









































Listen and Learn sessions  229

Look Out! Ableism is Loose  
in the Library
Inclusivity and Equity for Librarians  
with Disabilities
Kenneth D. Litwak, Reference and Instructional Services Librarian, Gateway 
Seminary of the Southern Baptist Convention

ABSTRACT Ableism is rampant in the profession of academic librarianship. 
While there has been stress on other minorities such as racial and ethnic, 
little attention is paid to those with disabilities. Disability is often treated as 
a medical condition that needs to be cured. The focus is on the disability, not 
the person. Much better for considering the entire individual is the social 
justice model. It is unfair and oppressive to exclude people from being hired 
as academic librarians or keeping their jobs at academic libraries because 
of a disability. The disability may have nothing to do with job responsibili-
ties, but because an individual has a disability, the person is stigmatized 
as a problem and not “normal.” Libraries only want to hire those who are 
“normal.” Library staff need to understand disability better, treat those with 
disabilities as people, make the library a caring community, and be willing 
to provide reasonable accommodations.

Atla has a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Committee. Part of the com-
mittee’s charge is “Increasing members’ competency with issues of 
diversity, equity, inclusion, and antiracism through active support 
and training.” This essay deals with disability and ableism in librar-
ies. I performed my own survey (Litwak 2022) and described the 
results. It is not hard to find news articles, blog posts, and presen-
tations about racism. Antiracism is definitely important, but what 
about librarians with a disability? Talk of diversity, inclusion, and 
equity is in the air. What do inclusion and equity really mean? For 
our purposes, equity means fair treatment for all, not only for some. 
This is a social justice matter. It’s not fair to exclude people because 
of some attribute that may have nothing to do with their job skills 
and experience. Inclusion, then, seeks to create equity. People of all 



230  atLa 2022 ProCeedinGs

sorts can apply for librarian positions, and if they can meet the re-
quirements, other attributes, such as disability, should not matter. 
However, in real life, such attributes do matter. This issue matters 
because it affects lots of people in negative ways. It has affected me 
personally. The (mis)treatment of librarians and library staff due to 
a disability is called ableism. Lindsay and Fuentes (2020, 178) state 
that this “refers to unwanted, exploitative or abusive conduct against 
people with disabilities that violates their dignity and security.”

Let’s begin by defining disability vocabulary. First, within disabil-
ity studies, there is disagreement over saying a “disabled person” or 
“a person with a disability.” I will use the latter because the first sug-
gests that “I am my disability,” and “that is all that matters about me.” 
The latter, on the other hand, suggests that a person may have one or 
more characteristics that significantly hinder interactions with the 
world around them on a daily basis. So, what does disability mean, 
what are we talking about? The meaning of disability depends upon 
the lenses that one uses to consider the subject.

There are different models for understanding this topic. These are 
the Medical model, the Deficit model, the Rehabilitation model, and 
the Social model. Seibers (2008, 3) asserts that in the Medical model, 
a person is seen as having an “Individual defect lodged in the person, 
a defect that must be cured or eliminated if the person is to achieve 
full capability.” The disability is a medical problem that needs to be 
fixed, and little attention is given to the individual beyond being a 
patient. The related Deficit model sees the person with the disability 
as lacking something. This leads to seeing the person with a disabil-
ity as “lesser.” Schomberg (2017, 120) explains that within Western 
cultures, “being publicly disabled has historically led to censure, 
hostility,” and suspicion that the individual is using the disability 
to gain sympathy. According to Schomberg and Highby (2020, 21), 
the Rehabilitation model focuses on, “Recovery and adjusting the 
personalities of disabled people to the existing environment,” not 
changing the environment. This is similar to the Medical model in 
that the focus is on enabling an individual to overcome her disabil-
ity to perform required job duties. The Social model focuses not on 
the individual, but on the environment. Those with disabilities are 
a minority group that faces discrimination because with a disabil-
ity, they are not “normal.” For many “normal” people, the exclusion 
might be unconscious. Connor et. al. put this more stridently, how-
ever, stating that, “Disability is not a thing or condition affecting 



