Deaf Clients in Therapy: ASL Interpreters, Telehealth, and Access

"Meet clients where they are" gets said so often that it can stop meaning much. With a Deaf client it becomes literal. You move your chair so the window isn't behind you. You stop talking while you look down at your notes, because a person reading your face can't read the top of your head. You wait through the small delay while a sentence crosses from one language into another. You learn to fingerspell your name and sign a greeting, clumsily, for someone who has spent a lifetime doing the adapting in hearing offices. You are physically changing how you communicate, in the room, to reach a person.

This is cultural competence in a form most clinicians don't picture when they hear the phrase. Trainings tend to present it as knowledge about a group. Here it lives in your hands, your eyes, your furniture and your calendar, and the client can see all of it from the first minute. The reason to do it is the client's access to care. It is also a remarkable way to spend an hour: two languages and everyone in the room working so that one person gets understood.

Keep the limit in view, because it protects the client. Effort and a beginner's signs are how you meet someone halfway. A qualified interpreter or a signing therapist carries the clinical communication. The rest of this guide covers what you need to do that well, in person and by video, along with the numbers, the culture, the law, and the places where the evidence runs out. Much of it also applies to hard of hearing clients who don't sign, who have different needs and get their own section below.

Many clinicians were taught to say "hearing impaired," and it may be what brought you to this page. The National Association of the Deaf (NAD) says most in the community no longer accept that term, and it treats deaf and hard of hearing as the accepted ones (NAD, n.d.-a). This guide uses those. Capital-D Deaf generally marks people who identify culturally as Deaf (Gallaudet University, n.d.-d), though conventions vary, and Gallaudet's own stylebook uses lowercase deaf in its publications (Gallaudet University, n.d.-c).

Any one client may describe themselves differently. NAD's advice is to ask the person how they identify, and that is the whole rule: ask, then use their word.

Counting depends on the question asked, and the common figures are old. The National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD, 2024) reports that about 15% of American adults, 37.5 million people, report some trouble hearing, a figure from the 2012 National Health Interview Survey. A later federal survey asked differently: in 2019, 13.0% of adults had some difficulty hearing and 1.6% had a lot of difficulty or could not hear at all, even with a hearing aid (Madans et al., 2021). CDC researchers found "deaf or serious difficulty hearing" at 5.8% of adults in one 2016 survey and 6.0% in a 2014 survey, with state rates from 3.8% to 13.3% (Li et al., 2018). These are different questions, so don't read them as a trend.

Most of those people are hearing adults who lost hearing later in life, and that matters for planning. Mitchell (2006), working from the Survey of Income and Program Participation, estimated close to 1 million Americans functionally deaf and nearly 10 million hard of hearing, with more than half of them 65 or older and under 4% younger than 18. An older Gallaudet Research Institute summary put functional deafness at roughly 2 to 4 per 1,000 people, with fewer than 1 per 1,000 deaf before age 18. The original page is gone, and that figure now survives through reposts (Gallaudet Research Institute, n.d., as reproduced in a 2009 blog post). About 2 to 3 of every 1,000 US children are born with detectable hearing loss, based on 1999 to 2007 data, and more than 90% of deaf children are born to hearing parents (NIDCD, 2024).

How many people use American Sign Language? Nobody knows. The American Community Survey can't say, and the Census Bureau states that it cannot provide separate ASL data (U.S. Census Bureau, 2021). Mitchell et al. (2006) traced the data-based estimates back to a single study from the early 1970s, one that asked about signing in general and not about ASL specifically. Published ranges show how loose this is: 200,000 to 500,000 primary ASL users in one paper (Pollard & Barnett, 2009), 100,000 to 1 million in another (Barnett et al., 2011). Treat any single number you see with suspicion, including one quoted confidently by an agency.

Globally, the World Health Organization (2026) reports that more than 5% of the world's population, 430 million people including 34 million children, need rehabilitation for disabling hearing loss, defined as greater than 35 dB in the better ear. It projects nearly 2.5 billion people with some hearing loss by 2050, and over 700 million with disabling loss.

A 2024 systematic review of 35 studies concluded that Deaf signing populations face inequalities in health and mental health outcomes (Rogers et al., 2024). Fellinger et al. (2012), in a widely cited Lancet review, describe a high burden of common mental health problems alongside barriers to care. They also report that Deaf patients with interpreter access used more preventive services and received more psychiatric counselling than those relying on note-writing. That single contrast is a fair summary of the whole field.

US data point the same way. In national survey data, 24.9% of deaf ASL users reported a provider's diagnosis of depression or anxiety, compared with 21.7% of hearing adults, and those diagnosed were younger on average, 45 versus 56 (Kushalnagar, Reesman, et al., 2019). Those are diagnoses people received, so they also reflect who could get care in the first place. At one Rochester-area health center, 41.0% of deaf ASL users went to the emergency department at least once over 36 months, against 24.0% of hearing English speakers, with adjusted odds nearly double (McKee, Winters, et al., 2015). That is one site, and it is suggestive.

Trauma deserves a direct question. Deaf and hard of hearing college students reported more maltreatment, lifetime trauma and PTSD symptoms than hearing peers in one US study, and identifying with the Deaf community went with fewer PTSD symptoms (Schenkel et al., 2014). Deaf female college students were about twice as likely as hearing undergraduates to report past-year partner violence (Anderson & Leigh, 2011). Among Deaf adults surveyed in ASL, 20.8% and 14.5% of two samples reported ever being forced to have sex by a partner, compared with 5.8% and 8.0% in two general population surveys, while physical abuse showed no uniform excess (Pollard et al., 2014).

Suicide data are thin. An older review found 13 eligible studies with small, unrepresentative samples, and student attempt figures so far apart (1.7% to 18%) that they can't guide practice (Turner et al., 2007). Our search also found no reliable national count of mental health clinicians fluent in ASL. Anyone quoting one should show the source.

A medical view starts with the audiogram and asks what is missing. A cultural view starts with a language, a community, schools, humor and history, and many Deaf people locate their identity there. Both views can apply to the same person, and only the client can tell you which matters to them. For a clinician the practical shift is this: you are working across a language and a culture, much as you would with any client whose first language isn't yours. Accommodation is only part of it.

ASL is a language of its own. NIDCD (2021) describes it as completely separate and distinct from English, and NAD (n.d.-f) notes its own rules of grammar and syntax. It isn't universal either, since British Sign Language is a different language. So signed English word order, written English and ASL are three different things, and a client's skill in one tells you little about the others.

