This week I'd like to reflect on something that happened to me recently that relates to a library patron's right to privacy. I put a copy of Little Brother on hold at my public library. My mom and 2 of my sisters work there. When my hold was available, one of the workers at the circulation desk told my mom that my book was available. She even made a joke about the title of the book because I have all younger sisters. My mom then called me to ask me if I wanted her to pick it up or if I'd come in to get it. She did pick it up for me. This seems like a violation of my privacy. My mom should not be the first person notified if I have a hold ready to be picked up. I'm not sure if the book is checked out to me, but was handed over to my mom, or if it was actually checked out to my mom. Also, I don't think it is very professional for a library employee to joke about my choice in reading material. I have chosen not to mention my objections to this breach of confidentiality to any library employee. I have nothing to hide from my mom and most of the library employees know my family and wouldn't do anything intentionally hurtful to any of us. I just hope that they do not take privacy issues so lightly with other patrons. I'm not sure how I would go about making a formal complaint about this if I did choose to. I would be uncomfortable doing so because I would be afraid that somehow my mom would be looked down on. I wouldn't want her coworkers to think she has a tattletale daughter, trying to cause trouble. At the same time, that really shouldn't have happened.
I found ALA's "Privacy: An interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights" to be very clear and helpful. There are many references and examples of how important privacy and confidentiality are to libraries. It's both an ethical and a legal issue. Check it out http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/oif/statementspols/statementsif/interpretations/privacy.cfm
Abby, given that the workplace breeds a certain familiarity among employees, I doubt that this incident was intentional, and it probably isn't something that would occur with "regular" patrons.
ReplyDeleteThat said, it's also quite possible that some library employees are not as aware of potential privacy violations as you are. At my library, I tend to be very anal about such things. While some of my coworkers might readily tell a patron over the phone that they can have someone pick up a book for them, I only allow it under exceptional circumstances--such as immobility or the like--and even then, I do my utmost to confirm the patron's identity over the phone beforehand.
Perhaps you could ask the library director to do a presentation on privacy at your next in-service day?
You certainly should have been to first one contacted, since it was your hold. I could understand if you put it on hold with your mom's card, but I'm guessing that this was not the case. Even though the staff know who you are and work with your mom. It is your material and your mother should not know about it unless you tell her.
ReplyDeleteAbby, this shows how easy it is to not think about how one might be violating another's rights. When we lived in Ft. Wayne the branch I used shelved all books on hold in a public area. The patron was expected to find the hold, after they were called, and bring it to the desk. The problem is anyone and everyone can all browse the shelves and see who has what on hold. Talk about lack of privacy!
ReplyDeleteI really hope other patrons are treated as "regular" patrons and that the person who placed the hold is the person who is contacted first. I thought about this situation because my discussion group for this week is on privacy. One of our articles is on self-service hold areas. I would not like the idea of picking up my hold from a public area. I like my privacy and value others' privacy as well.
ReplyDeleteAbby, your situation made me think of how the library in my small hometown deals with holds. When a hold is ready, the library calls the patron and tells them the book is in. No problem -- unless the person isn't home and a message is left. Perhaps this has changed in the past couple years as privacy issues become more in the forefront, but they used to just read out the title(s), whether to another person answering the phone or an answering machine. I didn't think anything about it at the time, but now it seems like such a huge violation of privacy! Hopefully, the library has changed its wording to, "The book you put on hold is in."
ReplyDeleteIf SLIS gave exams on the library bill of rights, this example would be an excellent exam question. On one hand, you could argue that you aren't a "regular" patron, and so, there is no harm. Plus, the library might not have acted this way if you were a "regular" patron. On the other hand, doesn't everyone, at all times deserve the same protections under the bill of rights?
ReplyDeleteI wonder if it would be different if your mom and sisters didn't work at the library. I'm not saying what they did was right, but the workers probably felt comfortable enough to do this because they probably know you and your mom works there. At least you mom called you.
ReplyDeleteI know a few people have said that holds are shelfed away from the desk and the patron picks them up themselves. I would hate to have that, not that I have any controversial books on hold but anyone can walk by and see what you have on hold.
These last comments remind me of policies other businesses have regarding privacy issues. I've been asked at doctors' offices if it is ok to leave a message with someone or on an answering machine. They ask if you want just a simple message like "call back" or if a detailed message is ok. Another thing is, just because we don't have anything to hide doesn't mean we want our private info out there for everyone to know.
ReplyDeleteHello,
ReplyDeleteI think is an issue of bad work ethics amongst your staff. I think the staff should be informed that staff reservation information should only be relayed to the person (staff, patron, etc.) who requested the book. At my job we are so strict about patron & staff privacy, that we have now started to use e-mail to inform library patrons about library materials placed on hold. This new policy was implemented because several months ago a library staff member was calling patron reserves at the front desk. while speaking with the patron my co-worker informed her that the book she requested about spousal abuse was being held at the library for her. Coincidentally, the woman's husband was at the same circulation desk checking out materials with another staff member, and overheard the librarian talking to his wife. Although, this may not seem like a privacy issue and maybe the librarian should have called the reserves in a more private area, this still caused a huge uproar at my library..With that being said, thank goodness for e-mail -- and I personally feel more and more libraries should begin to use e-mail as a way to inform library patrons about past due materials, fines, reserves, etc..
Wow, Kim--calling patrons from the front desk to notify them they have holds is one thing, but to actually mention the content of the book is reprehensible. Is that something that was normally done, or did the staff member take it upon themselves to mention the content of the book? Was there any fallout from the patron and/or her husband?
ReplyDeleteOne of the articles I picked for my discussion group involves privacy concerns over self-service holds, and this I believe this event makes for a good cautionary tale.
At my library, patrons receive email notification, or, if they don't have email, we notify them via snail mail.
Mail does seem more private than a phone call. I'm fairly certain that hold phone call notifications are done at the main circulation desk at the library I'm talking about also. I've been in the library browsing near the circ desk and overheard phone calls. This library recently got a new OPAC so there may be more options now for how to be notified when holds become available. It is very unfortunate that a staff member would discuss the content of a book if it was linked to a patron's name. It doesn't even have to be controversial material or sensitive material in order to be protected. Patrons have the right to privacy.
ReplyDelete