Libraries as Safety Nets for Special Needs Groups

On August 17, 2007, the Gilroy Dispatch ran a story titled "May I Borrow a Sitter?" In it, reporter Christopher Quirk informed readers of a disturbing trend in libraries nationwide-they are being used in place of daycare, particularly in areas like Gilroy, California, where the cost of living and childcare are expensive. In 2005, the Las Vegas Review-Journal printed a story about the hundreds of homeless who visit libraries in the Las Vegas area each day. In 2007, Chip Ward, former assistant director of the Salt Lake City Public Library System, wrote "America Gone Wrong: A Slashed Safety Net Turns Libraries into Homeless Shelters," in which he details the issues causing the homeless to flock to libraries and the impact the current (lack of) system has on community resources. Libraries are also increasingly used as a "safe" place to leave elderly family members who are unable to spend the day at home by themselves. The use of libraries for shelter and safety is not a new challenge, and it is not likely to solve itself. The question, then, is what, if anything, should libraries do to handle their role as babysitter and social worker?

For some, the answer amounts to nothing. Libraries are not intended to be daycares or homeless shelters, and so librarians should focus on their primary duties. They should serve all patrons, but if a patron is disruptive, that patron should be asked to leave. If necessary, the police should be called. In this scenario, if a young child is capable of quietly reading in the children's section all day, then so be it. If the homeless want to spend their days browsing the stacks, then they are as welcome as any other patron. This tact, however, does not work in the real world (or at least anywhere where there are actually unattended children and homeless who also suffer from mental illness).

One problem with this "solution" is that it only works if nothing out of the ordinary happens. And eventually, something always happens-patrons are human, and things go wrong. Whom does a librarian contact if there is a medical emergency with one of the elderly? Does the librarian have the authority (or time) to discipline a child left unattended? What happens if a schizophrenic homeless person is threatening other patrons? While the police and other emergency responders can help in some cases, many of these questions (and more) go unanswered. Libraries are forced either to ignore the issue, to hope it never comes up, or to create policies to handle these scenarios. Even in cases where authorities help, that only helps the immediate problem-the disruptive behavior or the medical emergency. It does not actually solve the problem, because it does nothing to prevent unattended children or elderly from being left in the library, and it does not ensure that the homeless get the help that they need. The "nothing" solution yields nothing results.

Another approach has been to move the problem outside of libraries. Since libraries are not intended to be daycares or homeless shelters, then the problem can be eliminated by imposing policies designed to prevent abuse of the library facilities. A staff editorial in the Gilroy Dispatch responded to Quirk's story by calling for library officials to create a policy such as this: "Children 12 and younger and adults who require caregivers must be supervised at the library. If the parent or responsible adult can't be reached, Protective Services should be called immediately." This places the responsibility for these children or elderly back on their parents or caregivers, and gives librarians a course of action when they are left. The Houston City Council passed new ordinances designed to discourage the homeless from using public libraries as shelters: "The new ordinance prohibits sleeping on tables, eating, using restrooms for bathing and 'offensive bodily hygiene that constitutes a nuisance to others.'" Other cities have passed similar measures, some giving out coupons with information on where the patron can shower or wash clothing.

I see two problems with these policies. First, librarians are still pulled from their regular duties to call parents and authorities and to enforce regulations. When staff members are busy, either policies will not be enforced or service to patrons will suffer. K.C. Howard, in his article about Las Vegas libraries, notes that, "despite a no-sleeping policy in the library district's code of conduct, there are usually several open-mouthed patrons dreaming away." In most cases, library staff does not have time both to keep up with their regular duties and to patrol patrons. In addition, librarians are not trained as social workers and may not feel comfortable waking up homeless patrons or approaching someone about body odor. If a patron is not disruptive, librarians may look the other way. Second, these policies also do nothing to address the underlying causes of the problems-they merely push the problems out onto the streets.

Some libraries have taken on the problems as their own. The Lunenburg Public Library in Massachusetts offers free childcare to patrons as they browse. Pansy Hundley, librarian at the Charles J. Rike Memorial Library in Farmersville, Texas, encourages patrons to take advantage of her summer story time: "Same place, same time, same free baby-sitting service: Tuesday afternoons, at the library, from 3:00 to 4:00 PM." Hundley goes on to encourage parents to enjoy an hour of child-free grocery shopping, antique browsing, or even reading. While these libraries are not offering true day-care, they do recognize the need for limited child-care for their patrons, and are doing what they can to meet that need. The Seattle Central Library employs a team of ten security guards who patrol the new library, checking in with homeless patrons and enforcing regulations in as kind a way as possible. While the guards are also not social workers, they are able to focus their energy on keeping the library a safe place for all patrons, including those who are homeless. These services undoubtedly take a bite out of the library's budget, and many would argue they stray from the library's true purpose, but they represent the genuine efforts of libraries to solve a problem facing them rather than look the other way.

While it is not the library's job to solve these issues, we are all human beings and citizens, and therefore we do have some obligation to seek a solution that will actually impact the underlying issues. And according to Ward, it makes financial sense to do so. He writes, a typical transient can cost taxpayers between $20,000 and $150,000 a year. You could not design a more expensive, wasteful, or ineffective way to provide healthcare to individuals who live on the street than by having librarians like me dispense it through paramedics and emergency rooms. For one thing, fragmented, episodic care consistently fails, no matter how many times delivered. It is not only immoral to ignore people who are suffering illness in our midst, it's downright stupid public policy. We do not spend too little on the problems of the mentally disabled homeless, as is often assumed; instead we spend extravagantly but foolishly.

Clearly, the solution to this issue will be found outside libraries, in social reform and public policy. What, then, are libraries to do in the meantime?

I suggest they do what most have been doing-they serve all patrons, regardless of their status in the community. They safeguard their patrons by removing those who are dangerous or disruptive, and they safeguard themselves from lawsuits by ensuring that children are supervised (or that authorities are notified of their presence). They invite their patrons and their communities to brainstorm solutions to these issues, and they campaign for funding to provide adequate (and properly trained) staff to meet the needs of their communities. They build relationships with social work agencies, and they educate. They educate themselves about what other libraries are doing that is working. They educate those in need about how to get help, and they educate those in a position to help about what could be done. In short, they do what they've always done, but they demand more resources so they can do it better.