By increasing access to testing, libraries connect their patrons with a valuable resource: the knowledge of whether or not they have COVID-19. Michelle Francis, head of the Ohio Library council, stated: “This is about being a distribution point for a resource that otherwise might not be accessible to certain individuals within our community.” What Francis gets at here is in a way the essence of libraries: we remove barriers to access. The State of Ohio is an example of library systems making rapid testing accessible. According to the Ohio Library Council, since partnering with the Ohio Department of Health in March 2021, libraries have distributed over 2.24 million tests. On January 3, 2022 a branch of the Youngstown and Mahoney County library system took roughly 10 minutes to distribute 4,000 tests.

Nationally, as stated by The Washington Post, “librarians have become the latest front-line workers of the pandemic.” Librarians in Washington D.C. reported lines down the street for testing. Further, public libraries in Boston ran out of tests within just a few days of starting distribution. The president of the Public Library Association, Melanie Huggins, stated: “Most library workers want to be there for their communities. … But with this new surge, we have to balance: Do we have enough staff to open our library safely? That’s the question I hear a lot of libraries talking about.”

If we boil everything down, it comes to this: libraries are at the centers of their respective communities; they are constantly evaluating community needs. Free and open access to COVID-19 home tests is a clear and present need when it comes to community safety.  Libraries seek to fill gaps in community services.

However, we cannot forget that these added services have an effect on library staff as well. Librarians are reporting fatigue and frustration. One D.C. children’s librarian shared: “…it feels like we’ve become too good at our jobs. It becomes, ‘Oh, the library can handle it.’” Interacting with potentially COVID-positive patrons, enforcing masking, and getting medical questions we cannot answer are negatively affecting librarians and library staff. Our mental health is being affected and it is okay to acknowledge that. If you or someone you know needs help, here are some resources:

• National Suicide Prevention Lifeline: 800-273-8255
• Crisis Text Line: Text “START” to 741-741
• Mental Health America
• National Alliance on Mental Illness

You are not alone.

The post Public Libraries are Feeling the Impact of the Latest Surges first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

The following books at the Victoria Public Library have been challenged in citizen complaints:

• Neither by Airlie Anderson
• Worm Loves Worm by JJ Austrian
• Uncle Bobby’s Wedding by Sarah Brannen
• Jo: An Adaptation of Little Women (Sort Of) by Kathleen Gros
• The Rainbow Flag: Bright, Bold, and Beautiful by Michelle Millar Fisher
• The Only Black Girl in Town by Brandy Colbert
• Beyond Magenta by Susan Kuklin
• The Moon Within by Aida Salazar
• Jack not Jackie by Erica Silverman
• The Black Flamingo by Dean Atta
• Red: A Crayon’s Story by Michael Hall
• Teens & LGBT Issues by Christine Wilcox
• Jacob’s Room to Choose by Ian Hoffman + Sarah Hoffman
• Queer (The Ultimate LGBTQ Guide for Teens) by Kathy Belge and Marke Bieschké
• My Family: My Two Moms by Claudia Harrington
• My Family: My Two Dads by Claudia Harrington
• The List of Things That Will Not Change by Rebecca Stead
• In the Role of Brie Hutchens by Nicole Melleby
• Rick by Alex Gino
• Sex us a Funny Word by Cory Silverberg and Fiona Smyth
• If I Was Your Girl by Meredith Russo

When going through these complaints, a couple things jumped out at me. First, the list trends overwhelmingly towards LGBTQ+ topics in both children’s and YA books. Second, the suggested replacements on the complaint forms overwhelmingly had a religious bent. Further, in a couple cases, complainants neglected to include subtitles for suggested replacements. For example, A Change of Affection: A Gay Man’s Incredible Story of Redemption, was simply listed as a A Change of Affection. Additionally, When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment, was listed only as When Harry Became Sally. There may be no larger intentions behind these omissions, but it is worth noting.

Schools in Texas have additional pressure coming from state leadership. Texas Governor Greg Abbott called on the state board of education and the Texas Education Agency to create standards for what books can go into school libraries as well as to pull books deemed “overtly sexual.” Abbott’s initiative led to state representative Matt Krause creating a list targeting 850 books. Unsurprisingly, these books predominantly address either racial or LGBTQIA+ topics. 

In reaction, the North East Independent School District in Texas pulled 414 books from its shelves for review. Supposedly, many of these titles will be available again following their review, but the school district did not stop there. They are implementing a set of electronic tools to allow parents to see which books their children have checked out. This school district was not the first to implement such a policy. The Collier County School District in Florida implemented this practice all the way back in 2015.

