When Communication Is Part of the Risk

Reflecting on Professor Jemina Napier’s research into domestic violence, Deaf and hearing families, and trauma-informed interpreting

Content note: This article discusses domestic abuse, trauma, children and the professional impact of working in high-risk situations. Please read it at a time and in a way that feels manageable for you.

A Deaf woman is trying to explain an experience of domestic abuse. She is distressed, the information is difficult to organise and several professionals need to understand what has happened.

The interpreter needs to convey the details accurately, but may need to ask for clarification. The woman may already have repeated the same account to the police, a social worker and a support service. A hearing child may also be present and may have become used to explaining information to their mother, even though a qualified interpreter has been booked.

Within this interaction, language cannot be separated from trauma, safety, family relationships, fear of services and the possibility that a misunderstanding could affect what happens next.

Professor Jemina Napier closed Day One of The Together Conference 2026 with Passing on Perceptions: The Impact of Domestic Violence on Communication in Deaf and Hearing Families and the Implications for Sign Language Interpreters.

It was a difficult but necessary session. Jemina asked us to consider what trauma-informed interpreting means in practice and how communication barriers can place an additional burden on Deaf survivors who are already dealing with abuse and its consequences.

Research built through partnership

Jemina began by acknowledging that the research could not have been completed without close relationships with Deaf organisations, women’s support services, survivors and professionals working in domestic abuse.

The work developed over several years through partnerships that included Deaf Links, Deaf Action, Angus Women’s Aid and Women’s Aid. Jemina also acknowledged the contribution of Lucy Clark, Tasnim Ahmed and Claire Houghton, whose professional knowledge and lived experience helped shape the research.

This collaborative approach was central to the project. Research into domestic abuse cannot be developed responsibly without listening to those who have experienced it and the organisations already supporting survivors.

The presentation drew on several connected projects. These explored trauma-informed interpreting, interpreter and police preparation, the relationship between interpreters and Independent Domestic Violence Advisers, and the more recent Sign LOUD project, which focused on Deaf mothers, family communication and the effect of domestic abuse on children.

What is trauma-informed interpreting?

Trauma-informed interpreting begins with an understanding that trauma can affect people in complex and changing ways.

A person may be able to describe an experience clearly on one day but find it much harder on another. A sound, question, location, facial expression or piece of language may bring a traumatic memory back unexpectedly.

Someone may appear angry, withdrawn, confused or unable to place events into a clear order. These responses should not automatically be treated as unwillingness to cooperate or a lack of credibility.

For interpreters, this means recognising that the person’s communication is happening within the effects of trauma. The work may involve information about violence, coercion, threats, criminal behaviour, children, family separation or other distressing experiences.

The interpreter is not a therapist or domestic abuse adviser. However, understanding trauma can affect how they prepare, how they approach clarification and how they work alongside the other professionals involved.

Jemina also emphasised that trauma-informed practice needs to include the interpreter. Interpreters are exposed to the language, images and emotional force of what they convey. They embody the tone and pace of the message, often using the first person while describing someone else’s traumatic experience.

This can have a significant emotional effect, particularly when the interpreter has not been prepared for the subject or has limited access to support afterwards.

Deaf survivors may carry an additional burden

A Deaf woman reporting domestic abuse may need to deal with many of the same systems as any other survivor, including the police, social services, healthcare, housing, legal services and specialist support organisations.

Alongside this, she may also have to repeatedly explain that she is Deaf, that she uses BSL and that she needs a qualified interpreter.

She may need to challenge assumptions about using a family member, writing notes or relying on a child to interpret. She may have to explain what a registered interpreter is and why the person booked needs experience appropriate to the situation.

This creates an additional layer of work at a time when the person may already be frightened, exhausted and trying to protect herself or her children.

Jemina described Deaf mothers feeling that they had to manage both the effects of the abuse and the access arrangements surrounding every service involved. A lack of Deaf awareness from professionals meant that the women were repeatedly required to educate the same systems from which they needed help.

