Comments on: Research and Morals

By: Uncontrolled Vocabulary #29 - Books should not expire. | Uncontrolled Vocabulary

Sun, 24 Feb 2008 23:51:08 +0000

[...] Research and Morals (Enquiring Minds Want to [...]

By: Othemts

Othemts — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 22:23:51 +0000

I think the closest I’ve come to a moral dilemma is when a patron made a dozen requests for books about union busting (I’m an activist in our local union). I never would have even thought about NOT getting the books for the patron, but I did hope he was planning to use them for good and not nefarious purposes.

By: Davina

Davina — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 08:41:14 +0000

Thanks everyone for your comments on this. I’m glad it’s generated some discussion!

For me personally, this is the reason why I don’t, and won’t, work for a firm that does family law. I tried it once, and I just can’t do it. Big corporate stuff tends to not bother me anywhere near as much as family law.

By: Shaunna

Shaunna — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 16:19:13 +0000

This is an excellent issue to ponder in advance of the morally uncomfortable reference question.

A librarian is not a judge.

Our job is to assist the askers that we are responsible to with the information they seek. It is not our job to judge the asker, or their ultimate client.

Morality is a personal issue. Integrity is a professional issue. At the end of the day, no matter what information you provide, if you can truthfully say that you carried out your job with integrity, you should find satisfaction in a job well done.

By: heidi

heidi — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 14:10:07 +0000

Of all the things that people say LIS education is lacking, I don’t think this topic is one of them. Aren’t we trained as librarians to give unbiased information to a patron, regardless of our personal feelings on the topic?

I wouldn’t even think twice about giving them the information that they need without questioning their reasons or my own moral judgment on the issue. It’s my job.

By: Connie Crosby

Connie Crosby — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 04:34:45 +0000

It helps to have thought out what your barriers are in advance and worked out a policy. I have always maintained that librarians, when calling outside the firm for information, should:
(1) identify our name and who our employer is (“Hello this is Mary Smith, I am a librarian at the Big Smart law firm”) and
(2) not identify the name of the lawyer or client on whose behalf we are calling, unless requested or given permission to do so. This is because the client and/or matter is often confidential.

When asked to do something that goes against these principles (especially #1), I explain the policy and stand firm. I have been known to even maintain #2 inside the law firm when calling another lawyer for advice on the research depending on the circumstances and the culture of the firm.

Can you think of certain policy you were put into place to help you deal with this in the future?

The lawyer ethic is that everyone, not matter what he or she has done, has the right to legal representation. That can certainly put you in the position of doing research on behalf of someone or some organization you do not personally believe in and would prefer not to support. Depending on how much this bothers you, you need to think about whether you can work for an employer that supports this organization. Are your feelings strong enough to make you want to leave that organization? This is something you need to ask yourself.

By: Meg

Meg — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 10:33:30 +0000

I’ve thought about this before and I will do it because I try to remain as neutral as possible. My job is to find them the information and what they then do with it, is not up to me.

I have had to flail my hands wildly at people to prevent them telling me more details of a case than I want to know – mostly, sadly, while researching some pretty nasty sex with minor cases – and I have done research for companies that I would rather not but in the end, because I tend to deal with barristers, I’m aiding the ideal of a ‘fair’ trial by providing the information they need.

By: scott

scott — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 17:50:27 +0000

I think this is an interesting question – but (rightly or wrongly) not one that actually troubles me that much. I suppose I am hard skinned with this one and tend to take a neutral approach to information I am asked to provide – I guess I put on a kind of virtual defence lawyer hat and represent my client (the lawyer). This is not to say I have been asked to research some weird things over the years or indeed mundane research which would be for a client (of the firm) for who I may wish – from a personal viewpoint – that the firm didn’t act for. I have certainly been happy to mention my views (sometimes shared) to lawyers in these situations but at the end of the day I – like they – have a job to do. Incidentally, I do know of at least two lawyers – one currently a partner at a city firm (not the one which employs me) who have asked not to work on deals because they objected either to the deal itself or the client.

By: JamesM

JamesM — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 14:24:30 +0000

Davina, this is an interesting post. To be honest I would probably do ANY research I was asked to do, maybe this is because I don’t have strong views, or I haven’t been asked anything that I would consider against my own personal morals. Having said that if you work for a law firm and especially if you work for a large law firm I think you have to acknowledge that some of the clients are going to probably do things that go against some of your principles. For example there are numerous law firms that represent major Oil & Gas exploration companies does working for the law firm mean you support their activities?