Law Enforcement and Effective Communication

As technology continues to improve and effective communication tools evolve, so do the processes in which law enforcement interacts with persons with disabilities. We review some of the best practices for law enforcement in regards to communicating and interacting with persons with disabilities as recommended by the Department of Justice in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). 

Effective communication

In general, the ADA requires that Title II entities, including law enforcement agencies, "communicate effectively with people who have communication disabilities." This means that covered entities are required to "provide auxiliary aids and services to make sure that individuals with speech, hearing and vision disabilities can understand what is said or written and communicate effectively." 

The issue of effective communication may come up when officers are required to interview witnesses, suspects, or victims, and often in times of distress − during which safety of course is a priority. 

Regardless, Title II entities are required to establish processes and procedures to provide effective communication and ensure programs, services, and communication are delivered effectively to persons with disabilities. 

Tips for communicating with persons with hearing disabilities

According to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), officers may find the following solutions useful: 

• Speech supplemented by gestures and visual aids can be used in some cases.
• A pad and pencil, a word processor, or a typewriter can be used to exchange written notes.
• An oral interpreter can be used when speaking with a person who has been trained to speech read. Note: Do not assume that speech reading will be effective in most situations. On average, only about one-third of spoken words can be understood by speech reading.

While the tips above are great in emergency situations, law enforcement agencies should always ensure they have up-to-date policies and procedures, as well as contracts and memorandums of understanding (MOU's) in place with communication vendors, such as ASL interpreters and VRI/VRS providers. 

For example, using a pad and pen may be considered acceptable for traffic violations, in which, the officer has the ability to point to text and pictures as visual aids - however, for more intensive interactions, such as interviews to determine whether a crime has been committed, more effective communication types need to be used, such as interpreters, UBI-DUO's, VRI/VRS, and Braille/tactile communication. 

Law enforcement agencies should have agreements in place to provide the following services: 

• Teletypewriters (TTY) for exchanging written messages over the telephone.
• Assistive listening systems or devices to amplify sounds for use when speaking with a person who is hard of hearing.
• Sign language interpreters when speaking with a person who knows sign language.
• Text-to-911 functionality - emergency services cannot rely on third-party services such as a state-funded relay to ensure persons who are deaf or hard of hearing can communicate with 911 operators.

To that end, law enforcement agencies should also be aware of any constraints in their communities. For example, in some states legislation exists that requires interpreters to be RID certified. RID certification is incredibly beneficial to those looking to secure qualified interpreters with evidence of their expertise, but in rural communities, there may be a lack of qualified individuals to meet both the legal requirements of their state and/or have the proper qualifications to interpret in legal settings. Law enforcement agencies should be aware of these constraints and prepare for alternative ways to communicate with their community. 

Practical suggestions

According to the DOJ's "Communicating with People Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing: ADA Guide for Law Enforcement Officers," the following are some practical suggestions for communicating effectively: 

• Before speaking, get the person’s attention with a wave of the hand or a gentle tap on the shoulder.
• Face the person and do not turn away while speaking.
• Try to converse in a well-lit area.
• Do not cover your mouth or chew gum.
• If a person is wearing a hearing aid, do not assume the individual can hear you.
• Minimize background noise and other distractions whenever possible.
• When you are communicating orally, speak slowly and distinctly. Use gestures and facial expressions to reinforce what you are saying.
• Use visual aids when possible, such as pointing to printed information on a citation or other document.
• Remember that only about one third of spoken words can be understood by speech reading.
• When communicating by writing notes, keep in mind that some individuals who use sign language may lack good English reading and writing skills.
• If someone with a hearing disability cannot understand you, write a note to ask him or her what communication aid or service is needed.
• If a sign language interpreter is requested, be sure to ask which language the person uses. American Sign Language (ASL) and Signed English are the most common.
• When you are interviewing a witness or a suspect or engaging in any complex conversation with a person whose primary language is sign language, a qualified interpreter is usually needed to ensure effective communication.
• When using an interpreter, look at and speak directly to the deaf person, not to the interpreter.
• Talk at your normal rate, or slightly slower if you normally speak very fast.
• Only one person should speak at a time.
• Use short sentences and simple words.
• Do not use family members or children as interpreters. They may lack the vocabulary or the impartiality needed to interpret effectively.

When considering the use of the tips above, law enforcement agencies should work to anticipate how various communication methods can be incorporated into their work on a regular basis. For example, running table-top exercises that focus on how officers may communicate with victims who are deaf or hard of hearing, what to do if interpreters are not available, and how to properly read Miranda rights to a person who does not speak English as a first language. Table-top exercises help agencies identify solutions that may not be apparent during the policy development process, such as how to properly restrain persons who communicate in ASL, and will ensure officers have lived experience working to identify ways to effectively communicate. 

Finally, law enforcement agencies need to be aware of when communication aids are absolutely required and when they are not. In general, it is not appropriate to rely on persons with personal relationships to translate for the officer. In some cases, officers may be tempted to allow a husband or wife to translate for them, only to find out later that the spouse was the reason the victim contacted the police in the first place - in this case, the interpreter has an obvious conflict in interpreting for the victim and should be treated as any other witness or suspect, regardless of their ability to translate for the victim.