To be irritated by the rules around adult/ child library books?

[hophap]

In our library any book not expressly a children’s book cannot be borrowed by a child.

However any art book with actual artists/ pictures in is adult. Local history books are adult. Music books. Maps. Basically anything not bought for cartoon/ curriculum support and whoever is buying certainly aims at the younger end of the child readers.

Is it really unbelievable an under 18 wants to read some of the adult books? Totally fine if I need to give permission/ they charge adult fines (though as most the books are generally around the same price...).

My daughter has been barred from getting a book on an artist she’s studying, I then went to say I’d give permission. Nope. The book is not dissimilar to what you’d find in most school libraries. Being out with a card or sufficient ID I could t get it either.

What is the logic behind adult/ children books being divided and able: older children being confined to kids books? Schools don’t worry if a book is appropriate by not a kids book. The library rules actually mean that yr 6 can’t get books out the library they read at school (able group- classics). By GCSE many books in the kids study area are totally babyish. I understand maybe some books require adult guidance, but surely this is solved with parental permission. I remember as a child having a green stamp on my ticket to show that my parents allowed me to borrow any book.

It depends on the classification of books. I'm not going to 'bend the rules' so a 13 year old can access sado-masochistic soft porn, any more than I'd give a 13 year old a gin and tonic if I were working behind a bar.

I do believe that society - whether that is the law or a local authority makes rules - imperfect ones - for the protection of young people.

Other people might believe in an anarchic society where young people were not protected in the name of freedom. I don't.

(Most sensible people don't. We're just arguing about where to draw the lines. In the workplace, I observe the lines that have been drawn. Mostly, they work.)

I dont in general agree with the censorship by librarians, it should be parents.
I cant get adults books out on my child's card. Interestingly though online book rentals you can. So it may be more about the fines.

It depends on the classification of books.

Classified by whom? Transparently? The history of the BBFC is tortuous and at times torturous, but they are extraordinarily transparent in their criteria and their judgements. They talk very openly about how the judgements are made, and who is making them, and have an extensive set of mechanisms for appeal and review. They sometimes get it wrong and own that, and they also have a historic perspective which allows them to see when films are both under- and over-rated as tastes and mores change (we're now horrified that the early Bond films are a A, ie PG, while amused that Apocalypse Now and The Wicker Man, stone-cold classics, were originally at 18).

Your classification scheme is "what I think at the issue desk", it would appear, or "what a bloke in the council says". We've fought big, public court cases to stop this sort of nonsense (the Chatterley judgement didn't have a "but not for the kiddies!" caveat) for precisely this reason.

Oh, and you're neatly slipping to 50 Shades, to avoid the "oh, a father didn't like magic in books so we don't lend them". How large a petition from religious conservatives (more likely to be Christian than Muslim in this case, before you dogwhistle racism again) would you and your colleagues need before you added Harry Potter to your unofficial list of books children shouldn't read?

No they are classified by the Bibliographic section, and that classification is linked to the software which is used by the self-issue machines and at the counter. It is possible for an individual library to change a classification according to local systems/needs. Publishers and booksellers also classify books as children, young adult etc.

What does strike me about the thread is that there is an undercurrent of hostility not just to library users who may have religious beliefs, but also to library staff. There's an idea that people who work in the public sector are lazy jobsworths. It's possible that specific individuals don't always give a good service, - perhaps because they sometimes get burned out by customers demands - but in fact more and more work - giving community information, IT support, benefits help - is being heaped on the people who work in libraries.

It is also worth pointing out that library services are extremely good value. They provide free books and free computer use and information/advice. They provide community space in an increasingly privatised world. (If you want to sit in a cafe you have to pay. If you want to sit in a library it is free.)

If people feel critical of the services provided by their local library, by all means query the policies , by talking to whoever is in charge, filling in feedback forms etc. But please do use them and campaign for better funding. You may not think you need libraries, that you can use the internet and buy books. (But what will you do when your printer dies but you need to print out your tickets. Or when you find your sight isn't so good and you need access to talking books. Or when your child develops a reading habit you can't afford to fund. Or when you want access lots and lots of practice papers for the 11+. Or you live alone and you just want to go somewhere that's warm and friendly, and you can not just get a book but possibly have a couple of minutes conversation about that book.)