The face carries grammar. NIDCD's example is a question signaled by raised eyebrows, widened eyes and a forward tilt of the body. Researchers describe facial actions marking relative clauses, content questions and conditionals (Elliott & Jacobs, 2013), and studies of Deaf signers show the same muscles serving both linguistic and emotional expression (Corina et al., 1999). A hearing clinician reading that face as affect can get it wrong. Our search found no study measuring how often facial grammar gets charted as agitation, flat affect or thought disorder, so hold this as a plausible risk rather than a documented rate. Large movements, intensity and an expressive face may simply be how a sentence looks.

The closest published examples are case reports. Anglemyer and Crespi (2018) describe a man whose forceful, frustrated signing in an emergency department with no interpreter was read as manic, and another who endorsed delusions in writing but whose thinking was linear through an ASL interpreter. Neither was a clean story of no illness, since both kept psychiatric diagnoses, and that is the honest lesson: the communication conditions changed what clinicians could see. Written English is a poor window into anyone's thought process when it isn't their first language.

Reviews repeat the warning without giving a rate. Overlooking language modality and fluency in the mental status exam can lead to misdiagnosis (Landsberger et al., 2013), and interpreter skill and training affect diagnostic accuracy when psychosis is the question (Landsberger & Diaz, 2011). On one specialty inpatient unit, Deaf patients were less likely than hearing patients to carry psychotic or substance diagnoses, and more likely to carry mood, anxiety, personality or developmental ones (Black & Glickman, 2006). No source we read supports a known misdiagnosis rate, whatever you may see repeated elsewhere.

Language deprivation is the piece most hearing clinicians have never been taught. With more than 90% of deaf children born to hearing parents, a child can reach school age without full access to any language. Glickman (2007) describes patients whose dysfluent signing stems from that history and looks, to an untrained eye, like disordered thought; telling the two apart takes specialized skill. Dysfluency can also relate to the cause of the deafness (Crump & Hamerdinger, 2017). Hall et al. (2017) proposed a "language deprivation syndrome" with effects on language, fund of knowledge, and thinking, mood or behavior. It is a hypothesis from a structured review with limited evidence, and it isn't a diagnosis. Ask about it anyway: when hearing loss began, how the family communicated at home, what kind of school, and when the person first felt they had a language.

Don't assume English literacy, and don't assume its absence. On an ASL version of a health literacy test, 48% of Deaf participants had inadequate health literacy, with 6.9 times the odds of hearing English speakers (McKee, Paasche-Orlow, et al., 2015). Among 57 deaf adults, 81% with college degrees, 32% still scored in a range matching low health literacy on a vocabulary test (Pollard & Barnett, 2009). You may see a claim that Deaf adults average a fourth-grade reading level. We couldn't confirm it at the source. It appears to stretch school-leaver data, the tests themselves have validity questions for this population (Qi & Mitchell, 2012), and plenty of Deaf people write beautifully. The point is that a form in English gives you no guarantee of informed understanding.

Start by asking how the client wants to communicate, ideally before the first visit and by text or email. An interpreter, which interpreter, ASL or a more English-based signing, written notes for a quick logistics question, speech with a hearing aid: these are the client's preferences to state. Under Title III, a private provider is told to consult with the person whenever possible, even though the final decision rests with the provider so long as communication is effective (28 C.F.R. § 36.303(c)(1)(ii)). In practice, what the client tells you is usually the fastest route to effective communication.

Then fix the room. Sit where the client can see your face without a bright window behind you, since strong backlighting makes faces and hands hard to see (National Deaf Center, n.d.-a). Keep the lights on when you show a video or do a relaxation exercise, and think through any eyes-closed exercise in advance, since a client with closed eyes has no access to your words or the interpreter. Clear the sightlines of plants and stacks of paper. Chairs that swivel or sit at an angle make a three-way conversation easier. If you take notes, write first and speak after, because the client can't watch your hands, the interpreter and the page at once. Slow your pace at topic changes, and pause before asking a question while the interpreter catches up. Pointing at a worksheet while talking fails for the same reason: look, wait, then speak.

Scheduling and the waiting room are where many clients first meet the barrier. Offer text, email and a portal for appointments. Tell front desk staff that a call that opens with an interpreter introducing themselves is a video relay call and to stay on the line. Video Relay Service lets sign language users place calls through an interpreter, and the FCC describes it as free to the caller (Federal Communications Commission [FCC], n.d.-b; 47 C.F.R. § 64.601). Relay is also reachable by dialing 711 (47 C.F.R. § 64.603). Replace a name called across the waiting room with someone walking over, or a text. Have a plan for a late or absent interpreter, and don't count a client as a no-show because your interpreter failed to arrive.

Forms take more than a stack of paper. Write consent and intake language plainly, send it in advance when you can, and go through it with the interpreter present in the first session, leaving room for questions. The informed consent, telehealth consent and intake tools here let you edit the wording, and the intake already has a line for language and interpreter needs. Check understanding by asking the client to explain a point back in their own signs, since nodding can mean "I see you" as easily as "I agree." Handouts deserve the same care: pick short, concrete sheets, use diagrams and pictures when they help, and go over them in session instead of sending them home cold.

Many hard of hearing adults have never learned ASL and won't benefit from an interpreter, and offering one on reflex misses them. The tools here are different. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is a trained person providing instant English text of what is said (National Court Reporters Association, n.d.), and it can be provided on site or remotely. Assistive listening devices pair a microphone for the speaker with an amplifier for the listener and suit one-on-one conversation (Hearing Loss Association of America [HLAA], n.d.-b). Ask whether the client's hearing aids or implants connect to one, which ear is better, and where they would like you to sit. Then turn off the white noise machine outside the door if it hurts more than it helps, and keep your hands away from your mouth.

Lipreading can't carry a session. In one sample of hearing college students, visual-only sentences yielded 12.4% of words correct (Altieri et al., 2011), and although some adults with severe to profound hearing loss do far better, ability varies widely (Bernstein et al., 2000). The often-quoted claim that about 30% of speech can be lipread doesn't trace to a good source, so skip the percentage and ask the person what they actually caught.

Hearing loss is also a clinical issue on its own. In US adults, moderate-to-severe depression was 4.9% among those with excellent hearing and 11.4% among those with at least a little trouble (Li et al., 2014), and the association didn't climb neatly with severity. A meta-analysis in older adults found higher odds of depression with hearing loss (pooled odds ratio 1.47), with low certainty, and no clear protective effect of hearing aids (Lawrence et al., 2020). Withdrawal, irritability and "not paying attention" in an older client with hearing loss deserve a real look before you decide what they mean.

