We are committed to the protection of privacy and confidentiality for the academic community we serve.
It is well recognized that it is a duty of a librarian to maintain confidences with their patrons. According to Garoogian (1991), “the librarian is ethically and legally bound to make every effort to protect the individual’s right to privacy no matter how convincing the argument for the release of such information appears in the light of the greater good” (p.219). In an academic law library, the librarian would not want to share information about circulation records or reference questions with anyone other than the person whose records or questions belong. As stated by the American Library Association’s (ALA) Code of Ethics (2008), the librarian should “protect each library user's right to privacy and confidentiality with respect to information sought or received and resources consulted, borrowed, acquired or transmitted.” It is understood that patrons are less likely to ask questions or check out materials if they know what they are doing is being shared with others (Fallis, 2009).
Justification for this principle can be argued from a consequentialist perspective, which is to choose the action that is expected to achieve the greatest overall happiness for those affected (Fallis, 2009). In the case of privacy rights, a violation of a patron’s privacy would cause harm or a negative consequence to the patron. Often, with consequentialism, the action chosen is the one that maximizes happiness for all involved, which could include others besides the patron. However, according to Garoogian (1991), “the individual’s right to privacy should take precedence over the rights of society” (219). Therefore, an academic law librarian should think twice about sharing information with others that could violate the patron’s right to privacy.
Also, justification could be argued from a natural rights perspective. The patron has a natural right to privacy based on being human (United Nations, 1948). This right to privacy imposes a duty on the librarian to protect the privacy of the patron (Fallis, 2009). The right to privacy is an example of a welfare right because it requires that the librarian to take positive steps to satisfy the patron’s right to privacy (Fallis, 2009).
This principle could come into conflict with Principle 2. If a librarian fails to protect the privacy of a patron, they could also fail to protect the patron’s right to intellectual freedom, and vice versa. If a patron does not feel comfortable with the services that the library provides (e.g., checking out books, placing holds) because they feel their privacy or intellectual freedom is being violated, then the librarian is not practicing both of these principles. Based on the welfare rights of their patrons, the librarian is obligated to protect the privacy and intellectual freedom rights of their patrons (Fallis, 2009).
A good example of a concrete application of this principle could occur when a student asks about a book that is checked out, wondering when it will be due back and who checked it out so they can go find that person. The academic law librarian would not share this information with the patron who was asking because it would violate the privacy of the patron who had the book checked out. If the student who had checked out the book knew their privacy could be violated in this way, they would have a chilling effect (Fallis, 2009). This effect would cause them to possibly not check out books in the future for fear that others could find out what they were checking out, and harass them to return the book. Therefore, the academic law librarian could apply this principle and maintain the privacy and confidentiality of the student who has the book checked out.