Legislature(2003 - 2004)
02/11/2004 01:33 PM Senate CRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 269-PARENT ACCESS TO CHILD'S LIBRARY RECORDS
CHAIR BERT STEDMAN announced SB 269 to be up for consideration.
It relates to access to library records of a child by a parent
or guardian. He stated he would like to move the bill that day.
He asked for a motion to adopt the committee substitute (CS) he
had prepared.
SENATOR THOMAS WAGONER made a motion to adopt CSSB 269 \H
version as the working document. There was no objection and it
was so ordered.
CHAIR STEDMAN asked Senator Green to introduce the bill.
SENATOR LYDA GREEN, sponsor of SB 269 and representative of
Senator District G, stepped forward. She decided to introduce
the bill after receiving calls from parents that were dismayed
to learn that they couldn't get information from the public
library regarding their children's accounts. She read the
following:
An eight-year-old boy put several books from the
children's section of the library on hold. Later in
the week, the library called to inform the boy one of
his books was available. The mother, who was taking
the message, asked which book, to be able to relay the
title to her son. The library informed her that
because of privacy laws they would not reveal any
information to the mother on the books that her eight
year old was checking out.
SENATOR GREEN relayed another instance in which the mayor of
Wasilla was unable to access her child's records when she tried
to find out when a book was due to be returned. As a result, the
books became overdue at which time the library gave her the
titles of the books so that they could be returned.
That parent took her son's library card away and now checks his
books out on her card. Senator Green said, "She would like him
to have his own card but parents have the right to know what
books are being checked out so they can teach their children the
responsibility of having their own card and getting books
returned on time."
Senator Green said those two instances caused her to begin
looking at the statute and she learned that public school
libraries already have the requirement that they provide the
information to the parent.
What was omitted, she suggested, was that public libraries were
not included in the definition. SB 269 removes specific
reference to "public elementary or secondary school" libraries
and changes "minor" child to a child "under 17 years of age."
Page 2, subsection (c) amends AS 40.25.140 and says, "This
section applies to libraries operated by the state, a
municipality, or a public school, including the University of
Alaska, and by a public library nonprofit corporation."
SENATOR LINCOLN noted the zero fiscal note and asked whether
libraries might need extra staff if this were to pass.
SENATOR GREEN replied she couldn't imagine they would because
the bill doesn't require the library to do anything but respond
to parent's questions regarding their children's accounts. She
added she was very surprised to find that the statute was
interpreted as a privacy issue.
SENATOR LINCOLN asked about any feedback from the Library
Association.
SENATOR GREEN advised she received a letter of opposition from
the Alaska Library Association.
SENATOR LINCOLN asked for a summary of the opposition.
SENATOR GREEN read the following:
Briefly, my concerns about SB 269 can be outlined as
follows:
· The vast majority of public libraries in the
state have automated checkout systems. These
systems are designed to delete borrower's
information upon the return of books. Public
libraries don't keep exhaustive lists of books
borrowed by library users over time. Thus, the
only "records" a library will have will be of
books currently checked out.
· Parents and their children can easily obtain
information about books that are currently
checked out by logging onto their library's web
site. A parent simply needs to sit down with a
child at their home computer, type in the child's
library card, and to obtain a list of the books
currently checked out by a child. Or, a parent
can encourage their child to simply call their
public library, and via the pone, the child can
ascertain a list of books currently checked out.
· Parents have other quite effective means of
checking on the borrowing habits of their
children. As an alternative to Senator Green's
sponsor statement, in which she says that "tins
legislation allows parents to perform their most
important role in life, that of being a parent,"
I might suggest a more direct approach, which I
don't believe will need legislative approval -
that talking to one's child.
· In short, I feel that this is intrusive and not
necessary. Since Ben Franklin established the
first public lending library in the United
States, we have not had to resort to enacting
statutes, which give a parent the right to
circumvent an opportunity to communicate to their
children. I don't see why we need this
legislation now.
CHAIR STEDMAN asked who authored the letter.