Telehealth can widen a Deaf client's options, since a signing therapist may be licensed in their state but live hours away. The evidence is small. A 2023 systematic review found only two eligible studies comparing telemedicine with in-person care for Deaf signers, both in mental health, and could draw no conclusion (Rogers et al., 2023). One was a rural signing telepsychiatry pilot with 24 participants and no significant differences (Crowe et al., 2016). In a survey of 422 Deaf respondents, willingness to use telemental health was linked to the therapist's ASL fluency and to having no other access (Crowe, 2017). So telehealth is a reasonable option that hasn't been shown equal to in-person care.

Video remote interpreting (VRI) brings an interpreter in by video, and federal rules set a floor for it. A covered provider using VRI must supply real-time, full-motion video and audio over a dedicated high-speed connection, a sharply delineated image large enough to show the face, arms, hands and fingers of the interpreter and the participant, clear audio, and adequate training for users (28 C.F.R. § 36.303(f)). Deaf patients' experience suggests why the floor exists. Only 41% of 555 US Deaf VRI users were satisfied with quality, and feeling that VRI interfered with disclosing health information tripled dissatisfaction (Kushalnagar, Paludneviciene, & Kushalnagar, 2019). A 2026 randomized trial in a Colombian public hospital found VRI raised patients' sense of being encouraged to express themselves without a clear gain in understanding the doctor (Rivas Velarde et al., 2026), a different setting and language worth keeping in proportion.

NAD goes further than the regulation for medical settings: it calls for VRI as a last resort, a minimum of 720p video, and no interpreter working longer than 60 minutes without a break (NAD & Deaf Seniors of America, n.d.). For therapy, those are sensible targets. Don't confuse VRI with Video Relay Service. The FCC says VRS cannot substitute for VRI, and describes VRI as the service for people together at one location (FCC, n.d.-a). When you hold a session, you arrange and pay for the interpreter, and the client's relay service stays out of it.

A three-way video session takes a little setup. Add the interpreter as a participant on your usual secure platform. Have the client pin the interpreter's video so it stays put; in Zoom, pinning affects only that person's own view and covers up to nine videos, and spotlighting is a host choice that changes the view for everyone. Zoom also documents a sign language interpretation view that hosts can use once an admin enables it, and it notes that Zoom doesn't supply the interpreters (Zoom, n.d.-a, n.d.-b). Features vary by plan and platform, so test the setup with the interpreter before the first session. Ask the client about camera height and lighting, since signing needs the whole upper body in frame, and agree on a backup, such as a text message, for when video freezes.

Captions help some clients and can't replace an interpreter for a client whose language is ASL, since they deliver English. Automatic captions also miss. In a small pilot with 10 participants in mock medical encounters, a speech-to-text caption tool had word error rates of roughly 12.7% to 22.8%, and medical terms were a weak spot (Hughes et al., 2026). We found no published error rates for captions in therapy sessions. Live human captioning tends to be more accurate (HLAA, n.d.-a), so use CART if a hard of hearing client relies on captions for therapy. Treat automatic captions as a convenience, and watch for errors on anything about safety.

Privacy looks different in sign. A client can't lower their voice, and anyone walking past can read a signed conversation from across a room. Ask what the client can see behind the camera, who could walk in, and whether a door closes. The interpreter needs a private space too. Consider whether your agreement with an interpreting agency needs business associate terms, a question for your attorney, and keep recording off.

Build safety planning around how the client actually reaches people. Confirm their location at the start of every session and record a local emergency contact, as you would for any telehealth client, and ask who in their life signs. For 988, the Lifeline's own page for Deaf and hard of hearing people says you can reach 988 Videophone by calling 988 with a VP number, which typically means signing up with a VRS provider; that you can start a text conversation by sending any message to 988; that chat is available online; and that TTY users can use their preferred relay service or dial 711 then 988 (988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline, n.d.). The FCC (n.d.-c) describes this videophone route as direct access for ASL users. Before you need it, check that the client has a VP number and can use it. Text-to-911 isn't available everywhere, and where it is unavailable carriers must send back a message saying so (47 C.F.R. § 9.10(q)), so look up the client's county.

Write a safety plan together with the interpreter present, list text and videophone contacts instead of phone numbers, and confirm that the client can understand every line later, alone. If partner violence is part of the picture, the National Domestic Violence Hotline's Deaf services list a video phone number, 855-812-1001, and report TTY and live chat access around the clock (National Domestic Violence Hotline, n.d.).

Start with the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (RID), which has a searchable database of certified interpreters (Florida Department of Health, n.d.). The National Association of State Agencies of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (n.d.) keeps a roster of state agencies, which is a good way to find local rules and agencies. In most places, you will end up with a local interpreting agency or a freelance interpreter. Florida's Department of Health, for example, notes that you can hire directly or through an agency and points to the Florida Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf's member database.

Book early. No RID guidance on lead time turned up in our search, but the National Deaf Center recommends 3 to 5 weeks for the most qualified interpreters in college settings (National Deaf Center, n.d.-b), and that's a useful benchmark in markets with few interpreters. A recurring weekly slot with the same interpreter is better for everyone. Consistency matters for therapy, and the client doesn't have to re-explain signing style to a stranger every week. Scarcity is your scheduling problem. Federal guidance says providers may not impose excessive advance notice requirements on the person requesting the aid (U.S. Department of Justice, n.d.-a).

Ask the agency more than whether someone is certified, because not all certified interpreters are right for every job (National Deaf Center, n.d.-b). Ask about mental health experience and training, and whether the interpreter has worked with suicide assessment, trauma or psychosis. Ask whether two interpreters will be needed; the National Deaf Center's teaming threshold for classes is one hour (n.d.-c), and a long intake may warrant it. Deaf communities can be small, so ask the client first whether there is an interpreter they don't want, since the interpreter may be a neighbor, a relative's friend or someone from their church. For a client with limited language, ask whether a Certified Deaf Interpreter working alongside a hearing interpreter would help.

