RID Code of Professional Conduct: Seven Tenets, Complaints, and Sanctions

The RID Code of Professional Conduct is a set of seven ethical tenets, jointly developed by the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf and the National Association of the Deaf, that governs how certified sign language interpreters work with consumers, colleagues, and the broader Deaf community.¹ It covers confidentiality, skill, conduct, respect for consumers and colleagues, honest business practices, and ongoing professional development. Violations are handled through a formal enforcement system that can end in loss of certification.

The Seven Tenets

The code sets out seven tenets. Each one comes with illustrative behaviors that show what compliance and violation look like in practice, but those illustrations are not exhaustive. Conduct that is not specifically listed can still violate the code if it conflicts with the tenet’s underlying principle, and the tenets are meant to be read together rather than in isolation.

Confidentiality

Interpreters must protect the privacy of everyone involved in an assignment. Whether information is spoken, signed, or written, it stays between the parties who were present. This applies in medical appointments, legal consultations, family meetings, and every other setting. Mandatory reporting laws are the main exception: state obligations around suspected child abuse, neglect, and threats of imminent harm override the confidentiality tenet. Outside those narrow situations, disclosing assignment-related information is a serious breach.

Professional Skills and Knowledge

Interpreters are required to deliver messages faithfully, capturing both content and intent, and to use the consumer’s preferred communication mode, whether American Sign Language, a manually coded English system, or something else. Equally important is knowing when to decline. An interpreter who lacks the specialized vocabulary for a medical procedure or a complex legal proceeding should turn the assignment down. A misinterpreted diagnosis or a garbled contract term can cause harm that is difficult to undo.

Appropriate Conduct

Interpreters stay neutral during assignments. Illustrative behaviors under this tenet include refraining from offering personal advice, counsel, or opinions. If a consumer is about to make a decision the interpreter personally disagrees with, the interpreter keeps that to themselves. The pull to help can be strong in emotionally charged settings like hospitals and courtrooms, particularly when the interpreter has been working with the same consumer for a long time, but the code treats that pull as a hazard. Once the interpreter becomes a participant rather than a conduit, the consumer’s independence is compromised.

Respect for Consumers

This tenet centers on the consumer’s right to make their own decisions. The interpreter facilitates communication; the consumer decides what to do with the information, whether that means choosing a medical treatment, answering a judge, or negotiating a contract. The interpreter is a tool for access, not a gatekeeper.

Respect for Colleagues and Interns

The colleague tenet calls for civility, cooperative teamwork, and a specific way of handling disagreements. Interpreters working together on an assignment coordinate logistics beforehand and monitor each other’s accuracy. When one interpreter believes another has breached the code, the expected first step is to raise the concern privately and try to resolve it directly. A formal grievance is appropriate only when private resolution fails or the conduct is harmful or habitual.²

Ethical Business Practices

Honesty in self-representation and billing is enforceable. Misrepresenting credentials, including education, training, certification status, or skill level, is a violation. So is manufacturing or duplicating certification documents, using another interpreter’s certification number, or impersonating a certified interpreter. On the financial side, the disciplinary policy specifically identifies obtaining compensation through fraud, negligent billing and record-keeping, and “double-dipping” (collecting payment from multiple sources for the same work) as violations.³ Pricing services at levels that become cost-prohibitive to consumers and hiring entities is also flagged, as is knowingly accepting a solo assignment that should be teamed and then charging inflated rates.

Professional Development

Interpreters are required to keep their skills current as terminology shifts, technology changes, and cultural norms within the Deaf community develop. RID enforces this through its Certification Maintenance Program, which requires 8.0 Continuing Education Units over each four-year cycle, with at least 6.0 drawn from professional studies directly related to interpreting.⁴

Who Can File a Complaint, and When

The RID Ethical Practices System handles enforcement. Anyone can file a complaint alleging that a certified interpreter or RID member has violated the code, whether a consumer, a colleague, or a member of the public. There is no deadline. The EPS reviews all complaints regardless of when the alleged violation occurred.⁵ The EPS can also open its own investigations based on public information such as court judgments or media reports, without a named complainant.

After a complaint is filed with a signed authorization, EPS staff hold an intake meeting with the complainant and gather documentation. The case then moves through three stages:

Initial review, where EPS staff decide whether the complaint falls within their jurisdiction and whether the allegations, if proven, would amount to a code violation. Cases can be dismissed at this point.
Investigation, where the respondent receives notice of the allegations and both sides get 30 calendar days to answer questions and submit evidence.
Decision, where the EPS reaches a conclusion and, if warranted, imposes sanctions.

Sanctions and the 30-Day Appeal Window

Available sanctions include remedial education, non-public or public reprimand and warning, suspension or revocation of RID membership, suspension or revocation of certification, temporary or permanent ineligibility to sit for certification exams, and other disciplinary action at the EPS’s discretion.⁵ Losing certification effectively ends an interpreter’s ability to work in most professional settings.

A respondent who wants to contest the outcome has 30 calendar days from the decision letter to request review, submitting a written or video letter explaining why the decision or sanction should be reconsidered.⁵ Missing the window makes the original decision final. A timely appeal goes to a Review Board, which can affirm, reverse, modify, or send the case back to the EPS if written procedures were not properly followed. The Review Board’s decision is final, and both parties are notified within 30 calendar days.

Where Federal Law Reinforces the Code

The CPC does not stand alone. Several federal laws impose parallel obligations that extend the consequences of a breach beyond the profession’s own discipline.

Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, a “qualified” interpreter is someone who can interpret effectively, accurately, and impartially in both directions, using any necessary specialized vocabulary. Covered entities, including businesses, state and local governments, and healthcare providers, must provide interpreters when needed for effective communication and cannot require someone to bring their own. A companion may interpret only when the individual specifically requests it and the companion agrees, or in emergencies when no qualified interpreter is available.⁶

In healthcare, when a provider hires a freelance interpreter or contracts with an agency, that arrangement typically requires a Business Associate Agreement under HIPAA’s Privacy Rule. Interpreters who are part of the provider’s own workforce do not need a separate BAA, and family or friends a patient brings along are also exempt.⁷ The practical effect is that confidentiality breaches in healthcare can draw HIPAA enforcement on top of EPS discipline.

Federal courts operate under 28 U.S.C. § 1827, which requires the Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts to establish qualifications and certify interpreters for judicial proceedings, including sign language interpreters. The presiding judge must use the most available certified interpreter, turning to an “otherwise qualified” interpreter only when no certified one is reasonably available.⁸

State Rules Still Apply

RID certification is a national credential, but it does not automatically satisfy state requirements. Many states impose their own licensing, registration, or certification rules, and RID maintains a state-by-state directory listing more than a dozen with specific regulatory frameworks, including Arkansas, Connecticut, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, and New Hampshire, among others.⁹ Some states require full licensure with continuing education and renewal fees; others require only registration. Interpreters who cross state lines need to confirm compliance in each jurisdiction where they work.

1
National Association of the Deaf. Updating the Code of Professional Conduct
2
Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, Inc. CPC
3
Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, Inc. Ethics
4
Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, Inc. Certification Maintenance Program
5
Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf. RID EPS Policy and Enforcement Procedures
6
ADA.gov. ADA Requirements: Effective Communication
7
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. Must a Covered Health Care Provider Obtain an Individuals Authorization to Use or Disclose Protected Health Information to an Interpreter
8
Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 28 U.S. Code 1827 – Interpreters in Courts of the United States
9
Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, Inc. State-by-State Regulations