Stepping outside the classification discussion, our library does issue fines on children's books once children are over 5 (they obviously become date-reliable and conscientious overnight on that birthday ) I haven't tested whether this means children can access a wider range of books - to be honest we hardly go any more, the books never seemed to have any new variety. Quicker and easier, and only slightly costlier, to use charity shops or download ebooks.

@Naty1 that’s good because librarians don’t agree with censorship either - rather a cornerstone of our profession.

What has happened to the idea of children's tickets for use in the children's library only. and adult tickets to be used in both adult and children's sections?

I recall when I was a kid I read a lot from a young age. I got special permission on my account to take out adult books. It seems ridiculous that they can't do the same..

librarians don’t agree with censorship either

Well, it would appear from this thread that they do.

I don't think it's easy as being for or against, censorship.

Which of these two books would you happy to see in your local library. Where would they go on the shelves and who should be allowed to borrow them?

1. Mein Kampf
2. The Anarchist Cookbook. This is a guide to making explosive devices. The bomb-making recipes are apparently inaccurate and dangerous.

Mein Kampf should be on the history shelves, given its fundamental place in understanding the great horrors of the 20th century. It's extremely dull, mostly. You've read it, I take it? It's back on the shelves in Germany, now.

The Anarchist Cookbook? Meh. Why bother getting a paper copy.

bnrg.cs.berkeley.edu/~randy/Courses/CS39K.S13/anarchistcookbook2000.pdf

This is the problem with well-intentioned censors. They produce something they believe to be clearly unacceptable, and go "what about this, eh? Eh? Eh?"

But all books aren't suitable for all audiences. Is stopping a little child from watching Last Tango in Paris censorship? Or taking a toddler to see 40 Shades of Grey or whatever. No one screams censorship about that. I understand why reading is held up as a higher art. Reading can be much more affecting than watching a movie.

Reading can be much more affecting than watching a movie

Arguably. But it requires that you be able to read the text, whereas cinema is more direct. Not many people are going to be able to read Marquis de Sade who can't deal with it, while Pasolini's Salo is a rather heavier business for a child.

And the stock at a typical local library doesn't run to material which is not on open sale anyway: we're talking about the question of "what happens if teenagers read books they could have easily bought in WH Smith's instead?"

In any event, as a society we have decided to impose age limitations on films and video games, but not on books. We have a legal framework for classification with a statutory regulator, which is accountable, transparent and answerable. I would have some, but not as many, problems if libraries were using a classification framework which was transparent. This isn't transparent. If people would like to campaign to have a book classification system set up - something we have not needed in the past, and something which would be mocked to scorn post-Chatterley - then they have legal and political avenues for that campaign.

Having local government doing it on their own account? Nah. Not cool.

But 6 year olds can read. And most 9 year olds could read any thing.

There may not be age limitations imposed on books but there are guidelines available as to what age books are written for, and that's chronological age as well as reading age. You might find that a particular book is recommended for age group 8 - 11, with a reading age of 5 - 8. A book rated like that would have content that appeals to an older child, but with simple words.
This can be helpful when recommending books for a particular reader. I don't call it censorship, it's more a case of using the tools available to help a child to find a book they will like, and be able to enjoy.
Censorship does come into it at times. There have been books which would have access restricted on them but in those cases professional advice is sought. At our school that would be the School Library Service. Certainly this would not be an arbitrary decision made by someone with their own agenda.

The history of the BBFC is tortuous and at times torturous, but they are extraordinarily transparent in their criteria and their judgements

I preferred it when they honestly had the word "censors" in the title. "Classification" is a little too cuddly for my liking, and disguises what is really going on.

2) The Anarchist Cookbook. This is a guide to making explosive devices. The bomb-making recipes are apparently inaccurate and dangerous.

I have a copy - there's much more dangerous inaccurate information on the internet. Or, come to think of it, our TV screens.

1) Mein Kampf

Is tedious in the extreme. I only read it because I did history and it was recommended (not required). This was aged 14 btw. For balance I also read the Communist manifesto at the same time. All I remember was the Soviet propaganda films suddenly made sense - although not the way I suspect they were intended too.

How about bowdlerised poetry books ? The second I discovered we were reading the "lite" version of St. Agnes Eve, wild horses wouldn't stop me reading the album version.

To be honest it's not a situation that comes up that much in libraries. The usual reason why children would borrow adult books would be for school homework rather than wanting to access novels with more adult themes.