Brief the interpreter before the session, by message or in the ten minutes before you start. Give the purpose of the session, the topics likely to come up, and any terms you plan to use, without sharing more client detail than the job requires. RID publishes a practice paper on interpreting in mental health settings (Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf [RID], 2007), and Hamerdinger and Karlin (2003) make the broader point that clinicians have their own work to do for interpreted therapy to succeed. If you're doing a mental status exam, tell the interpreter you need to know about how the client's language is working, including when signing is unclear or hard to follow. A smooth interpretation of a disorganized message can hide what you are assessing, and an interpreter who stays in role can still tell you afterward that something was hard to render.

In the room, speak to the client. Say "How has your week been?" and skip "Ask her how her week has been" (National Deaf Center, n.d.-a). Look at the client even when your instinct pulls you to the voice. Seating is worth deciding together: a common arrangement puts the interpreter beside and slightly behind the clinician, so the client can see both, and the client's preference outranks it. Everything said in the room will be interpreted, including your aside, so don't say anything you wouldn't want signed. Pause when the interpreter signals. Confidentiality binds the interpreter too, as the first tenet of the NAD-RID code of conduct (RID, 2005), and a short debrief afterward can cover language and logistics without turning the interpreter into a co-clinician.

The ADA defines a qualified interpreter by ability: someone able to interpret effectively, accurately and impartially, receptively and expressively, using any necessary specialized vocabulary, in person or by VRI (28 C.F.R. § 36.104). It names no credential. Credentials are still your best shortcut. RID's current national certifications are the National Interpreter Certification and the Certified Deaf Interpreter (RID, n.d.), tested through its Center for the Assessment of Sign Language Interpretation (n.d.). Interpreters may also hold older NAD levels, such as NAD III to V, whose exams have closed. The Board for Evaluation of Interpreters (BEI) is a Texas program with Basic, Advanced and Master levels (Texas Health and Human Services, n.d.; Wisconsin Department of Health Services, n.d.), and other states license it from Texas.

State rules range widely, so look up yours and read which kind of rule it is. Alabama requires a license for paid interpreting unless an exemption applies (Ala. Admin. Code r. 488-X-1-.06). Illinois's licensure act applies regardless of setting, with exemptions (Interpreter for the Deaf Licensure Act of 2007). Pennsylvania uses state registration (Pennsylvania Department of Labor & Industry, n.d.). Wisconsin goes further for this work: to interpret in a mental health treatment setting, an interpreter needs either an Alabama qualified equivalency or an alternative pathway of an advanced license, 40 clock hours of training, a 40-hour supervised practicum and an approved exam (Wis. Admin. Code SPS § 203.03). These rules change, and some of these boards have sunset dates, so check current status before relying on any of them.

Florida appears to have no general licensure or registration law for ASL interpreters. We found no such statute. The state's interpreter statute covers judicial proceedings and grand juries and defines who qualifies there (Fla. Stat. § 90.6063), which leaves your office out. The Florida Coordinating Council for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing is an advisory body (Fla. Stat. § 413.271), and its task force recommended creating a licensure board two decades ago (Florida Department of Health, Florida Coordinating Council, n.d.). A missing statute is hard to prove, so confirm with the Council before relying on this. In practice, a Florida clinician has only the ADA's skill standard and their own due diligence to lean on, which makes asking about RID or BEI credentials more important.

Mental health is its own specialty. As of early 2012, NAD noted that RID had no specialist certification for mental health interpreting (NAD, n.d.-c), so verify the current picture if this becomes a hiring question. Alabama's Qualified Mental Health Interpreter credential is the best-known route. It requires at least 40 clock hours of training, a 40-hour practicum and a comprehensive written exam, issued through the state's Office of Deaf Services (Ala. Admin. Code r. 580-3-24-.06). The University of Rochester's Deaf Wellness Center has also published a mentored mental health interpreting curriculum (Deaf Wellness Center, n.d.-a). An interpreter with this training is worth paying for, especially for assessment work.

This section is general information and not legal advice. Rules differ by state and setting and change over time, so check your state's law and talk with your attorney about your own practice.

Title III of the ADA lists the professional office of a health care provider as a public accommodation (28 C.F.R. § 36.104), so private therapy offices should assume it applies. A covered provider must furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary for effective communication, and those include qualified interpreters on site or by VRI, real-time transcription and assistive listening devices (28 C.F.R. § 36.303(b)-(c)). The Justice Department's guidance says that in a doctor's office an interpreter generally will be needed for something like a serious diagnosis or a sign language user's medical history (U.S. Department of Justice, n.d.-a), and it is hard to picture psychotherapy needing less. The limits are undue burden, meaning significant difficulty or expense, and fundamental alteration (28 C.F.R. § 36.303(a)). If one aid would be an undue burden, the provider still has to provide an alternative if one exists (28 C.F.R. § 36.303(h)).

The client doesn't pay. A provider may not impose a surcharge on a person with a disability to cover these costs (28 C.F.R. § 36.301(c)), and NAD says the same for health care providers (NAD, n.d.-e). Small practices may get some of it back. The federal Disabled Access Credit covers 50% of eligible expenses between $250 and $10,250, up to $5,000 a year, for businesses with 30 or fewer full-time employees or $1 million or less in gross receipts the previous year, and interpreter costs are eligible (26 U.S.C. § 44; U.S. Department of Justice, n.d.-b). Ask your tax preparer.

If you take federal money, more rules apply. Section 504 covers recipients of federal financial assistance from HHS, and its 2024 rule requires primary consideration to the person's requested aid (45 C.F.R. § 84.77). Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act covers health programs receiving HHS funds, requires aids free of charge and in a timely manner, and applies the Title II communication standards, which also give primary consideration to the person's choice (45 C.F.R. § 92.202; 28 C.F.R. § 35.160). Medicare Part B counts as federal financial assistance under that rule (Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities, 2024), and state Medicaid programs are covered by Section 504 (Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability, 2024). So if you bill Medicare Part B or Medicaid, ask your attorney which standard governs you. A 2025 court decision vacated parts of the 1557 rule on sex discrimination; HHS's notice says the rule's other provisions remain in force (Notice of Vacatur, 2026). HHS and the Justice Department have also issued joint guidance on disability and telehealth (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services & U.S. Department of Justice, 2022).