Getting back to the Victoria (TX) banning attempts, let’s examine the timeline of events. This past summer, members of the Victoria community submitted 43 separate citizen complaint forms. The complainants asked for either the removal or relocation of materials they deemed inappropriate. They were undeterred when their requests were denied, as 12 community members submitted further complaints about the aforementioned list of 21 books. A public hearing was held in November, but a ruling did not come down until the Library Advisory Board meeting on December 15th. As a result of that meeting, the board voted to approve the library director’s recommendation to keep all 21 of the contested books.

While this is a win. It is also part of a deeply concerning movement affecting libraries across the United States. Of course libraries are deeply affected, but it is also members of already marginalized communities feeling the strain as their identities come under question. Victoria resident Nat Clark had this to say: “I am just a person who loves humans. Why can’t I see that in a children’s book? Why couldn’t I see that when I was younger? Why wasn’t that there? Because people didn’t want it to be there.”[1] They are making an important point here. When diverse books are contested and demonized, it signals to people that they are not welcome. When people cannot see themselves in the collection, we are saying that libraries are not for them. 

Citations

1. Victoria Advocate, December 21, 2021 “Victoria Public Library Board Votes to Keep All Twenty-One Contested Books” https://www.victoriaadvocate.com/premium/victoria-public-library-board-votes-to-keep-all-21-contested-books/article_14699d98-5e0f-11ec-a2f9-a343ab897758.html.

The post Stop Trying to Make Book Banning a Thing first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

On October 19th, Maia Kobabe’s Gender Queer: A Memoir was removed from the Olympic High School (Kitsap, WA) library collection at the request of a parent. This latest challenge is one in a series that have been filed in school districts around the United States. School districts are now facing questions about the First Amendment, freedom to read, and protection of book selectors.

So, how did we get here? In October, a student at the high school checked out Gender Queer. Not long after, a parent complained about its “sexually explicit nature.” The complaint set district policy in process, causing the temporary (now permanent) removal of the book and its review by the Library Materials Review Committee.

The parent, however, was not satisfied with the book’s removal. To take it a step further, they requested the criminal prosecution of library and school officials for distributing the book, citing that it was “graphic pornography including pedophilia.”

These events are causing people to ask the question: can they do that? In short, no. Chad Enwright, the Kitsap County (WA) Prosecutor, looked into the case to see if there was any legal standing for what parents were attempting to do. Looking past the most obvious arguments under the First Amendment, Enwright also pointed out that state laws require something to be a photograph meant explicitly for sexual stimulation, meaning a graphic novel doesn’t fit criteria.

The pushback against Gender Queer did not stop at the complaint stage, nor at the book’s removal. Parents were unfazed by the lack of legal grounds for prosecution. The problem moved up the chain to the Central Kitsap School Board. Although County Prosecutor Chad Enwright did not press charges, parents at the school board meeting were looking for consequences. One parent asked: “Can we as parents come into the library and do an inspection? If our tax dollars are paying for the books, I think we should be allowed to.”

The Book

Gender Queer by Maia Kobabe is a memoir, documenting eir^[1] journey exploring gender identity and sexuality. As Kobabe points out, e wrote this book for the people in eir life, as a way of explaining eir identity. However, this graphic novel is also for teens who need it. As Kobabe shares: “By high school, I had met multiple out gay, lesbian, and bisexual people, but I didn’t meet an out trans or nonbinary person until I was in grad school. The only place I had access to information and stories about transgender people was in media — mainly, in books.” As Kobabe goes on to write in eir opinion piece for the Washington Post, there was a paucity of representation for transgender and non-binary folx, and e were always looking for people like em.

Complaints Affect Libraries

By this point, dear reader, you may find yourself frustrated. This is completely valid, and I invite you to take a second, take a breath, and read on; we have work to do.

Perhaps you can relate to the Central Kitsap librarians; book challenges seem to be happening at an alarming rate in public and school libraries. Gender Queer alone has been banned and challenged in Florida, Washington, Texas, Ohio, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Washington D.C.

If you do face a collection challenge, there is guidance provided by ALA’s Office of Intellectual Freedom. Here are the 8 action items OIF recommends. (This list is directly from an OIF blog post).

1. Familiarize yourself with the books that activist organizations are targeting.
2. Understand your district’s reconsideration policies.”
3. Use the policies.
4. Reserve judgment.
5. Engage your librarian.
6. Share information and resources with neighboring districts.
7. Protect the First Amendment and students’ right to read.
8. Report Censorship.