Providing an interpreter is important, but it does not automatically remove every communication barrier. The interpreter may not have been given enough information, may not know the specialist terminology or may not have experience of trauma-related work.

The survivor may therefore remain uncertain about whether she has been fully understood, even when an interpreter is present.

When children become responsible for communication

The Sign LOUD project looked closely at Deaf mothers and the impact of domestic abuse on communication within their families.

In some Deaf and hearing families, hearing children may become used to passing information between their parent and professionals. They may explain letters, answer telephone calls or step into conversations when they believe communication is not working.

In a domestic abuse situation, this can expose children to information and responsibilities that are not appropriate for them.

Jemina gave examples of children taking over even when an interpreter was present. A child might watch the interpreter and their mother, decide that the mother had not understood and begin explaining the information themselves.

This may come from a wish to help or from a role the child has already developed within the family. However, it can affect the child, the parent and the communication taking place.

The child is placed in a position of responsibility. The mother’s authority may be weakened, and professionals may begin addressing the child rather than the Deaf adult. The child may also be exposed to details about abuse, safeguarding or family decisions that they should not be expected to interpret or manage.

A qualified interpreter should reduce the need for children to act as language brokers. This requires the interpreter and other professionals to create enough trust and clarity for the mother to participate directly.

It also requires awareness that the child may be accustomed to taking on this role and may need support to step back from it.

Fear and mistrust of services

One of the most serious examples in Jemina’s presentation involved a Deaf mother who had previously disclosed domestic abuse.

The response from services included questions about whether she could care for her child because she was Deaf. Her child was removed, although they were later reunited.

When abuse occurred again, she was frightened to report it because she feared losing her child for a second time. She kept the situation hidden rather than returning to the services that were supposed to support her.

This example showed how ableist assumptions can affect safety.

A Deaf survivor may already be unsure about reporting abuse. If previous contact with services has led to judgement about her parenting, communication or Deafness, seeking help may feel like an additional risk.

An interpreter entering this setting needs to understand that defensiveness or mistrust may have developed through real experiences. The Deaf person may not see the police, social worker or interpreter as automatically safe.

Trust cannot be assumed simply because everyone present has a professional title.

This does not mean the interpreter should take on the role of advocate or promise a particular outcome. It means recognising the power dynamics in the room and understanding why the person may be frightened, hesitant or suspicious.

The harm of repeated retelling

Domestic abuse survivors may be asked to describe the same events several times.

They may speak to the police, an adviser, a social worker, a solicitor, a healthcare professional and others. Each service may need particular details, but every retelling requires the person to return to an experience that may be extremely painful.

For Deaf survivors, this repetition can be increased by communication breakdown.

An interpreter may need to clarify a sign or ask the person to repeat part of the account.

A professional may not understand the interpretation and ask for the information again.

Another service may begin from the start rather than using the information already available.

Jemina reported that Deaf mothers experienced this as re-traumatising. They were not simply sharing information. They were repeatedly reliving what had happened while also watching to see whether the interpreter and professionals understood them correctly.

Clarification remains necessary when information is unclear. Pretending to understand would be unsafe and professionally irresponsible.

However, trauma-informed interpreting asks us to consider how clarification is approached. Can the question be focused and clear? Can information already provided be used rather than asking the person to tell the whole story again? Can professionals agree who needs to ask which questions?

A small change in coordination may reduce unnecessary repetition.

Linguistic complexity under emotional pressure

Jemina described domestic abuse interpreting as both emotionally demanding and linguistically complex.

A Deaf woman may be crying, angry, frightened or struggling to organise events into a clear timeline. Her signing may be faster, less controlled or different from her usual language. She may switch between direct description, enactment and fragments of memory.

The interpreter still needs to understand who did what, when it happened and how events connect. The information may later contribute to safeguarding, police or legal decisions.

