The Legal Recognition of Signed Languages (LRSL) project aimed to investigate how legal recognition of sign languages impact Deaf people in Ireland, Finland and across the UK. The goal was to investigate how laws which purported to protect, promote or recognise signed languages actually impacted Deaf people and how those laws might be changed or improved o better serve the needs of the Deaf Community. LRSL then produced a ‘roadmap’ for effective legislation for signed language recognition, based on the findings of the research. This roadmap shows what Deaf people need and want, based on their own assertions, and shows how those needs and wants can be included in laws which aim to serve the Deaf Community.
LRSL was conducted between 2021 and 2024 and collected empirical data from Ireland, Finland and the UK through semi structured interviews with Deaf people in each jurisdiction.
There were four main themes for what people wanted the law to guarantee which emerged in the data. First, people wanted the law to grant specific status to signed language. This was particularly true in those states where a spoken language had a specific and identifiable legal protection, such as spoke Irish in Ireland, Swedish in Finland, Welsh in Wales or Gaelic in Scotland. Participants wanted the provision of meaningful, consistent and accessible engagement with state bodies, an increased availability of sign language interpreting on TV and public broadcasts, and the introduction of a formal register for sign language teaching.
Secondly, participants wanted the laws to ensure equality for Deaf people. Specifically, this would mean increased investment into services including interpreting services, monitoring and regulation. It would mean investment into accessibility services, such as closed captioning, in-picture interpreting on screen, interpretation at public events and the decrease in phone-only based services. Not all Deaf people are sign language users and so it is important, when improving equality, to consider the communication needs of the wider Deaf community.
Third, and building on the improvement in equality, participants wished that the law would help to improve employment outcomes for Deaf people. Unemployment in the Deaf Community is a chronic problem globally, and laws designed to uplift the Community ought to address this need. In doing so, laws designed to improve employment outcomes ought to provide upskilling and appropriate training of Deaf adults, many of whom have been denied equitable access to education in their youth and are at a disadvantage in the workforce. There should be the provision of Deaf Awareness training in state body workplaces and incentivised training in private workplaces to normalise Deaf people in the workplace for hearing colleagues. Additionally, efforts should be made to improve the access to sign language education for hearing people, to aid in communication with the Deaf community and normalise the use of sign language in everyday life.
Finally participants wanted the law to improve education access and outcomes for Deaf people. Deaf people across the world are denied access to education. Overwhelmingly, participants to this research wanted improved access to sign language education – that is, schools which operate through the medium of signed language, where Deaf children attend with other Deaf children and develop community. This is opposed to mainstream education, where Deaf children will attend an otherwise hearing school where adjustments are provided. If laws for recognising signed language are to provide for improved education access and outcomes, then there most be meaningful access to high quality sign language education for Deaf children. This access must be available regionally, so that children are not in a ‘post code lottery’ where their access to quality education is determined by their accident of their geographical location. There must be provision of early intervention access to signed language, and the provision of daycare and preschool options for Deaf children so that they may have meaningful access to signed language at the critical age group between 0-5. There must be investment into pathways for employment for Deaf people, and as above, provision of upskilling and appropriate training for Deaf adults. There must be meaningful access to third level education with consistent accessibility measures provided as standard. There must also be access to high quality sign language education for parents and families of Deaf children, so that communication in the home can be assured. From the research it was clear that education access is the singularly most important issue to Deaf people and without investment into education, the other three themes cannot be assured. Assuring legal status for a signed language, when the Deaf Community is deprived of meaningful opportunities to learn sign language renders the status tokenistic and hollow. Assurance of equality cannot be guaranteed for Deaf people in the absence of equal access to education and meaningful opportunities. Without equal access to education, Deaf people are inherently disadvantaged by lack of opportunity in the workplace. Education is the key to the achievement of all other aims under the findings of this research. To conclude, LRSL investigated the status of legal recognition of signed languages in Ireland, Finland and the UK. Moving forward, the findings of LRSL can inform lobby groups, activists, politicians, legislators and Deaf Communities about what aspect of laws work, what do not work, and what are the goals of Deaf people in legislation purporting to protect the Deaf Community and signed languages.