Family members and children are not your interpreters. A provider can't require someone to bring their own interpreter (28 C.F.R. § 36.303(c)(2)). It can't rely on an accompanying adult except in an emergency involving imminent threat with no interpreter available, or when the client specifically asks, the adult agrees, and it's appropriate under the circumstances (§ 36.303(c)(3)). It can't rely on a minor child except in that kind of emergency (§ 36.303(c)(4)). NAD adds that relatives often lack the skills and should be avoided for lack of impartiality (NAD, n.d.-b, n.d.-e). We found no study measuring the harm, and the clinical reason is plain enough. Given the partner violence and trauma numbers above, ask yourself what a client can disclose with a spouse or a parent doing the signing, or what it does to a nine-year-old to voice a parent's suicidal thoughts.

This is where meeting someone halfway becomes something you can do this semester. An intro course teaches you to greet a client in their language, fingerspell your name, say that the interpreter is on the way, and handle a two-line scheduling exchange in the hallway. It teaches where to stand, how to get attention, and how Deaf people expect a conversation to work. Most of all, it makes the barrier real in your own hands. Being on the slow, struggling side of a language for a few months is a useful bit of cultural humility, and it helps you spot a client's needs earlier: the nod that doesn't mean understanding, the interpreter who isn't a good fit.

For the client, the effect can be simple. A hearing clinician who walks over and signs "nice to meet you," badly, has shown in five seconds that this office will be different. That moment belongs to the client, and it opens the door. Keep your practice in the classroom and follow the client's lead on whether to sign directly at all.

Be clear about what it doesn't do. Intro ASL doesn't qualify anyone to conduct therapy in ASL or to replace an interpreter, and neither does a second or third course. The University of Colorado Boulder's linguistics department (n.d.) describes someone finishing a third ASL level as a novice signer and mentions eight or more years to reach fluency, though the page cites no study, and researchers note how little work has been done on how adults learn ASL (Quinto-Pozos, 2011). NAD (2003) stresses the need for direct communication and says fluency in ASL is frequently required for a culturally and linguistically competent provider. We didn't find an ethics code that addresses intro courses directly. The conclusion is our own reasoning: suicide assessment isn't the place to practice your signs. If you do want to work directly in ASL someday, formal proficiency interviews such as the ASLPI (Gallaudet University, n.d.-a) and the SLPI:ASL (National Technical Institute for the Deaf, n.d.) give you an honest outside measure, and the path is long.

To find a class, look for Deaf instructors first. Gallaudet University's ASL Connect offers online courses taught by Deaf faculty (Gallaudet University, n.d.-b), the American Sign Language Teachers Association runs a certification program you can ask an instructor about (American Sign Language Teachers Association, n.d.), and local colleges and Deaf community organizations are worth checking. This site has no relationship with any of them, and we are not endorsing a vendor.

Our PHQ-9, GAD-7 and PCL-5 are English instruments, and the scores mean what they mean because of how those words were tested. Handing one to a Deaf client assumes English reading. Having an interpreter render each item on the fly changes the instrument in ways nobody has measured. We found no direct study of this, so it is a reasoned caution. The closest evidence shows that format matters: Australian deaf adolescents showed clinically significant problems at about twice the rate on a signed questionnaire (42.6%) as on the written form (21.4%), in a sample of 54 (Cornes et al., 2006). Rogers et al. (2013) used filmed versions in part to avoid depending on any one signer's skill.

ASL versions exist, with limits. An ASL PHQ-9 and BDI-II were tested online with 361 deaf ASL users, and their authors say both still need norming against a confirmed diagnostic group and healthy controls (Wilson et al., 2023). They belong to a larger online suite that also includes the AUDIT, DAST, GAD and others (Guthmann et al., 2017). The PROMIS-Deaf Profile is the strongest validated ASL option we found: 1,354 participants, short depression and anxiety domains, adequate test-retest reliability and clear separation between clinical and non-clinical groups, with no clinical cut-offs yet (Kushalnagar et al., 2020). An ASL Zung tracked the Hamilton scale at r = .80 in 71 Deaf adults, compared with .71 for the written form, and the written form showed no association among lower-literacy adults (Zazove et al., 2006). An ASL Edinburgh scale is at pilot stage, with 36 participants (Anderson et al., 2021).

British Sign Language has better data, and it doesn't transfer. The BSL PHQ-9 and GAD-7 have good reliability (Rogers et al., 2013) and lower cut-offs, 8 and 6 where the English versions use 10 and 8 (Belk et al., 2016). BSL and ASL are different languages, so don't apply those numbers to an ASL client. Our search didn't find a validated ASL version of the PCL-5, or of a suicide screener such as the Columbia, and that absence isn't proof that none exists.

What to do in the meantime: use a validated ASL version when one fits and say what its limits are. If you must use an English measure through an interpreter, chart exactly how you gave it, treat the number as a conversation starter, and do not use it alone to set a diagnosis or a level of care. Suicide risk gets a clinical interview with a qualified interpreter, every time. For the same person over time, a consistent method is more useful than a borrowed cut-off.

Sometimes the right move is a referral, and the client may tell you so. NAD describes direct care as optimal and says many clients are more appropriately served by clinicians fluent in ASL (NAD, n.d.-d), and Fellinger et al. (2012) support specialist services with clinicians who communicate directly. Our search found no outcome trial showing Deaf therapists do better than hearing ones, so this rests on language access, client preference and professional consensus. One US integrated care program with language-concordant clinicians saw depression and anxiety scores improve, without a comparison group (Pertz et al., 2018).

Good places to look include your state agency through the national roster, and the Deaf Wellness Center at the University of Rochester, which serves adults 17 and older in New York in ASL with Deaf and fluent providers (Deaf Wellness Center, n.d.-b). Private options such as the Deaf-owned Deaf Counseling Center describe themselves as ASL-first and available nationwide, and that description comes from the group itself (Deaf Counseling Center, n.d.). Directories such as Psychology Today list ASL as a language, but those listings are self-reported, so ask how the clinician learned to sign and whether they conduct therapy directly in it. Telehealth expands the pool, within the limits of licensure in the client's state. If no signing therapist is available, you and a good interpreter can do real work together. Say so honestly, and let the client make the choice.

Before the first session: ask how the client wants to communicate and what they call themselves, book a qualified interpreter or CART, ask whether there is anyone they don't want interpreting, and send plain-language forms ahead. Learn who pays (you) and whether the tax credit applies.

In the room: light on faces, clear sightlines, your eyes on the client, questions addressed to the client, pauses for the interpreter, nothing said that you wouldn't want signed. Take a language history along with the trauma history. When something looks like a symptom, consider the language first.

On video: test the platform with the interpreter, pin the interpreter, confirm location and privacy, agree on a backup, and write the safety plan around 988 by videophone or text. For measures: use an ASL version if a suitable one exists, document how you gave it, and don't let one number decide anything.

