School librarians are not “trusted experts” for children. 👧
— Dan Kleinman @OccupyLibraries (@OccupyLibraries) March 16, 2026
Here is another reason why, from a mom of six.
“Freedom to Read Act” is from American Library Association—it sets school librarians as trusted experts. Do not sign that into law and repeal the others.
Defund ALA. pic.twitter.com/TGPSX8MQWe
When libraries shelve and promote age-inappropriate materials, they contribute to harming children. Recourse for parents is often dismissive and burdensome. Sexualizing children is deeply evil and it should be readily identified as such. Introducing minors to gender ideology, sex and sexual situations before they are emotionally ready, and before their parents have consented, is unacceptable in taxpayer-funded organizations.
In a recent article, Dan Kleinman of Safe Libraries notes, "This ongoing conflict underscores a core reality: as the Supreme Court has affirmed, parents are the primary protectors of their children's best interests and possess the fundamental constitutional right to direct their upbringing and education without being shut out or overridden by schools or public libraries.
Opponents, however—a powerful vocal minority—have framed parental objections to sexually explicit materials available to children as censorship, successfully influencing policy in many districts and states to effectively override family oversight regarding curriculum, access to sexually explicit materials, and exposure to politically driven agenda initiatives."
Recently, two Christian County Library Board members suggested that parents should be filling out challenge forms to alert the library to inappropriate books after the book Sybilline (discussed HERE and HERE) was exposed at a public meeting. The book was published in February. To his credit, the executive director also noted that speaking to staff could serve the same function.
As Kleinman notes, "Public schools and public libraries place sexually explicit illustrations and text in front of your children and require you to fight to protect your child from accidentally seeing it."
Are librarians not trained to curate their collections in a manner that protects children? Why must citizens, who pay the salaries of these trained staff, be the ones to ferret out and object to sexualized and age-inappropriate books?
The reconsideration policy and forms are not designed to protect children or parents' rights. They are designed to retain books in the library, regardless of content. If you have ever filled one out and turned it in, you know what happens. See HERE. The book is almost always retained with reasons such as the book has been checked out recently, the book has numerous positive reviews and awards, the publisher determines age-appropriateness, one must not discriminate, and so on. At best it is a stall tactic. At worst it is meant to let parents know in no uncertain terms that the library knows best and you are to go away and let the experts get on about the business of the library.
The American Library Association (ALA) is so invested in the unquestioned authority of libraries to be the arbiter of appropriateness that they even have a confidential support form:
 |
| From: ALA |
The ALA considers restricting access or relocating a book to the adult section as censorship or banning. It is neither, since no books are being suppressed (either in part or whole) and the government has not banned the book. These books are widely available at bookstores, online, etc. The argument has been successful in the past, but the courts are taking a second look and deciding that taxpayer-funded libraries have a right to curate their collections without forced exclusion or inclusion. Recent court decisions are also beginning to acknowledge and defend parental rights.
The ALA remains adamant that "the right of every individual to both seek and receive information from all points of view without restriction" is a right that extends to children. Again, insisting that children have a "right" to be exposed to depictions of sex (of whatever kind), genitals, transgender ideology and so on is evil on its face.
In his article referenced above, Kleinman also writes, "Constitutional Parent's Rights appear to be placed as secondary to a child's "right to read" which is not a right at all, but a suggested library policy by the American Library Association. "Freedom of Information," does not override Parent's Rights, either, also a suggestion from the ALA, however public libraries use both policies to potentially violate Constitutional rights of parents with regard to children's education and development."
The Missouri Public Library Trustee Manual, which relies heavily on ALA ideology, provides a sample reconsideration policy HERE (page 76). It is very similar to the ALA sample reconsideration policy you can find HERE.
You can find the Christian County Library reconsideration form HERE.
On page 25 of the state trustee manual it states, "Trustees must recognize the right of citizens to question board actions and be willing to listen and explain the policies of the library. The board should offer an open, concerned image without accommodating censorship demands. [Bolding added] Have a simple procedure for the board to use when dealing with material challenges. The library director should be the first person that meets with the patron and receives the complaint. If the matter is not satisfactorily addressed by the director, then the library board is next in line to receive the complaint."
Again, the accusation against citizens is one of censorship. And again, censorship involves government suppression, in whole or part, of speech or writing. Neither is happening just because a public library decides to curate its collection and abide by laws protecting children. And the Missouri trustee handbook flat out states that the library should offer a sense of concern "without accommodating censorship demands." It should be noted that the Missouri trustee handbook is not law. It promotes guidelines. No individual Missouri library must enforce or endorse them.
A library must take into consideration their patrons, including those who are minors and the laws governing their protection. Here is a portion of the Christian County Library policy on censorship. Although the board formally disassociated from the ALA, the LINK to a censorship policy differs from the updated materials policy that can be linked HERE. It should be updated to reflect the deletion of the policy below.
Book reconsideration challenges are used to identify
who objects to the books and how many times they submit objections. They
are performative on the part of the library. In essence they are written struggle sessions. To suggest a public library is incapable of properly curating a children's collection in accordance with laws designed to protect minors is also an insult to staff. Although parents are the lawful arbiters of judgment regarding their children, librarians who adhere to state and federal statutes regarding child protection would be generally in alignment. If there is a need for additional training, the executive director and board should make sure it happens.
Parents and other patrons should not have to scour the children's section to protect them from age-inappropriate and sexually explicit materials. Children should be allowed to remain free of such things in a library--the place where a world of knowledge, truth, and goodness should await them--not indoctrination, sexualization and degradation.
Instead of using reconsiderations as a 'gotcha' moment it would be a welcome surprise if the library took seriously the implementation of an updated collection policy. At the moment it is a pity reconsideration challenges could become a common avenue of collection curation, and not the library performing due diligence to protect the community's children.
