discomfort, disbelief, shock and horror at what you are seeing. Some interpreters may not be able to cope, and there is no shame in that. However, they should stay away from this sort of work: the last thing a victim of FGM needs is to see disgust and distaste on her interpreter's face. Shocking content I once had a job interpreting at a conference where nurses were using graphic slides to illustrate the dangers of FGM to a room of female Ethiopian asylum seekers. The nurses (who were clearly well accustomed to this sort of thing) did a sterling job of explaining each slide to the audience, while I had to work hard not to pass out. No one had thought to tell me in advance that the slides would include such graphic photos; all that I had been sent in advance were copies of the speeches. This was yet another learning curve: when interpreting PowerPoint displays, it is important to ask for advance disclosure of the entire – and most up-to-date version of – the slideshow from beginning to end. I also interpret in the courts in cases where there have been foiled attempts to send young girls abroad "on holiday". The authorities in the UK are sometimes tipped off by the girls' mothers, who try to protect their daughters from suffering what they themselves have been through as children. There has only ever been one (unsuccessful) prosecution in the UK, when the defendant, Dr Dharmasena, was acquitted of a charge of reinfibulation (the more extreme form of FGM) 1 against a Somali woman who had just given birth in a London hospital. She had been cut in Somalia as a child and refused to support the prosecution. The defendant's argument that his suturing was to stem blood flow after the birth was accepted by the court. By contrast, in France there is a tough 'zero tolerance' stance, with more than 40 trials (albeit still a drop in the ocean) since FGM was criminalised in 1983. According to Unicef, approximately 89% of girls are cut in Djibouti and Mali. In certain districts in Paris, such as Bondy in Saint-Denis, approximately 25% of the population originates from former French colonies such as these. While France clamps down, the problem is being displaced to the UK, courtesy of Eurostar. I interpret for girls who have been sent here for the sole purpose of being cut. According to Unicef, social acceptance of FGM as a rite of passage is the most commonly cited reason. It is culture, rather You learn to mask your discomfort… The last thing a victim needs is to see disgust on her interpreter's face