Get Premium
Dark mode theme is available exclusively for premium users. Learn more about the benefits of subscribing.
No fees, cancel anytime.
Dark Mode 
No fees, cancel anytime 
458
Bride Refuses To Have Sign Language Interpreter At The Altar When Asked By Groom’s Family
Planning a wedding can be both exciting as well as quite stressful, trying to make sure that both the couple and their guests can enjoy the celebration.
At least such was the issue in this Redditor’s family when she asked to have a sign interpreter at her brother’s wedding, yet the bride wanted to only have the couple on stage during the ceremony, sparking a discussion online.
More info: Reddit
RELATED:
A woman asked to have a sign interpreter at her brother’s wedding, sparking a discussion
Image credits: cottonbro studio (not the actual photo)
The groom’s sister asked for a British Sign Language interpreter so that she, her husband, and their son could follow the vows
Image credits: u/GullibleSandwich444
Image credits: sergio souza (not the actual photo)
Image credits: u/GullibleSandwich444
The sister suggested either a professional interpreter or her oldest sister, who is fluent in British Sign Language
Image credits: Vlada Karpovich (not the actual photo)
Yet the bride refused as she wanted only the couple exchanging vows on stage
A woman brought her disagreement with her future sister-in-law to the Reddit AITA community online, asking if she was the jerk to ask for a British Sign Language interpreter during the wedding ceremony.
The woman explained that due to her deafness since she was 6 years old, and her husband and their 8-year-old son being deaf as well, she asked the soon-to-be-married couple to have an interpreter on stage so that they could follow the vows.
The groom’s sister gave a few suggestions, which included either hiring an interpreter from outside the family or having her older sister as an interpreter, yet she was told no, as the bride wanted just her and the groom on stage.
The sister, on the other hand, found the option of the interpreter standing next to her inconvenient
Image credits: SHVETS production (not the actual photo)
The groom told his sister he will see what he can do, while she shared she would most likely attend anyway; however, probably without her son
According to the World Health Organization, the effects of unaddressed hearing loss and deafness may include a loss of the ability to communicate with others, delayed language development in children, social isolation, and loneliness; it may affect a person’s academic performance, options for employment, and the global economy.
Finally, Forbes discussed improvements that can help to ensure communication is more accessible to people with deafness, and these included using text or visual information, such as live captioning, increased availability of interpreters in public places, and the use of positive communication strategies, such as facing the individual with hearing loss, ensuring good lighting in the room, and keeping objects away from one’s face when speaking.
Coming back to the original story, the woman’s post gathered 10.3k upvotes on Reddit and people judged she was not the jerk for asking to have an interpreter, yet some commenters suggested she could have accepted an interpreter standing next to her family and not next to the couple.
What’s your take on the situation? Please, share your thoughts in the comment section below!
Redditors shared their takes on the situation
Poll Question
Thanks! Check out the results:
Newsletter
Subscribe to Access
Exclusive Polls
By entering your email and clicking Subscribe, you're agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Privacy Policy.
Thank you! You've successfully subscribed to newsletters!
What do you think ?
Papa 11 months ago
Did everyone read OP's reply to one of the comments above? She doesn't want the interpreter near her. She wants to be looking at the interpreter and the bride and groom at the same time, which means the interpreter would need to be up front near the wedding party. In my opinion this puts her firmly into the AH corner. She not only wants an interpreter there, which is perfectly reasonable, she also wants to dictate where the interpreter stands.
Zoe Vokes 11 months ago
I don’t understand why she can’t read the vows and still watch. If they get given the vows on paper then it’ll take a couple of seconds to read them, then she can watch the vows as it happens. Or read them all before they start talking so she knows what’s being said. Or have an interpreter sitting near OP but in the direction of the stage so she can watch them both. Plus when someone asked her whether bride has learnt any sign language, I felt she was a bit judgmental when saying no (like the bride should have). I would definitely learn hello, goodbye and some basics but if my fiancé was fluent and we rarely saw OP’s family (she doesn’t say how close they live) then expecting the bride to learn sign language is a bit much. Nice if she wants to but it’s not necessary or rude not to. Sounds like the bride was offering alternatives but OP said no to them.
Load More Replies...
Deborah B 11 months ago
The only time I've seen a sign language interpreter at a wedding, they didn't stand up with the bride, groom, and officiant. They stood off to the side, where they wouldn't be visually distracting for the hearing audience. Having the interpreter front and center like this woman is asking for would be weird. If the signing is that important for the couple, they would have an officiant who signs as well as speaks the ceremony, and who could interpret for the bride if needed, or have two officiants, one signing and one speaking.
Some guy 11 months ago
Having a dedicated interpreter off to the side would be fine. But to have an officiant both interpreting for the bride and having an active role in the ceremony would be crossing an ethical line. An interpreter should be objective and speak only for the participant (the bride in this case). Having to speak for both the participant and themselves would be confusing at the very least.
Load More Replies... Papa 11 months ago
Did everyone read OP's reply to one of the comments above? She doesn't want the interpreter near her. She wants to be looking at the interpreter and the bride and groom at the same time, which means the interpreter would need to be up front near the wedding party. In my opinion this puts her firmly into the AH corner. She not only wants an interpreter there, which is perfectly reasonable, she also wants to dictate where the interpreter stands.
Zoe Vokes 11 months ago
I don’t understand why she can’t read the vows and still watch. If they get given the vows on paper then it’ll take a couple of seconds to read them, then she can watch the vows as it happens. Or read them all before they start talking so she knows what’s being said. Or have an interpreter sitting near OP but in the direction of the stage so she can watch them both. Plus when someone asked her whether bride has learnt any sign language, I felt she was a bit judgmental when saying no (like the bride should have). I would definitely learn hello, goodbye and some basics but if my fiancé was fluent and we rarely saw OP’s family (she doesn’t say how close they live) then expecting the bride to learn sign language is a bit much. Nice if she wants to but it’s not necessary or rude not to. Sounds like the bride was offering alternatives but OP said no to them.
Load More Replies... Deborah B 11 months ago
The only time I've seen a sign language interpreter at a wedding, they didn't stand up with the bride, groom, and officiant. They stood off to the side, where they wouldn't be visually distracting for the hearing audience. Having the interpreter front and center like this woman is asking for would be weird. If the signing is that important for the couple, they would have an officiant who signs as well as speaks the ceremony, and who could interpret for the bride if needed, or have two officiants, one signing and one speaking.
Some guy 11 months ago
Having a dedicated interpreter off to the side would be fine. But to have an officiant both interpreting for the bride and having an active role in the ceremony would be crossing an ethical line. An interpreter should be objective and speak only for the participant (the bride in this case). Having to speak for both the participant and themselves would be confusing at the very least.
Load More Replies...
Related on Bored Panda
14
31