For yourself: sign up for the intro course. Then keep the interpreter anyway.

988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline. (n.d.). For Deaf and hard of hearing. https://988lifeline.org/help-yourself/for-deaf-hard-of-hearing/

Ala. Admin. Code r. 488-X-1-.06. https://www.law.cornell.edu/regulations/alabama/Ala-Admin-Code-r-488-X-1-.06

Ala. Admin. Code r. 580-3-24-.06. https://www.law.cornell.edu/regulations/alabama/Ala-Admin-Code-r-580-3-24-.06

Altieri, N. A., Pisoni, D. B., & Townsend, J. T. (2011). Some normative data on lip-reading skills (L). The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 130(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.3593376

American Sign Language Teachers Association. (n.d.). Certification. https://aslta.org/certification/

Anderson, M. L., & Leigh, I. W. (2011). Intimate partner violence against deaf female college students. Violence Against Women, 17(7), 822-834. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801211412544

Anderson, M. L., Wolf Craig, K. S., Hostovsky, S., Bligh, M., Bramande, E., Walker, K., Biebel, K., & Byatt, N. (2021). Creating the capacity to screen Deaf women for perinatal depression: A pilot study. Midwifery, 92, 102867. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2020.102867

Anglemyer, E., & Crespi, C. (2018). Misinterpretation of psychiatric illness in deaf patients: Two case reports. Case Reports in Psychiatry, 2018, 3285153. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/3285153

Barnett, S., McKee, M., Smith, S. R., & Pearson, T. A. (2011). Deaf sign language users, health inequities, and public health: Opportunity for social justice. Preventing Chronic Disease, 8(2), A45. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3073438/

Belk, R. A., Pilling, M., Rogers, K. D., Lovell, K., & Young, A. (2016). The theoretical and practical determination of clinical cut-offs for the British Sign Language versions of PHQ-9 and GAD-7. BMC Psychiatry, 16, 372. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-016-1078-0

Bernstein, L. E., Demorest, M. E., & Tucker, P. E. (2000). Speech perception without hearing. Perception & Psychophysics, 62(2), 233-252. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205546

Black, P. A., & Glickman, N. S. (2006). Demographics, psychiatric diagnoses, and other characteristics of North American Deaf and hard-of-hearing inpatients. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 11(3), 303-321. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enj042

Center for the Assessment of Sign Language Interpretation. (n.d.). About CASLI. https://www.casli.org/about-casli/

Corina, D. P., Bellugi, U., & Reilly, J. (1999). Neuropsychological studies of linguistic and affective facial expressions in deaf signers. Language and Speech, 42(2-3), 307-331. https://doi.org/10.1177/00238309990420020801

Cornes, A., Rohan, M. J., Napier, J., & Rey, J. M. (2006). Reading the signs: Impact of signed versus written questionnaires on the prevalence of psychopathology among deaf adolescents. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 40(8), 665-673. https://doi.org/10.1080/j.1440-1614.2006.01866.x

Crowe, T., Jani, S., Jani, S., Jani, N., & Jani, R. (2016). A pilot program in rural telepsychiatry for deaf and hard of hearing populations. Heliyon, 2(3), e00077. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2016.e00077

Crowe, T. V. (2017). Is telemental health services a viable alternative to traditional psychotherapy for deaf individuals? Community Mental Health Journal, 53(2), 154-162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10597-016-0025-3

Crump, C. J., & Hamerdinger, S. H. (2017). Understanding etiology of hearing loss as a contributor to language dysfluency and its impact on assessment and treatment of people who are deaf in mental health settings. Community Mental Health Journal, 53(8), 922-928. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10597-017-0120-0

Deaf Counseling Center. (n.d.). Home. https://deafcounseling.com/

Deaf Wellness Center. (n.d.-a). Mental health interpreting: A mentored curriculum. University of Rochester Medical Center. https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/deaf-wellness-center/scholarship-research/mental-health-interpreting

Deaf Wellness Center. (n.d.-b). Deaf Wellness Center. University of Rochester Medical Center. https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/deaf-wellness-center

Elliott, E. A., & Jacobs, A. M. (2013). Facial expressions, emotions, and sign languages. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 115. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00115

Federal Communications Commission. (n.d.-a). Video relay service vs. video remote interpreting. https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/video-relay-service-vs-video-remote-interpreting

Federal Communications Commission. (n.d.-b). Video relay services. https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/video-relay-services

Federal Communications Commission. (n.d.-c). 988 fact sheet. https://www.fcc.gov/sites/default/files/988-fact-sheet.pdf

Fellinger, J., Holzinger, D., & Pollard, R. (2012). Mental health of deaf people. The Lancet, 379(9820), 1037-1044. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61143-4

Fla. Stat. § 90.6063. Interpreter services for deaf persons. http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0000-0099/0090/Sections/0090.6063.html

Fla. Stat. § 413.271. Florida Coordinating Council for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0400-0499/0413/Sections/0413.271.html

Florida Department of Health. (n.d.). Communication and assistive technology. https://www.floridahealth.gov/individual-family-health/disability-rehabilitation/general-information/communication-assistive-technology/

Florida Department of Health, Florida Coordinating Council for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. (n.d.). Interpreter licensure task force. https://www.floridahealth.gov/about-us/boards-councils-and-committees/fccdhh/interpreter-licensure-task-force/

Gallaudet University. (n.d.-a). American Sign Language Proficiency Interview (ASLPI). https://gallaudet.edu/american-sign-language-proficiency-interview-aslpi/

Gallaudet University. (n.d.-b). ASL online courses. https://gallaudet.edu/asl-connect/asl-online-courses/

Gallaudet University. (n.d.-c). Editorial stylebook. https://gallaudet.edu/student-success/tutorial-center/english-center/writing/guides-to-understanding-and-writing-different-types-of-literature/editorial-stylebook/

Gallaudet University. (n.d.-d). Understanding Deaf culture. https://gallaudet.edu/career-success/deaf-culture/

Gallaudet Research Institute. (n.d.). Statistics about people who are deaf or hard of hearing [Summary reproduced in a 2009 blog post; the original page is no longer available]. https://crimevictimswithdisabilities.blogspot.com/2009/11/statistics-about-people-who-are-deaf-or.html

Glickman, N. (2007). Do you hear voices? Problems in assessment of mental status in deaf persons with severe language deprivation. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 12(2), 127-147. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enm001

Guthmann, D., Titus, J., Embree, J., & Wilson, J. (2017). Translation and validation of an online suite of assessments in American Sign Language. JADARA, 51(1), 12-20.