Listen and Learn sessions  231

people but instead a social negation serving powerful ideological 
commitments and political aims.” (2008, 447)  That may sound harsh 
unless one has been “assigned,” consciously or unconsciously, the 
“disabled” moniker. I am concerned about the Social model. In this 
model, those with a disability:

• Are a minority group that faces discrimination, because 
with a disability they are not “normal”

• Have a socially-defined impairment
• Are a product of social injustice, leading to exclusion and 

oppression
• Have a stigma for identity
• Pose challenges for services, employment, and more
• Face attitudes of the “normal”
• Struggle with expectations to adhere to American values 

and ideologies: “pull yourself up by your own bootstraps”
• Face barriers created by those without a disability, i.e., “normal”

It can be a struggle to have a visible or apparent disability. Hidden 
disabilities can be significant challenges as well, but they often do 
not affect one’s ability in an interview. As these items indicate, it is 
not the one with the disability who sets him/herself apart as not nor-
mal. It is those who are “normal” who set the bar higher than anyone 
with a disability can reach. This is ironic in that those perceived as 
normal will, given enough time or experiences, develop a disability.

WHAT’S THE PROBLEM?

Getting hired or keeping one’s position has proven very difficult for 
(potential) librarians with disabilities. Other minority groups often 
seem more able to obtain positions. There is significant discrimina-
tion against many groups, but those with a disability may have a 
harder time getting hired. Many, if not most, higher-ed institutions 
claim equity and inclusion in hiring. Librarians with disabilities are 
not treated equitably. Since such librarians are not considered “nor-
mal” and institutions want to hire “normal” people, such applicants 
will not get past an initial interview. Such employers are treating 
those with disabilities unfairly. The applicant should be considered 
with no value given to the disability. If a disability could interfere 



232  atLa 2022 ProCeedinGs

with performing the job that the applicant is seeking, the employer 
should find some way to ascertain if the disability matters for the 
position. For example, if an applicant wears a leg brace all the time, 
that is irrelevant to a position as a reference librarian, a cataloger, 
or other positions in an academic or theological library. This is even 
more relevant now since the pandemic required librarians to serve 
patrons more online. That change ameliorates the challenges that 
some librarians with a disability might face. For me, it means that 
I can use Zoom to view a student’s paper without struggling to see 
the student’s computer screen by looking over his shoulder. I can 
also easily demonstrate to users the details of performing searches 
in databases.

It is only fair that a potential employer not assume that because 
one has a disability, the applicant is stupid or mentally incapable 
of performing the duties of the position. I have a significant visual 
impairment due to a cluster of problems that came with the genes 
responsible for the eyes and eyelids. That does not affect my ability 
to provide reference and instruction. My impairment did not pre-
vent me from earning a PhD in New Testament studies. It does not 
keep me from reading Greek, Hebrew, German, French, Latin, or 
Aramaic. I regularly walk patrons over to the right spot in the stacks 
to help them look for resources. I make scans of lexicon entries for 
students who do not know the biblical languages. This list of tasks is 
not bragging. These tasks are common job responsibilities or require-
ments for theological librarians doing public services. My disability, 
regardless of what some interviewer thinks is true by looking at me, 
does not interfere with me learning more about library instruction, 
interacting with patrons, or doing my job well.

It may be reasonable to see some apparent disabilities as making 
success in a particular position somewhat unlikely. Someone who 
uses a wheelchair might have difficulty reshelving books in a seven-
foot tall shelving unit. I read of an interview with a person who had 
a significant hearing impairment to the point that he could not seem 
to hear questions from the interviewers. That could make success 
in the library challenging as well. However, a prospective employer 
ought to give an applicant with a disability the chance to explain 
why the disability will not prevent him or her from performing job 
duties. The ADA describes what questions an interviewer may or 
may not ask of a person with a disability (Employee Disability Re-
sources Center 2017). Schomberg and Highby (2020, 207-20) and the 



Listen and Learn sessions  233

Office of Disability Employment Policy (n.d.) offer other resources 
for interviewing someone with a disability. It is the responsibility of 
the applicant to talk about the disability in order to answer unasked 
questions. The interviewer needs to strive to let go of preconceptions 
about what “disabled people” can accomplish. These assumptions 
can be major barriers to applicants, as they have been to me.

