Librarian-I Have Never Been Hired To Work-In A Library-Not Anywhere in The Work-And Have Great Difficulty Enterning Most US Libraries As A Homeless Student-Illegal

12-16-2016

     I  wrote this brief statement, as an academic exercise, in my first Master's Degree program: Library and Information Science-through: Florida State University: 2008-2010 Perfect CGPA: 4.0, as well as completed voluntary thesis with pass grade, and no defense was required, to apply for my graduation. I, almost 7 years later, sill have never been given the opportunity, to work in a US library-although, I am studying in them-as often as they will admit me. I have applied, to several libraries unsuccessfully, and while, the Main Library-the Alachua County Library in Gainesville, FL, was happy to hire both of my daughters, for high school stipend pay internships.

       The downtown public library, in Gainesville, FL-however, refused to even offer me an interview, after my completed, and satisfactory application-had been submitted. I was a volunteer, at the Main Library-in Gainesville, FL, at the time, that I submitted, my application for hire-as a page. The page position, required, only an 8th grade education, and I, had already earned my Master's Degree-required to be hired-as an official; "Librarian." Due to the fact, that I have extensive experience, in the field of research, undergraduate/graduate research, as well as, medical school, and law school research-although I was refused an interview, with the downtown public library-in Gainesville, FL-a woman, who had been hired, to work with patrons self-filing legal documents, wanted me, to teach her how to do her job-while she, collected the pay-check. I was only a volunteer.

        The woman at the library-requested, that I volunteer, at the public library-in Gainesville, FL, on a regular basis, so that she could meet with me, more than once a week, so that I could train her, in online legal research. The woman,  had no idea, how to even figure out, what legal category-any given case, based on the complaint, had to be filed under.  The woman, had been hired, specifically for the job, and working with patrons, who wanted to self-file legal documents, with the public libraries direction/guidance.

          The woman expected me, to tutor her through-the two main, US online, legal case and related information, and document data bases: Lexis Nexis, and West Law. I thought the woman-had completely lost her mind. The woman, was a little older than me, however, she was not really senile, she was just too mean, and too dumb to understand, that she was asking me to help her more, than any reasonable person, with half a brain cell-would ever do. I never showed up, to volunteer again, at the reference desk-or, in any other section, of the downtown public library, in Gainesville, FL.

6-17-2010

Although: I am An: American Library Association-Accredited , Qualified, Well-Prepared and Educated Librarian-I have Never Held Employment-In Any Library.

     I have never worked in a library before.  Therefore, I am unfamiliar with how policy issues are decided, and how policy decisions are made in relation to books of a sexual nature.  I know a little about how case law interpretation works in the legal system though.  I tend go with the “original intent” approach, not to case law, but to understanding how to apply the meaning of a word.  The meaning of a word, I believe, should be applied as intended by the original historical context in which it originated. “Original intent” has a similar meaning: a law should be interpreted based on what was intended by the creator.  I think that the application of precedents in the legal system is very similar to the interpretation of vocabulary in general.  They are both heavily based on how strictly or loosely the meaning of the law/word is interpreted. 

   Laws, like words in general, can be interpreted as having various subtle meanings dependent upon the original context in which the law/word was, which reflects the meaning intended by the creator. Therefore, the act of applying “orginalism” to case law is very similar to applying the strict meaning of a word, as defined by a well established and trusted encyclopedia or dictionary.  However, Wikipedia is generally not a good choice because of its wiki nature—it is too unreliable. 

     When “originalism” is used in the interpretation of a law, the accepted understanding of the law, established by the case and therefore the precedent set, is understood within the context of the time in which the case was written and, therefore, is based on what was intended by the creator of the law.  “Originalism” pertains, to how a U.S. Supreme Court Justices interpret the laws purported by the U.S. Constitution.  I think that, in general, one may want to use the 1st or second definition of a word offered.  That meaning, I believe, generally comes very close to representing the original meaning of how the word was intended be understood, based the historical period (context) in which it was defined.

       In my opinion, society has evolved, but meanings, particularly those of words, have changed very little.  Therefore, I think that strict interpretation of the meaning of a word is the correct way to decide what the accepted meaning of "explicit" or "pornography" really is.  Generally the accepted meaning of a word in society pretty accurately reflects the accepted meaning of that word by the legal system.  This congruence of meaning is important and can have important consequences. 

      Ultimately, regardless of what ALA's guidelines say about ethical issues related to the amount of exposure to "explicit" reading materials high school students should be allowed to be exposed to, ALA does not make the final decision.  The choice is ethical and deals with a rather controversial issue, which is viewed by many as a legal matter, and therefore more appropriately addressed and decided by the court system.  Many children have parents who are quite conservative and, therefore, would feel uncomfortable with a book with any sexual connotations at all.

         In addition to considering what ALA has to say on the issue, a legal perspective, I believe, should also be applied.   I think, therefore, it is important to consider the pertinent legal issues which may apply, when deciding how to develop policies which support the exposure of high school students to books, which contain subject matter of a sexual nature.    The book choice could be challenged by a parent or even a student because of its sexual nature.  A case could very easily be brought to court on the issue.  

      Backing up the way the definition has been interpreted, when the policy was written, is very important in the perception of how valid the definition chosen for the word is, and therefore, how valid the policy created supports the exposure of high school students to reading materials of a sexual nature.  Use of a strict interpretation of the word’s definition demonstrates and supports the logic of the argument made in favor of exposing a high school student to a book of a sexual nature.  When an argument can be presented in a court room as being logical and based on some established and accepted interpretation, the high school media will have a much better chance of defending the case against them.