Access to Minors

An excerpt from my latest essay on intellectual freedom which will be uploaded to my Academia Webpage soon:

The fifth article of the Library Bill of Rights, penned by the American Library Association, posits: "A person's right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age, background, or views.  The interpretation of the article focuses on every citizen's First Amendment rights, which not only includes adults, but also children and young adults.  When selecting materials, librarians exhibiting either of Fiske's forms of censorship, conscious or subconscious, are abridging services to all patrons, regardless of age, and are in violation of not only the Library Bill of Rights but also the American Library Association's Code of Ethics.  Specifically, the second principle which states, "We uphold the principles of intellectual freedom and resist all efforts to censor library resources."  And lastly, the seventh principle states, "We distinguish between our personal convictions and professional duties and do not allow our personal beliefs to interfere with fair representation of the aims of our institutions or the provision of access to their information resources."  

In other words, the ALA believes that regardless of a librarian's personal views about providing access to the adult Holocaust materials, he/she has an obligation to the profession to provide equitable and unabridged access to information: assisting the patron with their information needs (the scenario).  What the scenario fails to consider is the availability of electronic databases geared specifically towards young adult populations.  Furthermore, when it comes to access to information, a librarian should not supersede the child's parent or guardian.  Many libraries include a statement of responsibility on their patron applications, such as the application used by Oxford Public Library, which states, "I accept responsibility for materials borrowed on the library card issued from this application.  Responsibility for the choice of materials rests with the person(s) whose signature(s) appear the signature lines below and not with the library system or its staff."  The application includes two signature lines: one for the parent/guardian and the second for the minor child.

A librarian practicing young adult librarianship in a suburban community stated:

I believe that all people, including teens, should be afforded the same level of access to read what they want and/or need.  In your scenario, I am not that girl's parent and so it is not my choice or place to censor what she reads.  I talk to my teens and their parents (if they are present) and tell them that if there's content in a book that they're uncomfortable with, they always have the option of closing the book and not finishing it.  We can find something else that will work for them. If the teen's parent was with her and objected to content in the books we have, I would certainly explain that s/he (the parent) has the choice to allow his/her child to read or not to read the information and offer other materials in our library, if they are available, or through ILL, if they are not.

I do not have a problem showing a thirteen-year-old adult books on the Holocaust.  It's history.  It's an uncomfortable subject, but it's an important one.  People need to remember their history in order not to repeat it.

(Footnote: A summary of Fiske's study can be found in the following article:

Niosi, Andrea E. An investigation of censorship and selection in southern California public libraries. Public Libraries, 37 (5), 310-315.)