AITA For Standing Up for Accessibility, Insisting on an ASL Interpreter Despite Objections?

Weddings are meant to be joyous celebrations where every guest feels included and valued. In this story, a 42-year-old woman—tasked with officiating her brother’s wedding—arranged for an ASL interpreter to ensure her deaf boyfriend could fully engage in the ceremony. Her careful planning, made with her brother’s initial approval, was meant to guarantee accessibility and participation for everyone.

However, when the wedding itinerary arrived without any mention of the interpreter, conflict quickly emerged. Her brother’s fiancée and the wedding coordinator decided to cancel the service, citing reasons that compared her boyfriend’s needs to non-English speaking guests. This decision has sparked a heated debate about the true meaning of inclusion and accessibility.

‘AITA for wanting an ASL interpreter at my brother’s wedding because my boyfriend is deaf?’

Navigating accessibility at family events is more than just a logistical matter—it’s a fundamental issue of inclusion. In this case, the OP arranged for an ASL interpreter so that her deaf boyfriend could experience the ceremony in real time. Real-time interpretation is essential for conveying not just words but emotions and subtle cues, which a printed transcript simply cannot capture. This ensures that every moment of the ceremony is shared fully, reflecting a commitment to true accessibility.

For many in the Deaf community, an interpreter is not a luxury but a necessity. Access to real-time communication is vital for participating fully in social events. The comparison between a printed script and live interpretation is not equivalent; while written materials may work for non-English speakers, they do not offer the dynamic, interactive experience that deaf individuals require. This discrepancy underlines the need for accommodations that respect and uphold the rights of disabled individuals.

As disability rights advocate Judy Heumann once stated, “Inclusion is not a favor—it’s a right.” Her words resonate strongly in situations like this, where the absence of live interpretation risks marginalizing those who depend on it. The OP’s insistence on an ASL interpreter is rooted in the belief that accessibility should be available on equal terms for everyone, without making compromises that undermine the dignity and participation of a deaf individual.

Moreover, experts in the field of accessibility stress that providing accommodations for one group does not obligate organizers to extend similar services unnecessarily to others. Rather, it is about recognizing the distinct needs of each individual. In this context, the decision to cancel the interpreter—while offering a printed script for non-English speakers—highlights a fundamental misunderstanding of accessibility. It suggests that one form of communication is valued over another, which raises concerns about fairness and discrimination in how accommodations are provided.

Finally, family events like weddings offer an opportunity to model inclusive behavior. By ensuring that all guests, regardless of ability or language, can participate fully, hosts set a precedent for respect and equality. The OP’s call for an ASL interpreter is not only a personal request but a stand for broader principles of inclusion. It challenges outdated norms and reminds us that accommodating disabilities is a matter of basic human rights—a message that resonates far beyond a single wedding ceremony.

Here’s what the community had to contribute:

Here are some hot takes from the Reddit community – candid and humorous. The community’s responses range widely, with some suggesting a printed transcript as sufficient while others argue that real-time interpretation is indispensable. Many emphasize that, much like a wheelchair for someone with mobility needs, an ASL interpreter is essential for full participation. The spirited debate highlights the broader issues of accessibility and equality, underscoring that one-size-fits-all solutions rarely meet individual needs.

In conclusion, the debate over an ASL interpreter at a family wedding isn’t just about logistics—it’s a stand for true inclusion. The decision to cancel the live interpretation, despite prior approval, raises questions about how we accommodate diverse needs at social events. Whether this is a simple miscommunication or a deeper issue of discrimination, it invites us all to reflect on how we can ensure that every guest feels truly included. What would you do if faced with similar challenges? Share your thoughts and join the discussion.