My involvement on the issue of cultural competence and access to language smart service delivery began when my family arrived in the mainland United States, in New York City. I was eight years old and was thrown into the semi-bilingual school systems of New York, Newark and Elizabeth.
Yes, my family moved around; a lot. By the time I graduated high school I counted 13 different schools in three states not including schools in Puerto Rico. The one thing that amazes me the most is the resilience of my parents to navigate the system by using the pre-existing communities of Puerto Ricans and Cubans (they were the main Latino population at the time) to survive. How did those communities learn to survive? They learned from other pre-existing communities before them, such as Italians, Irish, and Chinese, to name a few. The truth is that regardless of the existing support structures at the time and now, Latino communities continue to struggle with a system that needs fundamental change.
As a professional I have sat on many conference planning committees, cultural competence boards, government and nonprofit commissions all dealing with access to services by the Latino community. Time and again we have discussed and determined the need for culturally competent and community sensitive services to the Latino community; there have been reports and recommendations on what to do and how to do it. Through the years one thing has remained constant: the actual drive of culturally and linguistically competent services into the Latino community are spotty at best. I find myself, reliving and rehashing the same issues year-to-year and hoping for a different outcome. However, I am usually disappointed in the actual results.
I am always intrigued by the reasons “professionals” give for their “inability” to penetrate the Latino community. The first, of course, is the amount of money it would take to serve this community at 100%. This is also the most troubling answer as it purports to separate the Latino community from the general service delivery system. In reality, it is probably less expensive to rework the system to be culturally and linguistically sensitive, than to continue service delivery in “reactive” and “crisis” mode. Individuals who need services will get them, one way or the other. The question is whether they will receive the services in an emergency setting or as part of a routine or preventive schedule. When evaluating how agencies or councils serve the Latino community it may be wise to look at the overall cost savings that society would garner from preventive and routine service delivery. How do we get to a point where it is not about the initial investment but the eventual outcomes?
The second response usually involves a “fairness” question in the minds of those in charge. Sometimes, it takes on a historical approach, such as, “Well, when my grandparents came from X country they didn’t have bilingual services or materials in their language.” The other and more common answer is, “You know if we do it for one group then we’re going to have to do it for all groups.”
The truth is that many of us were not here when someone’s grandparents came to the shores of a country that promises equality and justice for all. But I do know that even then there were established groups such as the Sons of Norway, which was formed in 1895 in order to protect the rights of Norwegians living in the United States. The group also allowed Norwegians to purchase insurance as only natural born U.S. citizens were allowed to purchase insurance at the time. The initial charter and rules called for all the groups’ communications to be in the Norwegian language.
Hungarian Americans were also forced to start their own clubs and societies, many church-related. The reason was discrimination and the inability to integrate into existing services and structures. New Brunswick had the highest percentage of Hungarian Americans in the U.S.; it was referred to as “the most Hungarian city in the United States” according to the New Jersey Encyclopedia.
Polish Americans also began their lives here by fleeing the persecutions their country was undergoing in the late 18th century. Divided by Russia, Germany, and Austria, Poland was under threat of losing its culture and language. Therefore, many fled to the United States to save the culture and language, which they knew and loved. They established banks, newspapers, churches, clubs, and businesses for and by Polish people. It is easy to forget that many who came to the shores of this country were discriminated against and ridiculed because they spoke a different language and had a different culture. This is really no different than what Latinos are going through today with one exception: many of these groups came here before Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal.
The reason why “real change” in linguistic and culturally competent services does not happen is often cited as money. Money seems to be the driving force in many of the decisions made about service delivery. However, the overall cost of not delivering services in an appropriate and culturally competent manner will surely lead to increase cost and inappropriate service delivery.
If money is the answer, then let us imagine all that will be saved by educating people in a language they understand. Remove the guesswork most non-native speakers undergo at mainstream agencies, doctors offices, disability organizations and other institutions by following one of these vetted recommendations:
– Translate materials into Spanish and other languages in order to increase the availability of information to the diverse communities. This would decrease the lack of misinformation about services and programs offered by agencies, councils and others. This would include: web pages, resource directories, pamphlets, and other media such as Public Service Announcements, and direct outreach campaigns.
– Increase the number of individuals who are Latino within boards, advisory groups, councils, and search committees.
– Increase the amount of Latino staff to ensure a diverse place reflective of the people served.
– Provide cultural competency training staff, board members, and volunteers in order to better serve all communities.
– Incorporate the use of technology such as language lines to communicate with Spanish speakers when native speakers are unavailable.
– Include Latino-related topics in conferences, workshops, webinars and trainings.
The New Deal was a first step in the transformation of government to what it is today. It sought to restructure the type of services and way in which individuals could qualify for them. This system to some extent is what many of us have inherited. Today, Latinos need a “New Deal”, from the government that serves us. Many claim to believe in the “inclusion and immersion” of Latinos into all aspects of their departments, agencies, councils and not-for-profits. However, they refuse to lift a finger to change how they serve this same group. This in the face of overwhelming statistics that Latinos are and will continue to be the largest minority group in the United States, for many years to come.
(Javier Robles is currently the President of http://www.thisabled.com/, a disability website and consulting service.)
