I've never considered this before, but I saw an article that the homeless in Massachusetts are suing a library because they only allow those living in shelters to check out two items at a time, while others with a permanent address are allowed to check out up to fifty.

Article

I can understand this policy. The library's reasoning is that a number of things are never returned to the library, and they have no way of tracking them down because there is no permanent address. This makes perfect sense to me. I mean, it's not like they aren't allowed to check out any items. And don't you have limited space in a shelter, so where would you put a large number of books?

I feel sorry for the homeless because they feel they are being mistreated, but really, don't you think the library has a valid point?

By Tink on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 06:58 pm:

I agree with you, Adena. My understanding is that theft runs rampant in most shelters and the transient lifestyle of some homeless people make them a risk for lending. While I understand that the homeless are upset about this, I think the library is being reasonable about their lending policy.

By Colette on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 07:27 pm:

Makes perfect sense to me too.

By Dawnk777 on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 09:09 pm:

So, make more trips to the library. I end up not always getting time to read, so I don't usually check out more than 2 things, at a time, anyway.

By Reds9298 on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 10:10 pm:

It also makes sense to me.

By Emily7 on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 11:36 pm:

It is sad, but it does make sense.

By Hol on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 - 11:54 pm:

I understand this also. How could you possibly locate and retrieve materials that were overdue? WE live in a very small town, and our library is funded by an endowment. Our librarian says that it is hard enough to get people to bring in overdue items as it is, and they have an address. And everyone in town knows everyone else. I have always felt that they should raise the overdue fees. We still only charge ten cents per day on books and tapes. Movies, however, are a dollar a day. We don't seem to have much trouble getting THEM back. I understand now that even overdue library materials can impact negatively on your credit rating, too.

I am glad to hear that homeless people are using the libraries, and the libraries are open to them as well as to any other member of the public. However, the "track record" of returning them is probably poor due to a variety of issues including: moving around a lot, thus making it hard to keep track of one's belongings; theft, substance abuse and mental illness.

I also can't say that I'd be happy to bring something into my home that had been lying around a shelter or under a bridge somewhere. I don't mean that to sound harsh or callous, but it is impossible to be clean if you live on the street, though you never know WHERE any library item has been.

As has been stated, they are not barred from borrowing all together. It sounds like a complaint by someone with WAY too much time on their hands, or another lame-brained case drummed up by the ACLU.

By Ginny~moderator on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 07:54 am:

My library system (Abington Township, PA) and the Philadelphia system require proof of address (a utility bill or other piece of "official mail" or a driver's license, voter's card, etc.) before issuing a library card, so truly homeless people can't get a library card.

However, the complainant is not without a fixed address. He lives in a city shelter and at least at present has a fixed address. So maybe there does need to be some rethinking of the policy. A lot of children living in shelters are in school, and need to get books for their schoolwork - only 2 items at a time could be a significant handicap. And only 2 at a time means they have to make a lot of trips to the library, and that means either paying for transportation or doing a lot of walking. I think there is more to this than the article gives us.

Allowing "permanent address" people to take out 50 items at a time - I never heard of that. Libraries I have used have a limit of 10 or 12 items, and sometimes have summer programs allowing up to 20 at a time - but 50 sounds a bit excessive.

By Karen~admin on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 09:22 am:

I have to agree with that logic as well.

Ginny, my local library allows you to check out a large number of books at a time - not sure if it's unlimited or what, but I've checked out 15 or so books at a time in the past.

By Dawnk777 on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 10:03 am:

I just checked my library's website and can't find a limit on books checked out at one time. I DO know, though, that you can't check out more than 5 books on one topic, though.

I don't think I'd be able to carry 50 books out of the library, by myself!

By Colette on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 10:15 am:

My library has no limits on books, 5 at a time for dvds, and no late fees.