Support for adult victims of trafficking and exploitation - guidance: consultation analysis

11. Question 9 – Translation and Interpretation

Question: Does the guidance set out clearly the approach to translation and interpretation for adult victims of human trafficking?

Positive comments

Respondents were supportive of the inclusion of translation and interpretation within the guidance and welcomed the clear recognition that professional translation and interpretation services should be provided where required. A number of respondents considered this an important safeguard in ensuring that victims can understand information, communicate their needs, participate in decision-making and access support on an equitable basis.

Positive comments were also made about the availability of translated and Easy Read versions of the guidance.

Need for further clarity

Many respondents felt that the guidance should provide greater clarity on how translation and interpretation needs will be assessed in practice. Questions were raised about how decisions will be made regarding whether interpretation is required, what level of English language proficiency would be considered sufficient, who is responsible for making these assessments and at what stage decisions should be reviewed.

Respondents also sought more information on the standards that interpreters should be expected to meet. There were calls for clearer expectations regarding qualifications, accreditation, confidentiality requirements and trauma-informed practice. Several respondents felt that the guidance should specify whether interpreters should be sourced through recognised providers, approved supplier lists or existing procurement frameworks to ensure consistency and quality.

Further clarification was requested on the potential use of technology, including artificial intelligence tools, for translation and interpretation. While some respondents recognised that technology may have a role to play in improving accessibility, they felt the guidance should outline any limitations, risks and circumstances in which such tools may not be appropriate.

Need for practical information

Some respondents requested more practical information on how interpretation and translation services would operate in practice and how victims’ communication needs would be met throughout their engagement with services. Several respondents felt that the guidance should more clearly explain who is responsible for arranging interpreters, funding services where required, and ensuring provision remains consistent across different agencies.

There were calls for more information on the availability of interpreters in urgent or emergency situations, including out-of-hours provision and access in remote and rural areas. Respondents also suggested that the guidance should address the relative benefits and limitations of different forms of interpretation, including telephone, video and face-to-face services, recognising that some survivors may find in-person communication more supportive, particularly when discussing traumatic experiences.

Some respondents felt additional practical guidance would help interpreters and practitioners understand how to prepare for interpreted conversations and how to support effective communication during meetings.

Suggested additions to the Guidance

A number of respondents recommended that the guidance should explicitly discourage the use of family members, friends or other informal arrangements for interpretation except in exceptional circumstances. Respondents felt that professional interpreters provide important safeguards around accuracy, confidentiality and independence.

Several respondents also suggested including guidance on matching interpreters to survivors’ preferences and needs where possible. This included considering the preferred gender of the interpreter and ensuring that interpreters speak the correct dialect as well as the appropriate language, recognising that these factors can have a significant impact on trust, comfort and effective communication.

Respondents recommended the inclusion of information for survivors explaining their right to request interpretation and translation services. It was also suggested that the guidance should set out what good interpretation looks like, establish clear standards and expectations for service quality, and provide a mechanism through which survivors can raise concerns or request an alternative interpreter where difficulties arise. Some respondents suggested that relevant standards and guidance, including the Slavery and Trafficking Survivor Care Standards, should be referenced to support consistent practice.

Other concerns or comments

There was also recognition that victims often engage with multiple services, including healthcare, justice and support providers, and that interpretation arrangements should therefore be coordinated across agencies wherever possible.