Recently Asked Questions

My library knows that service animals provide vital assistance to patrons with disabilities, and that they must be allowed on library premises without pre-approval.

We also know that when a service animal is brought into the library by a visitor, we can only ask if the animal is needed for a disability, and what work or task it has been trained to provide.

We also know that some disabilities are not easily observed, and not every person using a service animal will be perceived as having a “real” disability.

Our library is small and we prohibit all animals—other than service animals—for a combination of reasons (including cleanliness, allergies, and fear).

Our question is this: we have a patron who we think is faking it. The patron sometimes comes in with a dog, and based on a variety of factors, it seems the patron is bringing in the dog not to accommodate a disability but to taunt staff members and dare them to confront this patron. What can we do?

A member of the public called me regarding the trend to switch to LED lighting in many libraries, especially rural libraries applying for NYS Public Library Construction Funding. She told me that she suffers from Photosensitive Epilepsy, and LED lights (among other light sources) cause her to have seizures, which result in injuries. She said this disease has limited access to much of what we all take for granted.

The local library, across the street, was the only place she could go because of the older lighting. The library is about to undergo renovation, and LED lighting may be part of the project because of its cost-savings and environmental impact.

She would like the library board to reconsider and asked why the library has not conducted a “reduction of access survey” because public libraries need to maintain or improve access. Are there reasonable accommodations combined to be fiscally responsible?

Thanks.

Sometimes, people nap in the library, particularly people who we believe might not have stable or sufficient housing. We feel that a library should not exclude people who need a secure place to rest, so long as there is no interference with library operations, but are there any legal considerations to this issue?

My institution subscribes to the "Kurzweil Reading Program", a "Text-to-Speech" product for those with reading impairments (dyslexia, English language learners, blind/vision impaired, etc.)

Section 121 indicates these users are "eligible persons" for "fair use", but others, without such disabilities could use the program (like an audiobook in the car!).

We'd be putting TEXTBOOKS up in the program; that fair use violation is what I'm worried about....

Thanks!

We had a patron come in this past week who said that he couldn't see well and also couldn't type or use a mouse, but he needed to certify Unemployment Insurance. He asked the staff member to login with his username and password and do this for him, and the staff member was, understandably, uncomfortable doing it.

I feel like patrons who divulge their personal data to us are doing it of their own accord and our privacy responsibility is to not share that information with others without the consent of the patron.

In this particular case, the patron was offering his information and consenting for us to enter it for him. As such, I don't think this violates any privacy agreement we have made as employees of the library.

The part that I worry about is, could this come back on an employee if they are doing a legal filing for a patron and the filing may be fraudulent? I am optimistic by nature and like to think people have good intentions, but the reality is, I know this happens. I wouldn't want to put an employee in a sticky legal position if they filed what might turn out to be a fraudulent claim for someone.

Do you know of similar situations in other libraries and what, if any, legal ramifications there might be for employees who could be caught in the middle of something like this?