SENATOR GREEN replied it was Michael Catoggio, who is the
president of the Alaska Library Association, but he was
expressing his personal views.
SENATOR LINCOLN made an inaudible statement.
SENATOR GREEN replied, "I believe that the majority of our
membership feel the same."
SENATOR LINCOLN disagreed with the statement, but noted
that many of the families she represents don't own a
computer. In addition, dysfunctional families are found
throughout Alaska and it's unlikely that individuals from
those family units would ever sit down and have the type of
conversation Mr. Catoggio is suggesting. She then
encouraged Senator Green to get a letter from the Alaska
Library Association representing their views.
SENATOR GREEN pointed to yet another personal opinion
letter she received. This was from an adjutant from Mat-Su
College stating that as a library employee and mother she
didn't "feel your further clarification of an existing
piece of legislation is detrimental to our freedoms." She
opined that most library associations would view the bill
as intrusive. She concluded, "But I don't actually care. I
think it's ridiculous for a child to be able to go to a
library and the parent not be able to pick up the book if
the child is not with them."
SENATOR WAGONER expressed his personal view that he was
disturbed by the letter because he couldn't really tell
whether the writer was trying to represent the association
or himself.
CHAIR STEDMAN opened the meeting to public comments.
MARC ANTRIM, Commissioner of the Department of Corrections
announced that he was appearing as a concerned parent. He
related a situation that Senator Green touched on that
speaks to an unintended consequence.
His daughter received her library card when she was six and
used the library extensively. Using the automated system,
she would reserve books from home and he would pick her
books up on his way home from work. This worked well for
years until she was about 13 when the American Library
Association (ALA) implemented a nationwide confidentiality
procedure. Because there was no specific access requirement
in statute, the ALA's interpretation is that there is no
access right. This applies not only to records but also to
picking up books, presumably because parents could infer
what their children are reading.
He stopped at the library to pick up his daughter's books
and was told, "Sorry, you'll have to have your child here
to get the books." He left without making an issue, but by
the time he got home he was most irritated and decided to
call and get further explanation. The librarian spoke with
him and then his daughter and they worked out a solution so
that his daughter's automated account had a note attached,
which allowed him to pick up her books. That worked until
she was about 15 when the policy disappeared. After a
number of heated conversations, he realized this was a
director's policy and the employee at the front counter had
no authority to change the policy.
The end result was that his daughter stopped using the
library at about age 15. Whereas there may be a debatable
concern regarding parents having access to their children's
records, the unintended consequence is that it discourages
some children from using public resources.
He closed his comments saying this is an outrageous sort of
situation. He and his wife have encouraged their daughter
to read anything and everything that she found to be of
interest. Never, he said, has he discouraged her from
reading anything she was comfortable reading. This is one
of life's small problems, but it would make a big
difference if parents were able to perform a needed service
for their children.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS recalled growing up in Oregon and
being particularly eager to read banned books such as
Catcher in the Rye, and noted that Mr. Antrim's concern
isn't associated with wanting to know what his child is
reading, rather it's with making is easier for his child to
get library books.
MR. ANTRIM agreed completely; he is concerned about the
mechanical process of getting books from the library to
their home for their daughter to read. He added that the
inference that it's not okay for parents to know what their
children read would be troubling to some, but that isn't
his point.
LYNN SHEPHARD, Alaska Library Association representative
gave a number of reasons why the association opposes the
proposed changes.
· First, the fundamental difference between school
library records and public library records should be
recognized before considering amending the law
· Second, potential harm associated with parental access
to children's library records should be considered
· Third, proposed age limits aren't well aligned with
other age limits pertaining to privacy rights of
children
School libraries are developed to support the school
curriculum, are age appropriate, and students are expected
and required to use them. Children don't expect their
school records to be private because parents receive report
cards and are able to learn about test scores. However,
school librarians have a code of ethics and they respect a
student's privacy with regard to materials that they check
out.
In contrast, membership in a public library is voluntary
and children expect to find more and different kinds of
material in the public library. The only reason that
parents are required to co-sign on their children's
accounts is to acknowledge that they assume financial
responsibility for lost of damaged materials.