Hall, W. C., Levin, L. L., & Anderson, M. L. (2017). Language deprivation syndrome: A possible neurodevelopmental disorder with sociocultural origins. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 52(6), 761-776. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-017-1351-7

Hamerdinger, S., & Karlin, B. (2003). Therapy using interpreters: Questions on the use of interpreters in therapeutic settings for monolingual therapists. JADARA, 36(3). https://nsuworks.nova.edu/jadara/vol36/iss3/5

Hearing Loss Association of America. (n.d.-a). Captioning. https://www.hearingloss.org/find-help/captioning/

Hearing Loss Association of America. (n.d.-b). Hearing assistive technology. https://www.hearingloss.org/find-help/hearing-assistive-technology/

Hughes, S. E., Wu, L.-Y., Ma, L. J., Jain, D., & McKee, M. M. (2026). Assessing the role of medical caption technology to support physician-patient communication for patients with hearing loss: Mixed methods pilot study. JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies, 13, e79073. https://doi.org/10.2196/79073

Interpreter for the Deaf Licensure Act of 2007, 225 ILCS 443. https://idhhc.illinois.gov/sign-language-interpreters/interpreter-for-the-deaf-licensure-act/statute-and-rules.html

Kushalnagar, P., Paludneviciene, R., Kallen, M., Atcherson, S., & Cella, D. (2020). PROMIS-deaf profile measure: Cultural adaptation and psychometric validation in American Sign Language. Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes, 4(1), 44. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-020-00208-7

Kushalnagar, P., Paludneviciene, R., & Kushalnagar, R. (2019). Video remote interpreting technology in health care: Cross-sectional study of deaf patients' experiences. JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies, 6(1), e13233. https://doi.org/10.2196/13233

Kushalnagar, P., Reesman, J., Holcomb, T., & Ryan, C. (2019). Prevalence of anxiety or depression diagnosis in deaf adults. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 24(4), 378-385. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enz017

Landsberger, S. A., & Diaz, D. R. (2011). Identifying and assessing psychosis in deaf psychiatric patients. Current Psychiatry Reports, 13(3), 198-202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-011-0186-2

Landsberger, S. A., Sajid, A., Schmelkin, L., Diaz, D. R., & Weiler, C. (2013). Assessment and treatment of deaf adults with psychiatric disorders. Journal of Psychiatric Practice, 19(2), 87-97. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.pra.0000428555.48588.f9

Lawrence, B. J., Jayakody, D. M. P., Bennett, R. J., Eikelboom, R. H., Gasson, N., & Friedland, P. L. (2020). Hearing loss and depression in older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Gerontologist, 60(3), e137-e154. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnz009

Li, C. M., Zhang, X., Hoffman, H. J., Cotch, M. F., Themann, C. L., & Wilson, M. R. (2014). Hearing impairment associated with depression in US adults, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2005-2010. JAMA Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, 140(4), 293-302. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoto.2014.42

Li, C.-M., Zhao, G., Hoffman, H. J., Town, M., & Themann, C. L. (2018). Hearing disability prevalence and risk factors in two recent national surveys. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 55(3), 326-335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2018.03.022

Madans, J. H., Weeks, J. D., & Elgaddal, N. (2021). Hearing difficulties among adults: United States, 2019 (NCHS Data Brief No. 414). National Center for Health Statistics. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db414.htm

McKee, M. M., Paasche-Orlow, M. K., Winters, P. C., Fiscella, K., Zazove, P., Sen, A., & Pearson, T. (2015). Assessing health literacy in deaf American Sign Language users. Journal of Health Communication, 20(Suppl 2), 92-100. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2015.1066468

McKee, M. M., Winters, P. C., Sen, A., Zazove, P., & Fiscella, K. (2015). Emergency department utilization among Deaf American Sign Language users. Disability and Health Journal, 8(4), 573-578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2015.05.004

Mitchell, R. E. (2006). How many deaf people are there in the United States? Estimates from the Survey of Income and Program Participation. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 11(1), 112-119. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enj004

Mitchell, R. E., Young, T. A., Bachleda, B., & Karchmer, M. A. (2006). How many people use ASL in the United States? Why estimates need updating. Sign Language Studies, 6(3), 306-335. https://doi.org/10.1353/sls.2006.0019

National Association of State Agencies of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. (n.d.). State agency. https://nasadhh.org/state-agency/

National Association of the Deaf. (2003). Position statement on mental health services. https://nad.org/knowledge-hub/position-statements/position-statement-on-mental-health-services/

National Association of the Deaf. (n.d.-a). Community and culture: Frequently asked questions. https://nad.org/knowledge-hub/american-sign-language/community-and-culture-frequently-asked-questions/

National Association of the Deaf. (n.d.-b). Position statement on health care access for deaf patients. https://nad.org/knowledge-hub/position-statements/position-statement-on-health-care-access-for-deaf-patients/

National Association of the Deaf. (n.d.-c). Position statement on mental health interpreting services with people who are deaf. https://nad.org/knowledge-hub/position-statements/position-statement-on-mental-health-interpreting-services-with-people-who-are-deaf/

National Association of the Deaf. (n.d.-d). Position statement on preservation of mental health services for deaf people in an integrated health care. https://nad.org/knowledge-hub/position-statements/position-statement-on-preservation-of-mental-health-services-for-deaf-people-in-an-integrated-health-care/

National Association of the Deaf. (n.d.-e). Questions and answers for health care providers. https://www.nad.org/resources/health-care-and-mental-health-services/health-care-providers/questions-and-answers-for-health-care-providers/

National Association of the Deaf. (n.d.-f). What is American Sign Language? https://nad.org/knowledge-hub/american-sign-language/what-is-american-sign-language/

National Association of the Deaf & Deaf Seniors of America. (n.d.). Minimum standards for video remote interpreting services in medical settings. https://nad.org/minimum-standards-for-video-remote-interpreting-services-in-medical-settings/

National Court Reporters Association. (n.d.). What is captioning? https://www.ncra.org/home/the-profession/Captioning

National Deaf Center. (n.d.-a). Communicating with deaf people. https://nationaldeafcenter.org/resources/deaf-awareness/communicating-with-deaf-people/

