A variety of reasons are given both to support and refute the idea of censorship for children. Censors argue that materials should be restricted for children because of the desire to protect children from harm. Some arguments favoring censorship are; children have limited rights, child development and cognitive theories, and parental rights and responsibilities should be supported by libraries. Arguments that argue against censorship also refer to parental rights and responsibilities as well as invoking children’s right to learn, the safety of learning once removed versus actual experience, the underestimation of children’s abilities and that forbidden fruits more attractive.
First amendment standards are different for minors. Something that is indecent, as opposed to obscene, is considered acceptable for adults, but not for children due to the potential for harm. Many materials targeted for censorship, however, would not be upheld as indecent by court standards.
Child Development theories are often used to defend the idea of censoring materials for children. Children’s cognitive abilities develop at different ages. Some information is indeed harmful to children. Young children will not have developed the critical thinking skills to comprehend all presentations of information, even if language used is itself simple. Most ethical theories support the idea that children should be should be kept from harm, while fostering development to well-rounded adults. The difficulty is in determining what is harmful; opinions will vary greatly, especially in controversial topics.
Parents do have the responsibility to shield their children from harm. They also have the right to raise them as they see fit and teach them their values without interference. Most parents expect public libraries to be ‘safe’, especially the children’s sections. They do not expect their children will be exposed to age-inappropriate materials. Many also expect the public library to reflect ‘community standards'. The issue however is what each person believes community standards to be will vary. The ALA maintains that the primary responsibility of child rearing resides with the parents and that if the parents decide to shield their children from certain materials, then it is up to them to oversee this, not libraries.
Children have the right to learn in order to properly develop. This is used from different angles to support or oppose censorship. Those who support it believe if the child reads without guidance they will get incomplete ideas if there is no open dialog with their parents. Those who oppose censorship believe there is safety in learning that is removed from the experience. Other feel that the abilities of children are often underestimated and that they are more capable than adults give them credit for.
Forbidden Fruits are more attractive to
children. This argument is used to refute the idea of censorship for children.
As soon as you tell a child that they are not to look at something you are
sending them a signal. To the child this signal looks like, 'read me now'
instead of, 'stay away from me.' Another problem that arises from this is that
if the child has questions about the material they won’t ask them. Since the item was forbidden to
the child they will be unwilling to admit that they have read it. This means
that a parent won’t be able to assist the child in interpreting the item's meaning.
Children will always find a way around rules when interested enough. If a
library puts a rule in place that a child may not check a book out, the child
will then read the book at the library. There is also nothing preventing the
child from locating the book if it is moved into the adult section of the
library. If the book is put behind the circulation desk this just makes it more
difficult for the child to view. The child might then see it at a
friend’s house or bookstore. These rules don’t usually prevent a
child from seeing the book. Rather they make the child more interested and
determined to view it. Children enjoy testing their boundaries and pushing the
limits, especially when there are rules telling them not to.