HB273

Hello members of the House Judiciary Committee, I am writing in strong opposition to HB 273, AN ACT relative to a parent's access to their minor child's library records. As a parent and a voracious reader from a young age, I strongly believe that students in New Hampshire public schools should be able to freely access all materials approved by a school library without interference. Even as a child I enjoyed the freedom from my parents to develop independent thinking skills and learn about a broad range of experiences. My exploration of the world through books was never censored, and it is horrifying to think that our current youth might not be able to enjoy the same freedoms I did 30 years ago. This bill sends a negative message against freedom of learning, thought, and exploring ideas. It discourages the inquisitive spirit of reading and is out of line with New Hampshire's "Live Free or Die" spirit. It’s also a waste of school librarians’ time and resources. If they are forced to maintain burdensome records for parents to review over the entire course of a student's time in school and afterward, they will not be able to focus on expanding student learning. Please vote ITL on this bill.

This is an unneeded intrusion.

Public libraries are based on the First Amendment's right to free expression. This does not just mean the right to speak on any subject free from sponsorship by the government. The U.S. Constitution implicitly grants the freedom to read what people choose and protects their right to read in privacy. My library explains the privacy right of minor children and all patrons when their child gets a library card, and parents can and do use their own email address to attach to their child's account, giving them access.

This bill puts minors at risk who do have supportive parents or in fact have abusive parents. Parents who have strong relationships with their minor children have the privilege to be involved in their reading choices by fostering trust, therefore making this ruling unnecessary in this scenario. The ruling would, however, be harmful to a minor needing access to information due to any number of nefarious actions by parents. Library card applications already require a parental signature for children 13 and under. This bill assumably expands the age range to include pre-teens and teens under the age of 18. This makes no sense to me as it means that teenagers who are entrusted to drive a vehicle at highway speeds, be paid a taxable wage for working, and have access to smart phones and the internet will nonetheless be forced to have their library use scrutinized by a parent. These freedoms and responsibilities would allow a teen to drive to a book store, and make purchases of the same books available at a library without parental oversight. I hope you can see why I find this absurd. Please do the right thing in our "Live Free or Die" state of NH and veto this bill.

Every human being, including minors have a right to privacy. A library is a place for learning, curiosity building, and a greater exposure to the world and different cultures, ways of thinking, and validation of ones life experience. A bill such as this projects a parent's way of thinking onto a child. Much of what this bill mandates can easily be addressed through parenting and strong communication between a parent and child, with the intent to maintain an open mind to differing opinions, life experiences and interests.

This should be a between a parent and their child - not a legal issue for the government to decide.

Why would we do this? This is a safe place where children can read and understand their feelings.

I oppose HB273. All children should have the freedom to access information and to read. Literacy is a human right. Adults should remove barriers for children to information and literacy instead of erecting them.

Protecting user privacy and confidentiality has long been an integral part of the mission of libraries. Children deserve the right to research topics with the parent knowing especially if it is for their own safety. This bill provides no structure or guidance for confirming a parent or legal guardian. How are library staff members and administrators supposed to know if that parent has been stripped of their parental rights in a court of law? Libraries and librarians do not serve in loco parentis. The parents are more than welcome to come to the library with their children and help them select books and materials. It is also up to the local library board of trustees to set the policies and procedures for their library. If parents have a concern about their library, they can present those concerns to the trustees who have regular public meetings.

KIDS HAVE THE RIGHT TO READ! If you want to know what your kid is reading so bad, how about you build a strong relationship with them so that they're not AFRAID to tell you? Are you so awful a parent they feel they have to censor themselves? Again: I am so tired of this 'parental rights' nonsense. Parental rights = my child is an object with no personhood. Parental rights = I'm mad my underqualified ignorant self doesn't have full control over what my children learn. It puts children in danger. "PARENTAL RIGHTS" MORE LIKE RIGHT TO MAKE MY CHILD AFRAID AND SUICIDAL!

I oppose this bill for many reasons. The bill doesn't specify how (or a procedure for) librarians would determine if the person requesting a child’s library records is the legal parent or guardian. Even if a parent presents a birth certificate for a child, that does not reflect any recent court rulings about custody and access. Releasing children’s library records – including home address – to the wrong adult could create serious safety and liability issues. Libraries would have no way of accessing this information, so how can they responsibly make a decision on who is safe to release it to? What if a parent comes in to get their child's history, including home address and they have recently been barred from seeing that child for safety issues? The liability is endless here. Parents and caregivers are in control of their children and should exercise that right by accompanying their children to the library and helping them pick out materials that they feel are appropriate for their family. Matter of fact, they already have this right! This bill is a solution in search of a problem. Parents already have the option of linking their family cards. Families often send children in to pick up items for family members. How would librarians be expected to police what folks check out and why? This bill is simply too vague about what it is asking to do and does not consider the implications for safety and liability issues outlined above.

A child should have the right to research a subject (re: abuse, alcoholism, etc) without the parent knowing, especially if the parent is involved, for their own safety.

Books are a basis for self-growth, for escape. They can cover topics such as self-help, gender identity, sexuality, and career choices. By opening up library records to one's family, books are censored. This strips a child of both the joys of reading and self- discovery. Both are essential skills to becoming a successful adult.

Hello, my name is Ryan O'Hora and I oppose this bill. HB 273 aims to give parents access to their minor child's library records but leaves no room for guidance on how staff, directors, managers, etc will provide this information. A staple of public libraries is privacy, confidentiality, and a place to be. Altering our current law will start an erosion of values and overall mission our libraries pride themselves on. There are plenty of alternatives to altering a privacy and confidentiality law (as we know how important our privacy and confidentiality is so important to our modern society). Some alternatives include, parents coming to the library to check out material with their children, parents talking with children about what they are reading at the library, parents reading to their children, family library cards that are in the parent's name and permissions granted to children to use the singlular card. In the grand scheme, I have yet to have problems with families and children privacy/confidentiality, but I could imagine this change to the law will have drastic effects on librarians and broken families that come to use the library. This proposed bill offers now guidance on how to work with parents, grandparents, and children that have sole custody, or other legal parameters that librarians do not need to manager or should. There is no feature that libraries have nor should have to mark a child's account with "legal guardian A has these rights, and parent B stipped of these rights". From a macroscopic level, mostly all New England states have the same current law as New Hampshire.

Position recorded without written comment.