But it's slightly weird that Mumsnet posters will agonise about when they can let teenagers go into town or have sleepovers or have their partners in their bedrooms. It's as if everyone accepts that there is a balancing act between being appropriately protective and also acknowledging growing independence, in those situations

I think that books can contain material which is hard for young people to process. On the one hand it is 'good' that reading stretches and challenges people in a way that enhances their understanding. But sometimes the material can simply distress them or confuse them. So again it's about recognising that they need more freedom as readers, but that - say, a graphic book about serial killers - might not be ideal bedtime reading.

So I'd say that library staff do try and provide guidance.

If parents/carers make it clear that they are completely happy for their young teenager to access absolutely any material that the library stocks, then a note can be put on the system to that effect.

But there are ALWAYS limits. What about that book circulated among paedophiles, How to Groom Young Children? Would you be happy for your 13 year old boy to read this?

Yes, that 'How to Groom etc' book is perhaps a better example than the ones I gave.

I think there is also a real issue about the kind of stock that is made available at a time when budgets are limited.

So if Mein Kampf was available in a library that has a wide selection of political books about democracy, socialism, totalitarianism etc, that's one thing. But if a run-down community library only has two or three books about politics (which is situation that does arise) and there is no budget for buying anything else, the fact that one of them is a work by Hitler, does rather skew matters. And suppose that same library is an area where there is high community tension, and a far right wing party is campaigning for a seat on the council....

Most people working in public libraries now are not librarians. They are library assistants that often have a retail customer service background. Qualified librarians have MAs or MScs in library studies or science, or a related information course, ratified by CILIP, the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals. (There's also an undergraduate route to this but it's rarer these days.)

Library Assistants are bloody wonderful and I worship the ground they walk on because they keep the show on the road and provide valuable advice and insight that helps me do my job. Indeed, many are early career qualified librarians getting more experience. But in most public libraries their hands are tied by the need to provide a service on an absolute shoe string, not being trained as well as their HE equivalents, and being expected to do all sorts of other council related jobs as well as their core role. That's what happens when there's no political appetite to actually provide the proper library service that councils are mandated by law to have in place.

Yes, these blanket rules are wrong and stupid. And as librarians we must tread a line between censorship, which is antithetical to the core of our profession, and ensuring a safe and appropriate environment for children. But until we have a proper library service in place with appropriate structures to allow for flexibility and good judgement to support children's reading appropriately, that's not going to happen.

If you don't like it, campaign for better library services in your area.

Here's a really good run down of what librarians do in public libraries: www.voicesforthelibrary.org.uk/the-story-so-far/ethics/what-librarians-do/ - that site is run by librarians and other library staff who campaign against the amateurisation of public libraries.

I've done library assistant work and continue to do library work to cover sickness/annual leave etc.. (I have a literature background and have also done welfare rights work) There is no real training - laughable online courses - and hands on experience and lots of policy documents to sign. Very often the only person who is a trained librarian is running about 5 libraries. They can be phoned and emailed in a crisis - usually because the roof has fallen in - but that's about it. There are very experienced library assistants with a good level of expertise and have very good people skills. The city council has closed all sorts of front line offices - as have the police and Citizens Advice. The council has also got us doing benefits-related work. Again the training and support has been minimal to non-existent. We have been given self-issue machines, which are of limited help, and which have been used as an excuse to cut staffing levels still further.

Quite often the work involves dealing with people who are extremely vulnerable. I've had a terminally ill client asking me to phone Dignitas for him. I've had clients with Tourettes using the most vile language to me.

Most customers are absolutely lovely. But there are a very few who decide that because for one reason or another you can't do the thing they want you to do, that you are a 'jobsworth' and the waste of the very little money that you are paid.

Yes, that 'How to Groom etc' book is perhaps a better example than the ones I gave.

Is that stocked by your local library? Yes, I realise that "not purchasing books" is a variation on "selecting certain readers to be denied issue". But seriously: could you tell us the local lending library which is stocking a book for paedophiles discussing grooming? Have you had the problem of refusing to lend that to a 13 year old while being happy to lend it to a 23 year old?

Mein Kampf is a workable example because it's stock in lending libraries and reference libraries; it's on open shelves in my university library, just waiting for impressionable eighteen year olds, and I'd be surprised if it's not in public libraries. If you think it should be restricted in areas of community tension, why do you think that 13 year olds should be kept from it, but 19 year olds not?