In academia, assumptions are made about what a “normal” en-
vironment and “normal” worker is. As one country-western song 
put it, ”normal is just a setting on the washing machine.” These as-
sumptions create barriers for librarians and other library workers. 
Value is placed upon people’s minds and thoughts. According to 
Evans et al., while this “value could create greater room for people 
with physical disabilities,” it can present difficulties for those with 
psychological impairments. Evans et al. (2017, 205) assert that these 
could include learning disabilities, autism, and other forms of neu-
rodiversity. One study examined the job-seeking experiences of li-
brarians with autism. According to Anderson (2021), employment 
rates are lower than the general population. Autistic LIS grads are 
regularly un- or under-employed. Disclosure helped some, but hurt 
others. Autism is often an invisible or hidden disability. It manifests 
itself in many ways. Like others who “pass,”—i.e., do not have an ap-
parent disability—such individuals may struggle after being hired. 
Those with mental health issues will face stigma and prejudice. It is 
no surprise that those with hidden disabilities avoid disclosing them 
unless and until necessary.

Requesting accommodations is a problem as well. Some find it 
necessary to request accommodations. Obtaining accommodations 
can be difficult or risky as well. Suggesting that accommodations will 
be helpful during an interview may raise “red flags” as employers 
consider what those might cost. There is also the concern that other 
employees will wonder why they did not get such an accommoda-
tion. The work environment for those with disabilities can be harder 
than for others. While many libraries provide accommodations for 
students, they do not provide similar accommodations for library 
faculty and staff.

While not specifically about librarians, one study of faculty and 
staff at a multi-campus university found that a much larger percent-
age of faculty and staff with disabilities felt excluded (shunned or 
ignored) and experienced intimidating, offensive, or hostile conduct. 
Evans et. al. (2017, 212) state that this included bullying and harass-



234  atLa 2022 ProCeedinGs

ment that faculty and staff without disabilities do not normally ex-
perience. Schomberg (2017, 117) described the case of one librarian 
whose coworker tried to get the librarian terminated because she 
had diabetes. Granted that diabetes, like other ailments, needs to 
be managed, it is wrong to attempt to get someone fired simply be-
cause the person has a disability. If there was any doubt that there is 
a problem, these studies and experiences should dispel those doubts. 
It would be one thing to be terminated because of unacceptable be-
havior, such as racial slurs or inappropriately touching someone else. 
It is quite another to be terminated because of a medical condition. 
Unfair! It is true that some disabilities may make an employee work 
more slowly than others, but the slower person needs to know the 
expectations of the organization. If one meets those expectations, 
then the disability should be irrelevant.

FINDING EMPLOYMENT WITH A DISABILITY

Job ads for librarian or other library staff positions often claim to be 
inclusive. Yet, if a library basically “writes off” an entire minority 
group, it is inclusive in name only. According to the World Health 
Organization and World Bank (2011), approximately 15 percent of 
people in the world have a disability. Oud (2019, 169) asserts that, “Li-
brarians with a disability are an example of...an overlooked group. 
Librarians with disabilities form a substantial minority within li-
brarianship, with estimates of 3.7 percent in the United States and 5.9 
percent in Canada.” In 2019, Atla ran a demographic survey, in which 
they asked about disabilities among the membership. According to 
the survey, “140 individual-type members responded to the survey 
out of 513 current individual-type members at the time the survey 
was distributed (27.3%). Of the 140 respondents, the membership 
class breakdown of respondents was: emeritus – 9, retired – 10, stu-
dent – 11, and individual – 110.” (Atla Director of Member Services 
2022). Individual members were those who joined Atla as individual 
members. This includes members who joined as individual, student, 
emeritus, or retired. From the survey data, I am interested in the re-
sponses from individuals and students, not retired or emeritus be-
cause they may have developed a disability long after retiring. 6.54 
percent of individual members reported having a disability, and 
9.09 percent of student members reported having a disability. These 
numbers are better than that for the ALA or those in Oud’s research, 



Listen and Learn sessions  235

but still do not reflect the 15 percent of the world’s population. These 
statistics suggest, as Koford (2018, 3579) states, that “people with dis-
abilities are underrepresented in librarianship and library work.”

