Libraries and privacy: It’s Tough

Libraries and privacy is a short editorial from The Fairbanks Daily News-Miner on Alaska Senate Bill 269, to give a child’s parents or legal guardian access to that child’s library records. They say parents should know what their child is doing, who their child is hanging out with, what their child is reading. It’s that last one, though, that has drawn a bit of attention lately in the Legislature.

March 5, 2004 by Uncategorized 5

You may also like...

5 Responses

  1. Martin says:
    March 5, 2004 at 9:48 pm

    Tough situation for parents, too.
    After reading this item I recalled comments in response to other articles saying parents should monitor their children’s internet viewing instead of depending on filters. More vigilance from parents, some LISNews people say, is the preferred solution.

    At the same time some of the same people say that parents should not be allowed to know what their children are borrowing from the public library.

    How can we have it both ways? If I am responsible for my child at home am I not also responsible when he/she visits the library?

    The Alaska editorial notes that it is tough being a kid. It’s tougher being a parent.

    Reply
  2. pchuck says:
    March 5, 2004 at 11:18 pm

    So What’s Wrong With a Non-Custodial Parent?
    Non-custodial parent shouldn’t have their rights curtailed, they are still parents. Not having custody isn’t the same as having one’s parental rights terminated.

    Reply
  3. djfiander says:
    March 6, 2004 at 3:49 am

    Re:So What’s Wrong With a Non-Custodial Parent?
    Actually, that depends. In certain jurisdictions, a “non-custodial parent” is exactly that: a parent whose parental rights have been terminated. For example, while my daughter doesn’t live with me, I have joint custody with my ex: in Ontario there’s a distinction between residency and custody.

    Reply
  4. Anonymous Patron says:
    March 8, 2004 at 8:21 am

    Monitoring?
    If I were a kid, I wouldn’t bother to check out a book, I’d just read it in the library, if I knew my parents were snooping. Just like visiting friends, or sneaking computer access to gain illicit files.

    It’s a matter of trust and values, rather than a s tate of monitoring. Simple fact of the matter is that you can’t monitor everything, and the attempt to try just makes everyone in the situtation frustrated. And makes the amount of illicit things increase – if it’s a forbidden fruit, it’s more likely that you are going to want to try it during your rebellious years.

    Ask Shrub about alcohol and his daughters….

    — Ender, Duke_of_URL

    Reply
  5. pchuck says:
    March 11, 2004 at 11:20 pm

    Re:So What’s Wrong With a Non-Custodial Parent?
    Well, here in the States the law doesn’t work that way. I dare say the law in Canada doesn’t work that way either, then again I am not licensed to practice in Canada (just Oregon).

    Custody and non-custody deal with where the child lives. Whether you are a custodial parent or a non-custodial parent, you still have some rights to the child.

    It may be semantics, but a parent whose rights have been terminated doesn’t have custody of the child. In fact, they will never restore those rights. Being a non-custodial parent doesn’t mean that his or her parental rights have been terminated. In fact, custody could change in the future.

    Termination of parental rights is the nuclear bomb of parental rights. Terminating parental rights means the state has come in and taken ALL of the parent’s rights to the child away. The parent is no longer a parent in the eyes of the law. They are considered a “stranger” in the eyes of the law. This is done is only a limited number of situations when the parent is deemed “unfit”. For example, the parent has sexually abused the child, the parent has prostituted the child, the parent has physically abused the child on numerous occassions, etc. In fact, just because a parent is in jail for an unrelated crime that doesn’t mean his/her parental rights have been terminated. In addition, it is usually a child-specific termination. For example, if mom gets her parental rights terminated with child A, that doesn’t preclude her from having child B in 9 months and that doesn’t mean her rights will be terminated in regards to child B.

    N.B. I speaking generally here.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

LISNews Archives