AI with Sign Language Must Be Deaf-Led, Independent, and Accountable

A welcome step from WFD

This morning, I welcomed the WFD (World Federation of the Deaf) LinkedIn post about its Ad Hoc Group on Artificial Intelligence. I praise WFD for recognising that AI must be approached through human rights, accessibility, inclusion, and sign language perspectives.

That is an important step forward.

I hope this leads to trusted global leadership and real protection for Deaf communities as AI continues to develop at speed.

Looking for country-level action

I am also looking forward to seeing this develop at the individual country and regional level — for example, in the UK, Europe, the Middle East, Asia, Australasia/New Zealand, North America, and South America.

I hope these structures will support the wider work of WFD and EUD (European Union of the Deaf), while also responding to the reality of each local sign language community.

Global leadership matters, but country-level action matters too.

Sign language belongs to the community

Over the last few months, I have become increasingly concerned about how AI with sign language is being developed, presented, and promoted.

I have written about this before, including my post “Who gave approval for AI with Sign Language?” People from Portugal, Germany, Belgium, and elsewhere — including senior leaders from companies and universities — have contacted me because they also see the need for stronger governance, ethics, and accountability.

We know it is possible to build a coalition, create an independent ethics committee, and develop proper safeguards.

But too often, the business comes first.

The funding comes first.

The sign language community comes second.

That is the wrong order.

Sign language belongs to the community. It does not belong to AI.

Why is stronger governance needed

We need stronger protection through BSI guidance, wider standards such as ISO/IEC 42001, national sign language recognition, accessibility duties, and Deaf-led oversight. ISO/IEC 42001:2023 is an international AI management system standard that sets requirements and guidance for organisations establishing and improving AI management systems.

But we also need more than standards on paper.

I believe we need governance that is professional, neutral, and independent. Where alliances, committees, or advisory groups are closely connected to commercial AI interests, it is important to protect independence, public trust, and confidence.

Extended alt text (more detailed): In a meeting room, a diverse group of Deaf and hearing people sit around a table under a sign reading “Independent Ethics Committee.” Several participants are using sign language, while others listen and take notes, supported by interpreters. A nearby banner and laptop display “AI with Sign Language,” representing a discussion focused on ethics, governance, accessibility, and Deaf involvement in AI development.

I would prefer to see more models that feel trusted and impartial — closer in spirit to approaches such as Ofcom or NRCPD, where standards, accountability, and public confidence matter.

International recognition and standards around the world

This issue is not only about British Sign Language. It is global.

There is no single worldwide sign language standard. Sign languages are distinct languages rooted in their own communities, cultures, and histories. WFD says many countries now legally recognise their national sign languages, and its legal-recognition page currently lists 82 countries out of 195 with official recognition.

That is why governance for AI with sign language must respect national and regional sign languages, not treat them as one generic system.

There are already important legal and policy examples around the world:

• New Zealand officially recognises New Zealand Sign Language

• Ireland legally recognises Irish Sign Language

• South Africa recognises South African Sign Language as an official language

At the international level, the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is also fundamental because it recognises signed languages and supports the linguistic identity of Deaf communities.

All of this matters because AI with sign language cannot be separated from language rights, human rights, and community ownership.

When sign language is promoted without real access

Alt text: A Deaf person stands at a conference exhibition stall with a banner reading “AI with Sign Language.” Around them, several hearing people are talking to each other using speech and not signing. The Deaf person looks confused and excluded, as no one at the stall is communicating in sign language.

Another concern is what keeps happening in podcasts, conferences, webinars, exhibitions, and across social media. For many Deaf people, it is deeply disappointing to see sign language being promoted in these spaces while Deaf people are still excluded from direct communication, representation, and access.

It becomes even more frustrating when public-facing videos, podcast clips, conference content, or social media posts about sign language are shared without proper BSL, captions, or meaningful Deaf presence.

Alt text: Two people are recording a podcast at a table with microphones and headphones. One person is wearing a T-shirt that says “AI with Sign Language.” Both are speaking and listening, but neither is using sign language.

Some companies are building products for real-time sign language translation, sign language streaming, and sign language studios, yet Deaf people may still arrive at a stall, event, or public discussion and find that direct sign-language communication is not available.

That is a serious problem.

If Deaf people, interpreters, translators, friends, or family members approach a stall using sign language, they should not be left struggling to communicate while conversations continue around them without direct access.

Too often, conversations about sign language are still happening in ways that leave Deaf people outside direct communication and decision-making.

Where are the Deaf professionals?

We should be asking simple questions:

Where are the Deaf professionals?

Where are the CODAs?

Where are the fluent sign language users?

Where are the interpreters and translators?

Where is the Deaf identity in these spaces?

If a company is serious about AI with sign language, then sign language should be present in every moment — at the stall, on the stage, in the podcast, in the webinar, in the networking, in the business meeting, and across social media.

Do not just show sign language in the product.

Show sign language to the people.

Show sign language in the culture.

Show sign language in the values.

Accessibility must be visible, not hidden

Alt text: A conference panel of hearing speakers sits on stage discussing AI with sign language. One speaker is wearing a logo that says “AI with Sign Language.” Two BSL interpreters stand beside the panel, providing sign language interpretation for the audience.

It should not be acceptable for events about sign language AI to take place without proper access.

Too often, we still see panels, podcasts, or conferences without:

• Deaf presenters

• CODAs

• fluent sign language users

• interpreters

• translators

• direct sign language communication

This sends the wrong message.

If you are building tools for sign language users, then your own communication should already reflect that commitment.

Bring Deaf staff. Bring CODAs. Bring skilled sign language users. Bring interpreters. Bring translators. Bring people who can communicate directly and respectfully with the community they claim to serve.

This is about respect, not performance

We are not here to be treated as test subjects, marketing tools, or an audience to impress from a distance.

We are sign language users, community members, rights holders, and experts in our own lived experience.

Too often, Deaf people approach these spaces expecting real engagement, only to discover that the conversation is still happening around them rather than with them.

That is not inclusion.

That is not a partnership.

That is not respect.

We need real opportunities for Deaf people

AI with sign language should create real opportunities for:

• Deaf people

• Hard-of-hearing people

• CODAs

• interpreters

• translators

• fluent sign language users

  
  

These spaces should create far more room for Deaf professionals, CODAs, interpreters, translators, and fluent sign language users.

There is nothing wrong with hearing people learning sign language or wanting to support the field. But support must not replace Deaf leadership, Deaf expertise, or direct access for sign language users.

Built with us, not around us

AI with sign language must not be something built about us, around us, or above us.

It must be built with us.

That means:

• community trust

• professional standards

• independence

• accessibility

• Deaf rights

• Deaf-led involvement from the beginning

  
  
  
  

A respectful way forward

I welcome WFD’s step forward, and I hope this is only the beginning.

I now want to see country-level and regional action that is:

• professional

• independent

• neutral

• trusted

• truly centred on sign language communities

  
  

We do not need more performance.

We do not need more hearing-only spaces speaking on behalf of sign language users

.We do not need more technology without accountability.

We need trust.

We need access.

We need independence.

We need Deaf-led leadership.

Final message

No more sign language products without sign language people at the centre.

#AI #SignLanguage #BSL #Deaf #DeafLeadership #Accessibility #Inclusion #HumanRights #Ethics #Governance #WFD #EUD