As librarians, we sometimes have to lean heavily on collection development policies to defend collection decisions. It is also important to have a network to lean on so you aren’t fighting these battles alone. Gender Queer being removed from the Olympic High School library is part of a larger trend of challenges as our country struggles with debates about DEIA and critical race theory. These struggles aren’t going anywhere soon, but we have ways to defend our collection choices as well as the right to read of our patrons.

Transgender and Non-Binary Rights

The controversy around Gender Queer forces librarians to consider the population its removal hurts the most: transgender and non-binary teens who are actively struggling with identity. I cannot write this article without recognizing the struggle these teens, as well as transgender and non-binary adults, face daily. The truth is in the numbers.

The Human Rights Campaign releases an annual report regarding violence against transgender and gender noncomforming people. So far in 2021, 44 transgender and gender noncomforming people have lost their lives to violence. Further, this violence disproportionately affects people of color; the average life expectancy for a transgender woman of color is 35 years. Further, the majority of transgender and non-binary teens seriously consider suicide. If our work as librarians can do anything to help, it is more than worth it.

It’s important to remember who we are fighting for, and why we protect collection decisions and resist censorship. Everyone should see themselves in our collections, regardless of what others think.

^[1] e/em/eir are called Spivak pronouns, they are the gender neutral pronouns Kobabe uses.

Check out this related Freedom to Read Foundation webinar: Managing and Addressing Book Challenges in Your Community: Law, Policy, Advocacy – December 9.

The post Criminalizing Book Selection first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

Public libraries are just that — public. We directly contradict the Library Bill of Rights when we continue to enforce discriminatory practices such as late fees, keeping the public from much-needed resources. The three public library systems in New York City have removed a barrier to services, and have joined an ever-larger group of libraries who have cancelled late fees.

As increasing numbers of libraries cancel late fees, studies and reports of the effects have come pouring in. The results are promising. For example, when the San Diego Public Library made the change, 130,000 patrons regained privileges because their late fines were cancelled. It isn’t just that more people can use the library now, it’s that they are using it. For instance, when Chicago Public Libraries eliminated late fees, they quickly saw a 240% increase in returns. Hold on, read that again: 240%. Libraries created late fees to encourage patrons to return materials, but are quickly discovering that the financial liability discourages returns.

So far, it has become clear that a high number of patrons are re-gaining access to libraries, as well as returning materials that were previously accruing late fees. One important question we have to ask ourselves is: who is coming back to the library? Another question we should always have in the back of our heads is: who isn’t coming to the library and why? In 2018, the Urban Libraries Council (ULC) conducted a flash poll of libraries to get a sense for their positions on late fees. Reading the results, the most striking statistic comes from respondents who have removed late fees. 54% of these libraries changed their policies to increase library access for children who are low-income. Further, the “Long Overdue” report from San Francisco Public Libraries in 2019 indicated that it is, in fact, low income service areas with the highest proportion of residents unable to use their cards due to fines. Fines, especially in libraries serving large populations, impact low-income, black, and non-college educated communities at a much higher rate.

So, why do we care? Why is this so important? We all know that libraries aren’t just about their collections anymore. Libraries are a place to cool down or warm up for people who are housing insecure. They are a place to get help applying for unemployment or disability. They are a place to find much-needed mental health resources. The populations who need the library most are the same people being barred from the library due to fines. If the pandemic has shown us anything, it is that we need to take care of each other. This is one way libraries can help, and it fulfills our mission according to the Library Bill of Rights.

Our job as public libraries is to remove every possible obstacle that could keep someone from using our services. By eliminating fees, we are increasing the chance of people coming into the library to use our resources and hopefully have a better life. We are also fulfilling Article V of the Library Bill of Rights:

A person’s right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age, background, or views.

Because late fees impact specific populations such as low-income families at a higher rate, we deny or abridge our services whether we intend to or not. This is not equity.

But what is equity? And what does it have to do with libraries? Equity is one of the most important issues we face in society today, making it a crucial issue for libraries to address. I want to stress this word equity because it is not the same as equality. As the Annie E. Casey Foundation shares in their definition of equality: “Like equity, equality aims to promote fairness and justice, but it can only work if everyone starts from the same place and needs the same things.” We know that our patrons are not starting from the same place; this has been ensured by centuries of systemic oppression. So, sometimes, we have to take the extra step to give everyone a chance to access and use our resources. Cost should not be a prohibiting factor when it comes to public institutions. Eliminating late fees is one of those extra steps that brings our most vulnerable patrons closer to resources they need. That is where equity begins.

Further Reading:

https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-business-new-york-new-york-city-libraries-c9e42a88a9c89575668c24f9248a229b

The post Ending Late Fees: A Case for Equity first appeared on Public Libraries Online.