WHAT CAN WE DO?

Having described the issue and why it is important, it is time to con-
sider what to do about it. Many, if not most, people may not be aware 
of their ableist perspective. One might subconsciously hold an opin-
ion about the capabilities and/or burdens of an employee with a dis-
ability, but not be aware of the presence and indeed power of such 
presuppositions. Therefore, it is imperative that those without dis-
abilities reflect on the possibilities for someone who has a disability 
to be a coworker or supervisor. To borrow from the real estate world, 
the core problem is attitude, attitude, attitude. What disabilities 
would actually make a person incapable of performing job duties at 
a reasonable level? There may be disabilities that would in fact make 
performing a specific role in the library a challenge. However, that 
should not be assumed. Such assumptions create stress for those with 
disabilities who may fear job loss simply because of a condition that 
they have no control over. In fact, ableist assumptions often lead a 
person with a disability to depression, low self-esteem, and social iso-
lation. Moeller (2019, 455) asserts that, “existing processes designed 
to address disability treat its existence as a problem in need of a so-
lution, and in doing so, further contribute to the workplace precar-
ity experienced by library workers.” The assignment of everyone to 
two groups, able-bodied or disabled, is not helpful for treating all 
employees fairly. If (potential) employers saw those with disabilities 
as people, not disabilities, it could help enormously. Librarians care 
about patrons. The library faculty and staff should likewise be a car-
ing community for each other. Jessica Schomberg (2017, 121) offers 
several suggestions for how to change the situation:

• Recognize that more people have disabilities than you are 
aware of, and these disabilities fluctuate. Disabilities also 
might not manifest themselves, but that does not mean that 
they are nonexistent.

• Build a caring community through potlucks and having 
group projects in order to help solve problems and keep the 
burden of a task off of one person.

• Allow employees to work from home when practical.



236  atLa 2022 ProCeedinGs

• Provide clear information to employees about performance 
and timelines.

ASGCLA (2015) also offers helpful tips, such as:

• Promote job sharing, in which each person contributes 
one’s knowledge and skills.

• Other staff members and supervisors must respect an indi-
vidual’s privacy.

• Provide an opportunity for someone with a disability to ex-
plain it can also be helpful in dealing with false assumptions.

• Ensure that there is good lighting, not only in the stacks, but 
work and break areas, and no glare.

• Make sure, for libraries in the U.S., that workspaces comply 
with the ADA and sections 504 and 508 of the Rehabilitation 
Acts of 1973.

Academic and theological librarians with disabilities are not ob-
jects to be feared or pitied. Supervisors and other library staff need 
to see those with disabilities as people, not as a medical problem to 
be solved. They are people like any library staff member. They want 
to be respected. They want to avoid being considered “less” that those 
without disabilities. Think about what it would be like to be consid-
ered less or incapable because of something you have no control. 
They want to get the job done, even if that does require some accom-
modations. They want to contribute to the organization. They want 
the same recognition, opportunities, and support that other library 
workers get. Like any job applicant, they want a fair chance to make 
the case for a library to hire them. As academic and theological li-
brarians, who learn constantly and care about patrons, it is time to 
treat library staff with disabilities the same way. Most of us probably 
know the sense of being treated unfairly, incompetent, or judged as 
“less.”. Let us extend that desire to how those with disabilities are 
viewed and treated. We can do better. Let us strive to do so.

WORKS CITED

Anderson, Amelia. 2021. “Job Seeking and Daily Workforce 
Experiences of Autistic Librarians.” The International Journal 
of Information, Diversity, & Inclusion 5, no. 3: 38–63. JSTOR.



Listen and Learn sessions  237

ASGCLA. 2015. “Library Staff with Disabilities: What You Need 
to Know.” American Library Association. Last updated 
September 24, 2015. https://www.ala.org/asgcla/resources/
tipsheets/staff.

Atla Director of Member Programs. 2019. Atla Membership Survey. 
Data was received through email correspondence, June 28, 
2022.