National Deaf Center. (n.d.-b). Hiring qualified interpreters. https://nationaldeafcenter.org/resources/access-accommodations/coordinating-services/interpreting/hiring-qualified-interpreters/

National Deaf Center. (n.d.-c). Interpreting. https://nationaldeafcenter.org/resources/access-accommodations/coordinating-services/interpreting/

National Domestic Violence Hotline. (n.d.). Deaf services. https://www.thehotline.org/get-help/domestic-violence-deaf-services/

National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders. (2021). American Sign Language. https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/american-sign-language

National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders. (2024, September 20). Quick statistics about hearing. https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/statistics/quick-statistics-hearing

National Technical Institute for the Deaf. (n.d.). Sign Language Proficiency Interview (SLPI:ASL). https://www.rit.edu/ntid/slpi

Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities, 89 Fed. Reg. 37522 (May 6, 2024). https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2024-05-06/html/2024-08711.htm

Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance, 89 Fed. Reg. 40066 (May 9, 2024). https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2024-05-09/html/2024-09237.htm

Notice of Vacatur Regarding Certain Provisions of the 2024 Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities Final Rule (June 2, 2026). Federal Register. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2026-06-02/html/2026-11015.htm

Pennsylvania Department of Labor & Industry. (n.d.). Office for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. https://www.pa.gov/agencies/dli/resources/compliance-laws-and-regulations/odhh.html

Pertz, L., Plegue, M., Diehl, K., Zazove, P., & McKee, M. (2018). Addressing mental health needs for Deaf patients through an integrated health care model. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 23(3), 240-248. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/eny002

Pollard, R. Q., & Barnett, S. (2009). Health-related vocabulary knowledge among deaf adults. Rehabilitation Psychology, 54(2), 182-185. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015771

Pollard, R. Q., Jr., Sutter, E., & Cerulli, C. (2014). Intimate partner violence reported by two samples of Deaf adults via a computerized American Sign Language survey. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 29(5), 948-965. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260513505703

Qi, S., & Mitchell, R. E. (2012). Large-scale academic achievement testing of deaf and hard-of-hearing students: Past, present, and future. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 17(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enr028

Quinto-Pozos, D. (2011). Teaching American Sign Language to hearing adult learners. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 137-158. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190511000195

Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf. (n.d.). Available certifications. https://rid.org/certification/available-certifications/

Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf. (2005). NAD-RID code of professional conduct. https://rid.org/programs/ethics/code-of-professional-conduct/

Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf. (2007). Interpreting in mental health settings [Standard practice paper]. https://rid.org/resources/

Rivas Velarde, M., Izquierdo Martinez, L. C., Dalal, J., Martinez-R, A., Guevara Rojas, K. L., Parra Valero, N. A., Cruz Reyes, D. L., Cuculick, J., Vallejo-Silva, A., Irreño-Sotomonte, J., & Groce, N. (2026). Video remote sign language interpreting and health communication for deaf patients: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Network Open, 9(2), e2557189. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.57189

Rogers, K., Lovell, K., & Young, A. (2023). What is the efficacy and effectiveness of telemedicine intervention for deaf signing populations in comparison to face-to-face interventions? A systematic review. BMC Health Services Research, 23(1), 678. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-023-09509-1

Rogers, K. D., Rowlandson, A., Harkness, J., Shields, G., & Young, A. (2024). Health outcomes in Deaf signing populations: A systematic review. PLOS ONE, 19(4), e0298479. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0298479

Rogers, K. D., Young, A., Lovell, K., Campbell, M., Scott, P. R., & Kendal, S. (2013). The British Sign Language versions of the Patient Health Questionnaire, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item Scale, and the Work and Social Adjustment Scale. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 18(1), 110-122. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/ens040

Schenkel, L. S., Rothman-Marshall, G., Schlehofer, D. A., Towne, T. L., Burnash, D. L., & Priddy, B. M. (2014). Child maltreatment and trauma exposure among deaf and hard of hearing young adults. Child Abuse & Neglect, 38(10), 1581-1589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2014.04.010

Texas Health and Human Services. (n.d.). Board for Evaluation of Interpreters certification program. https://www.hhs.texas.gov/providers/assistive-services-providers/board-evaluation-interpreters-certification-program

Turner, O., Windfuhr, K., & Kapur, N. (2007). Suicide in deaf populations: A literature review. Annals of General Psychiatry, 6, Article 26. https://doi.org/10.1186/1744-859X-6-26

University of Colorado Boulder, Department of Linguistics. (n.d.). How long does it take to be fluent in ASL? https://www.colorado.edu/linguistics/how-long-does-it-take-be-fluent-asl

U.S. Census Bureau. (2021). Frequently asked questions (FAQs) about language use. https://www.census.gov/topics/population/language-use/about/faqs.html

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services & U.S. Department of Justice. (2022, July 29). Guidance on nondiscrimination in telehealth. https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/disability/guidance-on-nondiscrimination-in-telehealth/index.html

U.S. Department of Justice. (n.d.-a). ADA requirements: Effective communication. https://www.ada.gov/resources/effective-communication/

U.S. Department of Justice. (n.d.-b). Tax incentives for businesses. https://www.ada.gov/resources/tax-incentives-businesses/

Wilson, J. F., Niehaus, M., Embree, J. A., Guthmann, D. S., Sligar, S. R., Titus, J. C., Welch, A., & Taylor, K. (2023). Addressing the need for depression inventories in American Sign Language. JADARA, 55(3), 2-24. https://nsuworks.nova.edu/jadara/vol55/iss3/2/

Wis. Admin. Code SPS § 203.03. https://www.law.cornell.edu/regulations/wisconsin/Wis-Admin-Code-SS-SPS-203-03

Wisconsin Department of Health Services. (n.d.). Board for Evaluation of Interpreters (BEI) FAQ. https://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/odhh/bei-faq.htm

World Health Organization. (2026, March 3). Deafness and hearing loss. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/deafness-and-hearing-loss

Zazove, P., Meador, H. E., Aikens, J. E., Nease, D. E., & Gorenflo, D. W. (2006). Assessment of depressive symptoms in deaf persons. Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, 19(2), 141-147. https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.19.2.141

Zoom. (n.d.-a). Enabling sign language interpretation view. https://support.zoom.com/hc/en/article?id=zm_kb&sysparm_article=KB0058636

Zoom. (n.d.-b). Pinning participant videos in a meeting. https://support.zoom.com/hc/en/article?id=zm_kb&sysparm_article=KB0065767