Specialist terminology can also create difficulties. Interpreters may encounter language connected to coercive control, risk assessment, child protection, court processes, housing or domestic abuse services.

An interpreter who does not recognise the terminology may feel reluctant to reveal uncertainty. However, failing to clarify could leave the survivor’s account incomplete or inaccurate.

Preparation is therefore essential. Interpreters need enough information about the purpose of the appointment and the professionals involved. They may also need access to specialist glossaries, training and information about domestic abuse processes.

Jemina explained that the research projects had produced free resources, including handbooks, online training modules and a glossary of domestic violence terminology and definitions. These were created with survivors, Deaf relay interpreters, police and other professionals to support more informed practice.

Interpreter, adviser and advocate are different roles

One part of the research examined how interpreters and Independent Domestic Violence Advisers, or IDVAs, work together.

The roles are connected but distinct.

The interpreter provides language access within the interaction. An IDVA offers specialist advice, advocacy and continuing support through the domestic abuse process.

A Deaf IDVA may also bring direct knowledge of Deaf culture, communication barriers and the systems Deaf survivors are likely to encounter.

Jemina explained that very few Deaf qualified IDVAs are available nationally. Where they are involved, they can work alongside interpreters, provide specialist terminology and help the wider team understand the survivor’s needs.

Clear role boundaries remain important. The interpreter should not be expected to become the person’s ongoing support worker. The IDVA should not be treated as a replacement for a qualified interpreter when language access is required.

Strong collaboration allows each person to contribute their own knowledge without one role becoming confused with another.

Jemina also encouraged consideration of Deaf interpreters, Deaf intermediaries and Deaf IDVAs where their involvement would support communication and safety.

The question should not only be, “Has an interpreter been booked?” It should be, “What combination of professionals is needed for this person and this situation?”

Confidentiality, safeguarding and duty of care

High-risk assignments can bring professional responsibilities into direct tension.

Interpreters have duties relating to confidentiality and professional boundaries. They may also become aware of information connected to the safety of a survivor or child.

Jemina encouraged interpreters to prepare by thinking about safeguarding before the assignment rather than waiting for a concern to arise.

What is the reporting process within this setting? Who is responsible for safeguarding decisions? What should the interpreter do if they become aware of an immediate risk? Is there an opportunity to speak with the lead professional before the interaction begins?

The interpreter should not make independent investigative decisions or take over the role of the police, social worker or domestic abuse specialist. They do, however, need to know how to raise a concern through the correct professional route.

The interpreter also needs to think about personal safety. Domestic abuse work may involve a perpetrator, a high-risk location or someone known to the interpreter through the local Deaf community.

Accepting every assignment without considering these factors is not a sign of professional commitment. It may place the interpreter or the people involved at risk.

Looking after the interpreter is part of safe practice

Jemina was clear that interpreters should consider whether they are prepared and suitable for this area of work.

Domestic abuse assignments may involve detailed descriptions of violence, threats, child harm and fear. The interpreter may carry images or emotional reactions away from the assignment, particularly after using the first person to convey the survivor’s experience.

This can contribute to vicarious trauma.

Interpreters should not be expected to absorb this material and simply move on to the next job without support. Preparation, appropriate breaks and debriefing can all help, but some assignments may also require professional supervision or counselling.

Supervision provides a confidential space to discuss the effect of the work, ethical dilemmas and patterns that may be developing over time. Counselling may be appropriate when the material has had a deeper personal effect.

Jemina’s advice was not that interpreters should avoid all difficult work. It was that they should make an informed decision about whether to accept it and ensure they have somewhere safe to process the impact afterwards.

Self-care in this context is not a reward after the assignment. It forms part of responsible professional preparation.

An interpreter who is emotionally overwhelmed, unsupported or repeatedly exposed to traumatic content may find it harder to make decisions and maintain the quality of their work.

What does this mean for translators?

Jemina’s session focused on interpreting within live interactions, but translators also contribute to domestic abuse access.