Employee Disability Resources Center. 2017. “Job Interview: 
Disability-Related Questions (What Is and Is Not OK to Ask 
in a Job Interview?).” Employee Disability Resources Center, 
University of Wisconsin–Madison. https://employeedisabilities.
wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/343/2017/09/Job-Interview-
Questions.pdf

Connor, David J., Susan L. Gabel, Deborah J. Gallagher, and 
Missy Morton. 2008. “Disability Studies and Inclusive 
Education: Implications for Theory, Research, and Practice.” 
International Journal of Inclusive Education 12 no. 5-6:  441-457. 
doi:10.1080/13603110802377482.

Evans, Nancy J., Ellen M Broido, Kirsten R Brown, and Autumn 
K Wilke. 2017. Disability in Higher Education: A Social Justice 
Approach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Koford, Amelia. 2018. “People with Disabilities.” In Encyclopedia 
of Library and Information Services, 4th ed., edited by John D. 
McDonald and Michael Levine-Clark, 3573–83. Boca Raton, FL: 
CRC Press.

Lindsay, Sally, and Kristina Fuentes. 2020. “It Is Time to Address 
Ableism in Academia: A Systematic Review of the Experiences 
and Impact of Ableism among Faculty and Staff.” Disabilities 2, 
no. 2: 178-203. https://doi.org/10.3390/disabilities2020014.

Litwak, Kenneth D. 2022. “Desperately Seeking Librarians with 
a Disability.” In Implementing Excellence in Diversity, Equity, 
and Inclusion: A Handbook for Academic Libraries, edited by 
Corliss Lee, Brian Lym, Tatiana Bryant, Jonathan Cain, and 
Kenneth Schlesinger, 98-119. Chicago: Association of College 
and Research Libraries.

Moeller, Christine M. 2019. “Disability, Identity, and 
Professionalism: Precarity in Librarianship.” Library Trends 67 
no. 3 4: 55-470. https://doi.org/10.1353/lib.2019.0006.

Office of Disability Employment Policy. n.d. “Focus on Ability: 
Interviewing Applicants with Disabilities.” Office of Disability 
Employment Policy, U.S. Department of Labor. https://www.
dol.gov/agencies/odep/publications/fact-sheets/focus-on-ability-
interviewing-applicants-with-disabilities.

https://www.ala.org/asgcla/resources/tipsheets/staff
https://www.ala.org/asgcla/resources/tipsheets/staff
https://employeedisabilities.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/343/2017/09/Job-Interview-Questions.pdf
https://employeedisabilities.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/343/2017/09/Job-Interview-Questions.pdf
https://employeedisabilities.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/343/2017/09/Job-Interview-Questions.pdf
doi:10.1080/13603110802377482
https://doi.org/10.3390/disabilities2020014
https://doi.org/10.1353/lib.2019.0006
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/odep/publications/fact-sheets/focus-on-ability-interviewing-applicants-with-disabilities
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/odep/publications/fact-sheets/focus-on-ability-interviewing-applicants-with-disabilities
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/odep/publications/fact-sheets/focus-on-ability-interviewing-applicants-with-disabilities


238  atLa 2022 ProCeedinGs

Oud, Joanne. 2019. “Systemic Workplace Barriers for Academic 
Librarians with Disabilities.” College & Research Libraries 
80, no 2 :169-194. https://crl.acrl.org/index.php/crl/article/
view/16948.

Schomberg, Jessica. 2017. “Disability at Work: Libraries Built to 
Exclude.” In The Politics of Theory and the Practice of Critical 
Librarianship, edited by Karen P. Nicholson and Maura Seale, 
115-127. Sacramento, CA: Library Juice Press.

Schomberg, Jessica and Wendy Highby. 2020. Beyond 
Accommodation: Creating an Inclusive Workplace for Disabled 
Library Workers. Sacramento, CA: Library Juice Press.

World Health Organization and World Bank. 2011. World Report 
on Disability: Summary. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health 
Organization. http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2011/WHO_NMH_
VIP_11.01_eng.pdf.

https://crl.acrl.org/index.php/crl/article/view/16948
https://crl.acrl.org/index.php/crl/article/view/16948
http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2011/WHO_NMH_VIP_11.01_eng.pdf
http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2011/WHO_NMH_VIP_11.01_eng.pdf

	_Hlk107931637

