When Choice Is Removed from Access
Access support should meet the Deaf employee’s needs, not the employer’s convenience.
I’ve noticed how quickly interpreter choice can disappear once an organisation has an in-house arrangement.
Some organisations employ in-house interpreters.
This can work well when it is based on choice, trust, confidentiality, and the Deaf employee’s actual access needs.
But it becomes a problem when in-house support is treated as the only option.
Under Access to Work, Deaf employees can request support that meets their needs, including freelance BSL interpreters.
That matters.
Because access is not only about having “an interpreter” in the room.
It is about whether the Deaf employee feels safe, understood, respected, and able to participate fully.
Interpreter choice can affect trust.
It can affect confidentiality.
It can affect mental health.
It can affect whether the Deaf employee feels genuinely included or quietly managed.
This is not about criticising in-house interpreters.
Many do important and skilled work.
The issue is when organisational convenience, contracts, or cost-saving are placed above Deaf autonomy.
Access should never become something decided around the Deaf employee instead of with them.
Accessibility is not ownership.
It is not control.
It is not profit.
Deaf employees should not be made to feel difficult for wanting support they can trust.
