The Ethical Request to Alter a Transcript
You are a certified shorthand reporter who covered a family law hearing. After the hearing, the attorney for one party calls you and says: "The transcript makes my client look bad. Can you change 'I threatened to leave' to 'I considered leaving'? It's basically the same thing, and it will help everyone." The attorney offers to pay an additional fee for the change. You have already prepared a draft but have not yet certified it. The audio clearly captures the client saying "I threatened to leave." The hearing involved custody issues, and the transcript may be reviewed by a judge.
1. How should you respond to the attorney's request, and why?
Read the worked answer
You must decline the request. The audio clearly captures "I threatened to leave," and changing it to "considered leaving" would alter the meaning of the testimony and falsify the record. The offer of an additional fee is irrelevant and should not influence the decision. The reporter's duty is accuracy and impartiality; the transcript is a verbatim record, not a document to be edited for a party's benefit. The appropriate response is courteous but firm: explain that you cannot alter testimony, and that any correction must be limited to genuine transcription errors verified against the audio. The reasoning is that altering testimony could mislead the court in a custody matter and would violate professional ethics. Integrity governs, regardless of the fee.
2. What should you do if the attorney insists or threatens to complain?
Read the worked answer
You should remain professional, reiterate that you cannot alter testimony, and document the request and your response. If the attorney persists, you may consult applicable rules, a supervising official, or legal counsel, and you should preserve the audio and draft as evidence. You should not retaliate or become confrontational. The reasoning is that the reporter must protect the integrity of the record and their own professional standing. A complaint based on a refusal to falsify a transcript is not a legitimate basis for discipline, and documentation supports your position. Ethical duties of accuracy and candor outweigh pressure from a party.
3. If you discover a genuine transcription error in the draft, how should you handle it?
Read the worked answer
You should correct genuine errors that are verified against the audio, and you may note the correction in the transcript or in a correction sheet as required by local practice. The distinction is between correcting a true transcription mistake (for example, a mistyped word that does not match the audio) and altering testimony to change its meaning. The former is proper proofreading; the latter is falsification. The reporter should verify against the audio, make the correction transparently, and certify only when the transcript accurately reflects the record. The reasoning is that accuracy requires correcting real errors while preserving the witness's actual words. Transparency and integrity govern.