The second point relates to weighing the benefits of
releasing a child's public library record to a parent or
guardian against the instances in which there might be
potential harm. She pointed out that library records could
reveal a child's personal concerns and a parent could use
that information to the child's detriment. She questioned
what might happen to the child who was seeking information
about a sensitive issue that a parent couldn't or wouldn't
address. A child might be reluctant to go to an adult, but
not to go to the privacy of the library to seek
information.
She posed a number of hypothetical situations librarians
must take into consideration and insisted that librarians
go to great lengths to cultivate trust in patrons. She
suggested that trust in public officials could be
undermined if confidentiality can't be expected. After all,
other professionals don't have to reveal to parents the
types of information they collect.
Furthermore, a child's health and safety might be
compromised if information about his or her address or
domicile is released. She noted there is nothing in the
proposed legislation that would protect a child from that.
With regard to setting the age limit at 18, she pointed to
the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) that
confers rights on the student rather than the parent of a
dependent student whenever that student is attending a post
secondary institution. It's not age based, rather it's
based on affiliation.
In 1998, the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act
(COPPA) was passed and set the age of "under 13" as the age
at which parental consent is required to collect personal
information.
Under AS 09.55.590, a 16 year old may petition for
emancipation and the rights of adulthood, exclusive of
voting and alcohol, are conferred.
CHAIR STEDMAN informed her that the CS lowered the age to
under 17.
MS. SHEPHERD said she had the previous version at which
time Mr. Baker handed her a copy of the CS.
Finally, she noted that the Library Bill of Rights is the
American Library Association's statement regarding policy
guidelines and it includes the confidentiality of library
records. She read,
The American Library Association affirms that all
libraries are forums for information and ideas,
and that the following basic policies should
guide their services.
V. A person's right to use a library should not
be denied or abridged because of origin, age,
background, or views.
The Alaska Library Association officially interprets that
to mean that, "Librarians and governing bodies should
maintain that parents and only parents have the right and
the responsibility to restrict the access of their children
and only their children to library resources. Librarians
have a professional commitment to ensure that all members
of the community they serve have free and equal access to
the entire range of library resources and this applies
equally to all users, minors as well as adults." In their
view, not protecting the confidentiality of a minor's
records would be an abridgement of the child's rights.
SENATOR WAGONER asked her to read the last two sentences of
her statement.
MS. SHEPHERD did so and added, " Parents or legal guardians
who do not want their children to have access to certain
library services, materials or facilities should so advise
their children." They believe that parental monitoring is
the right approach.
SENATOR WAGONER replied that's what the bill does. He
agreed that it is the parent's right and the bill allows
parental monitoring. He said, "I'm a little confused."
MS. SHEPHERD asserted that parents might monitor what
access their child has to library resources, but once
they've checked something out there should be no parental
access to that record.
SENATOR LINCOLN understood the concerns expressed, which is
why she asked whether the Alaska Library Association had a
position. She then asked what Ms. Shepherd's role is with
the association.
MS. SHEPHERD said she is a professional librarian, a member
of the Alaska Library Association and the governmental
relations coordinator for the association.
SENATOR LINCOLN asked if the association met and took a
position on the legislation.
MS. SHEPHERD replied the association met virtually.
SENATOR LINCOLN admitted she wasn't clear about whether the
president of the association was representing himself or
the association officially. He signed the letter as
president of the Alaska Library Association, but it was
unclear whether he was speaking for the group. Since Ms.
Shepherd says she is speaking for the association, she said
she'd register her testimony as such.
Next she asked for clarification about how parents can log
on the library website and find out which books a child has
checked out.
MS. SHEPHERD replied each person's record is password
protected so a parent wouldn't have access unless a child
revealed his or her password.
SENATOR LINCOLN acknowledged that the direct approach of
talking with one's child is best, but she doubted that a
child faced with abuse or neglect would try to talk to the
parent.
