Print

Print


Hi Donna,
Something else to factor in besides the things you have mentioned is the rule of 5. If you borrow the maximum number of articles obtainable within the "rule of 5" for non-work related purposes, then when someone needs it for work related purposes you either can't get it or must pay higher costs for it. 

We have prioritized all of our work so that work related comes first. Non-work related comes after that. And we stopped picking up the tab for anyone's articles - work-related or not - a long time ago. If someone wants an article for which there is a charge, we will get it if they pay for it up front. Some people have the ability to charge it to their departments. Others not. I got burned once or twice and stopped trusting what folks say as often as I used to. 

We also had a meeting of the librarians from the area nursing schools and the hospitals some years back, and the nursing school librarians very much wanted us to turn their students back to them for their ILLs because that's the only way they created the documentation for improving their own collections. I have used that several times and the students seem to understand it. Of course they were not happy about it because we are much easier and more convenient for them, but particularly if they are in healthcare, they understand the need for documentation. 

It's always a tightrope. 


Joan Yanicke, MALS, AHIP
Medical Library
St. Vincent Hospital
123 Summer Street
Worcester, MA 01608
Voice 508.363.6117
Fax 508.363.9118
[log in to unmask]


-----Original Message-----
From: Medical Libraries Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Donna Beales
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2011 3:04 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: ILL and Ethics

This may have been discussed previously, but I don't recall any recent
dialogue...

 

I'm interested to hear from colleagues on the issue of  ILL requests
that are really outside of your institution's purview and policies.
Please reply to the list for the benefit of all.  

 

Recently, I had a complaint about a refusal to provide ILL services for
a non-work-related educational request.  I referred the individual back
to her school library; I believe at the time I also explained that the
request would cost the institution upwards of $45 dollars for ILL fees
and copyright clearance.  

 

The individual did not approach me in any way to question the refusal;
the interchange was so benign in my POV that when the complaint was
brought to my attention, I was very surprised, and at first had
difficulty remembering the exact circumstance.  So far as I recall, I
was polite and took time to explain the reason, something I routinely
do.  I've assisted the person in the past and had what I thought was a
good relationship with her.

 

At the time, the person seemed to take in the information and appeared
accepting, but left the library and brought the matter to the Director
level.

 

I should clarify that I almost never refuse a ILL request from a staff
person & will fill it as long as the need is occasional, I have the
time,  and I can obtain the work for "free."  But if a request is going
to impact the institution's bottom line, or I just don't have the time
to handle it (I was short-staffed for several months during the
interchange and handling a CME reaccreditation) that's when I politely
refer to a more appropriate venue.

 

I'm thinking of a few examples of the types of ILLs I'm referring to,
but I'm sure there are many more:

 

"I need a few articles for my son's/daughter's science fair project..."

A staff member begins to order dozens of articles because s/he or a
family member has a disease/personal issue.

A staff member is in school, but the education is clearly unrelated to
their work or the mission of the institution, and they want to use ILL.

 

Clearly, these are issues of good policy writing.  One's policies on ILL
and document delivery services should clearly spell out the types of
requests that are appropriate, and management should buy in to them.  My
policies are clear that an ILL request must be of a work-related nature;
they were put in place because neither budget nor personnel resources
are infinite, and my Director was involved in the approval process.
The policy has stood for 11 years and has never been challenged.

 

There are several ethical and personal issues as I see them:

 

*         The use of ILL services for non-work-related purposes drains
dollars and energy from the institution; I feel an ethical duty, and
have a managerial obligation, to act in  responsible manner to avoid
unnecessary expense.

*         The use of ILL services for non-work-related purposes adds a
burden to my ILL colleagues, and I feel an ethical responsibility to
avoid adding to others' workloads for such requests.

*         There is a "feel good" component to this; refusal, no matter
how politely stated,  runs the risk of engendering bad feelings which in
a relatively small environment can impact library marketing.

*         There are shades of grey here; not every request is so
clear-cut, and there are exceptions to every rule.  Rules are made to be
broken-sometimes.

*         I explained to the person at the time that the ILL system I
would be using to place her request (not Docline) was the same one her
school would utilize, probably with quicker turnaround due to system
parameters that prioritize certain library types higher than my own.

 

If you have any thoughts on these issues, please do share.  I am
considering inviting the person who made the complaint to participate in
potential revision of policy, but I would like to have collegial
feedback to share with my manager as we approach a rewrite.

 

TIA.

 

Donna Beales, MLIS
Lowell General Hospital
Health Science Library
295 Varnum Ave.
Lowell, MA 01854
Email: dbeales AT lowellgeneral.org
http://www.lowellgeneral.org/library
<http://www.lowellgeneral.org/library> 

Tel. 978-937-6247
Fax 978-937-6855

Thank you for using our services.      

   

Tell us how we're doing.
<http://www.kwiksurveys.com/online-survey.php?surveyID=BMDHI_cd5c65f1> 

 

This message and any included attachments are intended only for the use 
of the person or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain 
information that is privileged, confidential and protected from 
disclosure under applicable law.  Any review, disclosure, transmission, 
dissemination, copying or other use of this information by persons or 
entities other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited.  If 
you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the 
sender and delete the related message.  Thank you.