Accommodations

I saw a leashed dog in the library and saw no obvious identifiers that it was a service animal. I approached the patron and told him that pets were not allowed in the library. He told me that if I looked down, I could see it was a service animal. In fact, I could not. He then turned the animal around and pointed at the collar, which had "service animal" embroidered in it.

First, I want to be very clear that service animals (dogs and miniature horses) do not have to wear any specific collar or badge. It is by their training and the service they provide (often not easy to discern to a casual observer) that they are identified.  For that reason, it can be easy to mistake a service animal for a pet, so caution is always warranted.

My library knows that service animals provide vital assistance to patrons with disabilities, and that they must be allowed on library premises without pre-approval.

We also know that when a service animal is brought into the library by a visitor, we can only ask if the animal is needed for a disability, and what work or task it has been trained to provide.

First: Because of the restrictions you cite, continue to not take the bait! If this person is indeed taunting library workers and daring them to deny access, continue to address the situation with tactical restraint.[1]

A member of the public called me regarding the trend to switch to LED lighting in many libraries, especially rural libraries applying for NYS Public Library Construction Funding. She told me that she suffers from Photosensitive Epilepsy, and LED lights (among other light sources) cause her to have seizures, which result in injuries.

This question is at the tip of a large and fast-moving iceberg.

As with many iceberg-type issues, when I started my research, I didn’t know how deep things went.

So, I did my usual thing when a question involves the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), went to AskJAN.org, to see what they had to say about LEDs and epilepsy.

We are a small, urban, very diverse school district with a large English Language Learner (ELL) population and a high poverty rate. Our school library spaces are small and do not have adjoining meeting rooms. There is no dedicated prayer/meditation space in our schools either.

In the United States, public schools that accept federal funding are barred from restricting student access to generally available space on the basis of “religious, political, philosophical…” beliefs.[1]

We have a large facility. Sometimes patrons have to walk far to get to various programs and spaces. We have had a few patrons in the recent couple of months ask if we have a wheelchair or walker they could use to help them get around. We consulted with our insurance provider about this and he basically said to ask a lawyer.

This is such a beautiful idea! In my experience, there are three things that often impede beautiful ideas:

1. Insurance concerns;
2. Legal concerns; and
3. People who worry that there might be insurance or legal concerns.

This question shows how to protect an idea from these impediments:

Sometimes, people nap in the library, particularly people who we believe might not have stable or sufficient housing. We feel that a library should not exclude people who need a secure place to rest, so long as there is no interference with library operations, but are there any legal considerations to this issue?

This is a VERY sensitive issue. There are many factors that could contribute to a person sleeping in a public space, including:

My institution subscribes to the "Kurzweil Reading Program", a "Text-to-Speech" product for those with reading impairments (dyslexia, English language learners, blind/vision impaired, etc.)

Section 121 indicates these users are "eligible persons" for "fair use", but others, without such disabilities could use the program (like an audiobook in the car!).

This question reflects the level of savvy "Ask the Lawyer" readers bring to their submissions.  The member submitting the question has already set out (in a manner much more succinct than I usually achieve) the interplay of:

Students in a school are reading a simultaneous use eBook. The students with IEPs[1] have access to a screen reader but this feature is very robotic and doesn't meet their needs. The school librarian and the School Library System searched for an audio version of this book but could not find one for purchase.

The school may be covered by Fair Use but for this scenario, it doesn't need to be in order to make the recording proposed by the member.

Why?

We had a patron come in this past week who said that he couldn't see well and also couldn't type or use a mouse, but he needed to certify Unemployment Insurance. He asked the staff member to login with his username and password and do this for him, and the staff member was, understandably, uncomfortable doing it.

At first glance, this question seems simple: what are the possible legal risks to a librarian helping a patron fill out a legal document?

But within this question lies another, slightly more complex issue: when does good customer service become an accommodation for a disability?

When publishing Oral Histories to a Digital Exhibit, such as Omeka, are we required by ADA to include a full transcription of the interview in the metadata? Is a Time Summary sufficient?

Ugh.

Not only is the answer to this “maybe,” but I am afraid the answer is actually “maybe maybe.”  And it might even have to be “Maybe maybe maybe, maybe.”  But hang in there, because I think I can still give you some solid information in reply! (Maybe.)