Barriers Experienced by First Nations Deaf People in the Justice System.

Anecdotal evidence strongly suggests that members of the First Nations Deaf community experience more barriers when engaging with the criminal justice system than those who are not deaf. Therefore, our purpose for writing this article is to highlight legal and policy issues related to First Nations Deaf people, including perspectives of professionals working with these communities, living in Australia who have difficulty in accessing supports within the criminal justice system. In this article, we present data from semi-structured qualitative interviews focused on four key themes: (a) indefinite detention and unfit to plead, (b) a need for an intersectional approach to justice, (c) applying the maximum extent of the law while minimizing social services-related resources, and (d) the need for language access and qualified sign language interpreters. Through this article and the related larger sustaining project, we seek to center the experiences and needs of First Nations Deaf communities to render supports for fair, just, and equitable access in the Australian criminal justice system to this historically marginalized group.

Effective Deaf Access to Justice.

This article reports on findings from a qualitative study that explored the experiences of eight deaf participants in interacting with the justice system in Northern Ireland. The study was spurred by anecdotal evidence of challenges facing members of the Deaf community in obtaining access to solicitors. The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, to which the United Kingdom is a State Party, requires providers of goods, facilities, and services, which include solicitors, to provide effective communication access to deaf people seeking their services on an equal basis with non-disabled people. The Disability Discrimination Act comes into play, requiring service providers like solicitors to make a "reasonable adjustment" in order to provide access to deaf clients. Eight participants provided narratives from which three thematic categories emerged: (a) Barriers to Access, (b) The Contested Meaning of "Reasonable Adjustment," and