نبذة مختصرة : The aim of this article is to analyse experiences of using children as language brokers in Swedish public services, and the consequences of doing so. We begin by discussing and comparing the two concepts of brokering and interpreting. We then go on to analyse and discuss data obtained by quantitative and qualitative methods, including two online surveys whose respondents worked in health care and social services, and seven group interviews which included persons with experience of language brokering as children. A main result is the existence of discrepancies between how public service staff described their experiences of using children as interpreters, and how child interpreters perceived their situation. The former assert that children are rarely used as interpreters, only in critical situations or for simple assignments, and never on a regular basis. By contrast, interviewees with experiences of language brokering as children declare that they were regularly called on to interpret, every day, and in all kinds of situations. They testify that they were not asked for their consent, nor was their presence ever questioned. Although contradictory, both perspectives are relevant and describe the reality of those who participated in the surveys and group interviews. The discrepancy can be explained by the fact that the parents and relatives of the brokering children may have had encounters with diferent public service institutions several times a week. If all these institutions legitimised the use of children on isolated occasions and in simple and acute situations, this can seem like full-time work from the perspective of the child. Finally, we focus on the consequences for patients and service users in terms of legal certainty and discrimination.
Processing Request
No Comments.