Deaf survivors need clear information in sign language about recognising abuse, reporting options, emergency support, housing, legal processes, children’s services and specialist organisations.

A written leaflet or website may not be accessible simply because it has been written in plain English.

Deaf translators can work with domestic abuse organisations and survivors to create signed information that reflects the questions Deaf people actually have. They can also contribute to terminology resources, training materials and public campaigns.

As with interpreting, the translation process needs trauma awareness. Images, examples and language should not be chosen without considering how survivors may respond to them.

The people developing the material should also think carefully about privacy. For example, can someone access the video without leaving an obvious digital trail? Does the information explain what may happen after a disclosure? Is it clear who will see any information the person provides?

Translation cannot resolve every service barrier, but accessible information may help someone understand their options before they reach a crisis point.

What are we passing on?

The theme for The Together Conference 2026 was Pick It Up, Pass It On.

Jemina’s session asked us to consider the perceptions that can be passed between families, professionals and systems.

A child may pick up the belief that they are responsible for communication.

A Deaf mother may be left with the message that services see her Deafness as a parenting problem.

A police officer or social worker may assume that booking any interpreter is enough.

An interpreter may be taught to remain within narrow boundaries without being given the knowledge needed to manage safeguarding and trauma.

These perceptions affect how people approach the next interaction.

What we pass on should be different. We can pass on the understanding that Deaf survivors have the right to communicate directly and be believed. We can explain why children should not be used as interpreters. We can make role clarity part of collaborative working and treat preparation, supervision and trauma awareness as professional requirements rather than optional extras.

We can also pass on the message that asking for support does not mean an interpreter is unsuited to difficult work. It may show that they understand the responsibility the work carries.

Shared purpose in high-risk settings

The theme for The Together Conference 2027 is New Insights, Shared Purpose.

Domestic abuse access cannot be improved by interpreters working alone. It requires collaboration between Deaf organisations, survivors, translators, interpreters, police, social workers, healthcare professionals, IDVAs, legal services, researchers and policymakers.

Perhaps you are developing trauma-informed interpreter training. You may have worked on accessible domestic abuse information, researched family communication or developed a better referral pathway between services.

You might be a Deaf professional, survivor, practitioner or researcher with knowledge that could improve the way services respond. You may also have a workplace project or early findings that could be shared through a poster.

The Call for Papers for The Together Conference 2027 opens on Monday 5 October 2026. You do not need to decide whether your proposal belongs in the live programme or the extended conference. Submit your idea and the review panel will consider where accepted contributions fit best.

Poster submissions will also be welcomed for developing research, professional resources, service improvements and practice-based reflections.

Some subjects are difficult to bring into professional discussion. That difficulty is one reason they need a space.

Shared purpose begins with listening carefully to the people most affected and being willing to change the systems around them.

Using this article for unstructured CPD

Please approach these questions with care. You do not need to reflect on personal experiences or record anything that feels unsafe or too private.

1. What does trauma-informed interpreting mean to you?

2. How might trauma affect the way a person communicates or recalls events?

3. What additional access burdens might a Deaf survivor face when seeking help?

4. How can hearing children become drawn into communication between Deaf parents and professionals?

5. What could interpreters and professionals do to prevent children taking on an inappropriate language-brokering role?

6. How might repeated requests to retell an experience become re-traumatising?

7. What preparation would you need before accepting an assignment connected to domestic abuse?

8. Which terminology, procedures or professional roles would you need to understand?

9. What is the difference between the role of an interpreter and an IDVA?

10. How would you raise a safeguarding concern within your professional role?

11. What support would you put in place for yourself after emotionally difficult work?

12. Are there circumstances in which declining the assignment would be the safer professional decision?

13. What role could Deaf translators play in improving access to domestic abuse information?

14. Is there a project, resource or area of research that could contribute to The Together Conference 2027?

A short professional reflection on these questions could be recorded as part of your unstructured CPD.