There are various documents promulgated by the American Library Association to guide professionals in making considerations as a LIS professional. I have been familiarized with three documents, in particular, and their various interpretations. The first one is the Library Bill of Rights, which affirms the principle “that all libraries are forums for information and ideas” and sets out six principles of intellectual freedom, including the principle that “library resources are provided for the interest, information, and enlightenment of all people of the community the library serves” (American Library Association, n.p.). The second document is the Freedom to Read Statement, which elucidates the various rationales for upholding the principles of intellectual freedom when faced with challenges. The third document is the Code of Ethics of the American Library Association, which discusses the ethics of information science that all involved in the field should uphold. I am submitting a mock reference interview I completed for INFO 210 in which a patron comes to the reference desk with concerns that a family member may be experiencing mental health issues. The interview comes with annotations showing how the a reference interview was conducted in conformity with the Reference User Services Association (RUSA) guidelines for an ideal reference interview. The interview is conducted with the dialogue (and physical actions of the reference librarian in brackets) corresponding to RUSA annotations containing guidelines next to each dialogue. Librarians will often be confronted by these issues in their efforts to provide information to patrons who are often scared or embarrassed about receiving information about very personal issues they are going through. The interview shows how a reference librarian can show compassionate, unbiased, courteous service when a patron comes to her asking for information relating to a very personal issue. I am also submitting an assignment I completed for INFO 234, a class which specifically dealt with intellectual freedom issues, as the second piece of evidence of my mastery of this competency. This assignment was a privacy assignment where I was required to study the specific laws of a state regarding library patron records. I elected to do the state of Washington and the legal statute generally covering public records in that state for the first part of the assignment. For the second part, I chose a specific public library in the suburban Seattle region to observe how (or how not) the library policy contained specific protections of patron records, and whether the policy document was in line with state law, and how state law generally affected the wording of the policy. I am incorporating an assignment on the Library Bill of Rights I completed for INFO 234 as the third piece of evidence of my mastery of this competency. In the process of completing this assignment, I realized it is important to distinguish between my personal beliefs regarding intellectual freedom, and the professional values of the Library Bill of Rights I am supposed to uphold as a part of my professional duties. And that is extremely difficult to do sometimes, especially when you have strong personal views about an issue. It is important to not let your personal emotions become involved, but to use your knowledge of applicable principles and policies guide your handling of issues.

I took particular interest in the Code of Ethics for its applicability to specific situations, I as a librarian, will face in my career. As I read through the Code of Ethics (2008) a few of the statements stuck me as essential to the practice of professional librarianship. The first statement of the Code of Ethics states that librarians, regardless of professional background or field of librarianship, should “provide the highest level of service to all library users through . . . accurate, unbiased, and courteous responses to all requests” (n.p.) This is particularly important for librarians to maintain collections of material which are unbiased and well-researched, since much information available on the internet and other electronic media is not often verified. Particularly in the health informatics field, the difference between well-researched information and anecdotal information from popular health websites is a life-or-death issue.

The statement of the Code of Ethics states that librarians 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” (n.p.) Particularly in the age of the Patriot Act and similar anti-terrorism laws, certain patron information, including, but not limited to, a list of books requested by a patron, may be requested by government officials and law enforcement as part of an effort to discover whether a person’s library checkouts might yield certain patterns indicative of an intent to commit a terrorist act or prepare materials for terrorist activities (or other activities considered in violation of criminal statutes, for that matter). While many public libraries have policies regarding the sharing of private information, and state law may contain protections of library materials specifically, many librarians are not aware of the laws surrounding these privacy issues, and this may lead to civil liability against librarians (and the public libraries they are a part of) who are not aware of these laws and policies, and may not be abiding by them. Therefore, it is imperative that librarians familiarize themselves with applicable state statutes and local library policies to uphold their commitment to patron privacy and following the law. The ninth statement of the code of ethics is very important to the protection of intellectual freedom, when it states that librarians should “distinguish between our personal convictions and professional duties and do not allow our personal beliefs to interfere with fair representation of the aims of our institutions or the provision of access to their information resources” (American Library Association, 2008, n.p.)

The Library Bill of Rights, which discusses materials specifically, rather than the role of librarians in upholding policy over conviction, states that “[m]aterials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval” (American Library Association, 1996, n.p.). All librarians, in agreeing to take a professional library position, immediately become subject to the policies of their institution, and despite personal convictions, biases, or preconceptions, have a responsibility to uphold the policies without reference to their own “personal convictions.”

References

• American Library Association. (2008, January 22). Code of Ethics of the American Library Association. In Intellectual Freedom Manual. Retrieved August 23, 2015 from .http://www.ala.org/advocacy/proethics/codeofethics/codeethics

• American Library Association. (2004, June 30). Freedom to Read Statement. Retrieved August 23, 2015, from http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/statementspols/freedomreadstatement

• American Library Association. (1996, January 23). Library Bill of Rights. Retrieved August 23, 2015, from http://www.ala.org/advocacy/sites/ala.org.advocacy/files/content/intfreedom/librarybill/lbor.pdf