As a parent, she is concerned that parents are unable to
pick up library books for their children. Although her
children are adults, she wanted to be involved in their
activities when they were young. She knew what they were
reading, but at that time she had access to that
information. If a parent is involved, she suggested,
they'll know.
MS. SHEPHERD agreed that involved parents probably would
know, but the library wants to protect the child if a
parent isn't involved and the family situation is
problematic. Stories abound about librarians forming
relationships with children in libraries because they are
alone and seeking refuge.
SENATOR WAGONER commented that coaches are the greatest
counselors in the world and librarians may be the next
best. He admitted that he favors the parent's right to
know, but made the point that it's not necessary to check a
book out in order to get information. They can read the
book and then put the book back on the shelf.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS asked about her mention of "under 13"
as the age that parental consent is required to collect
personal information. When he was raising his children, he
encouraged them to read anything they might select after
they reached a certain age and level of maturity.
MS. SHEPHERD said the Children's Online Privacy Protection
Act is a federal law that was passed in 1998. It relates to
collecting personal information online and was particularly
directed at e-commerce because problems associated with
individuals making personal contact with children over the
Internet had arisen. A company or individual is liable for
questioning online anyone that is under 13 without the
parent's consent. It doesn't matter how innocent the
question may appear.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS asked if she would recommend an age
other that 17 for this bill.
MS. SHEPHERD said that would be a compromise. Speaking for
herself, she compared meetings between a child and a
councilor to a child's dealings with a librarian saying
that if children aren't able to trust librarians it would
impact the way libraries provide their service.
SENATOR WAGONER said he had difficulty correlating
confidentiality regarding library books to his child
visiting a councilor.
MS. SHEPHERD replied parents might make a child feel guilty
about their book selection. She argued the situations are
analogous if you consider that the child might be seeking
personal guidance.
SENATOR LINCOLN advised that her questions were more
numerous because Ms. Shepherd was representing a group, not
because she was trying to put her on the spot. She referred
to a previous statement that a child doesn't have to check
a book out to garner information on a sensitive topic and
asked how many children might actually check out that type
of book rather than reading it while they were in the
library.
MS. SHEPHERD replied she was interested in the child's
privacy rights in the instances in which a child actually
would take that step.
CAROL HEADMAN testified as a parent to express support for
the opinions of the library association and the existing
legislation. With regard to the mechanical difficulty
associated with picking up your child's library books, she
pointed out that there is frequently the option of posting
a permission slip on the child's account.
SIDE B
2:20 pm
SENATOR WAGONER noted that the bill sponsor didn't delve
into the issue of a child with a problem who was seeking
information. Her focus was to make it possible for parents
to pick up and check on their child's books. He remarked
the issue could easily be expanded to ridiculous lengths.
MS. HEADMAN agreed and said that's the potential difficulty
with expanding the current law beyond the public school.
She suggested the simple solution is to find a way around
the mechanical difficulty addressed by the first testifier
and to leave the age and access issue unchanged.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS asked whether she was a librarian.
MS. HEADMAN replied she is a librarian.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS commented that the bill raises
important questions.
SENATOR WAGONER expanded on that point to say that Senator
Green gave examples about children that were under 10 years
old. He asked the Chair if he would consider holding the
bill to have a further discussion with the sponsor
regarding the age requirement. He also stated, for the
record, that he would be consulting his wife on the
subject.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS chimed in to say he was uncomfortable
changing the age at this point, but he would request that
the bill sponsor look at the issue to look for a
compromise.
JACQUELINE TUPOU, staff to Senator Green, replied the CS
before the committee has an age compromise. There has been
an extensive discussion related to the age issue. Seventeen
states have specifically spelled out this right and
fourteen of those have established 17 and under as the age
limit. Most states simply refer to a minor. After a
thorough dialog, Senator Green decided to compromise on 17
and under.
SENATOR LINCOLN concurred with her colleagues regarding
holding the bill. She then noted that the version she was
reviewing listed the age as 16.
MS. TUPOU agreed and said that's why they feel they have
already made a compromise.
CHAIR STEDMAN announced he would hold the bill for further
analysis.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|