Ethics and Bookclub Reflections

When first reading the ALA Code of Ethics, I felt really confident and excited to uphold these standards.  I particularly perked at the following passage:

We significantly influence or control the selection, organization, preservation, and dissemination of information. In a political system grounded in an informed citizenry, we are members of a profession explicitly committed to intellectual freedom and the freedom of access to information. We have a special obligation to ensure the free flow of information and ideas to present and future generations.

It is essential for information professionals to work to become aware of the many ways that their own personal preferences, motivations, and biases subtly influence their decision-making and relationships in the field.  This is not a social awareness that comes naturally to everyone, and so I believe it will be a process to gain perspective on their own partiality.  I think this is important in a (generally) liberal-bent profession.  This is an over-generalization and an over-simplification, but in my observations of growing up in a pretty far left community, and then burying myself in the notoriously left-leaning institutions of Berkeley, Teach For America, and Michigan, I have seen many liberal-minded individuals presume themselves free of bigotry and biases.  For these individuals, it is sometimes harder to perceive their personal prejudices because they are often not looking for them.

For this reason, I really appreciated the complexity Mark Lenker brought to the Code of Ethics with his article on "dangerous questions."  Of course, there is no easy answer or quick fix when a patron approaches with a morally questionable topic - but Lenker does provide a good discussion and a possible framework to process troubling encounters.

I think one of the biggest struggles when these situations arise is the urgency and pace of the reference desk.  When I am providing reference services in Hatcher, by brain is always running a mile a minute because I am pooling through my brain for the best resources and search methods to help users; it's hard for me to process moral dilemmas at the same time.

That said, in an academic library I think determining intent with say, a book about marijuana cultivation or bomb how-tos, because I pretty much always ask what the purpose of the research is.  My partner worked for the Emma Goldman Papers in Berkeley and he had to conduct pretty extensive research on home-made bombs to determine the relevancy of testimony in the Tom Mooney trial.  Throughout his research on the chemistry of dynamite, etc, he was never questioned of his intentions.  Though if he had, he would have had an easy explanation.  It's an expected and comfortable question in a university library where everyone is conducting research towards similar purposes.  In public libraries this sort of questioning may feel to some an invasion of privacy.

I feel that if the library provides the material, there should be reference services.  But I can't say that I would be completely comfortable pointing a patron to material I thought they might use to hurt themselves or others.  So much of this information can be found online, or independently in the library, if a patron is coming to a person or chat service, I do feel that there is a level of wanting someone to know.  I know that some libraries are able to offer or host social services through the library, and those materials are good to have available.  I feel that asking more about requests in a respectful way, with a sense of humility, can't hurt.  The worst that can happen is that a patron can decline to engage in the conversation.

image from http://www.booksdistilled.com

Now to the book clubs we participated in last week.  Overall  I really enjoyed the opportunity to discuss literature and to lead a book club discussion with my peers.  I am currently in 3 book clubs, on and off, but in my opinion, there are never enough opportunities to talk about books.  The discussion leaders in our group led in very different ways, and it was great to learn from everyone.

I struggled with some of the things I expected to struggle with; some voices were louder than others, and in a "voluntary" setting I found it a lot more challenging to find a diplomatic way to support a shared floor.  This is easier in a classroom, where I had the authority to call on students or ask students who weren't sharing more pointed and specific questions.  In a casual book club setting I struggled with how to do this respectfully.  I'd love any feedback others had or experience with similar issues!