[Koha-bugs] [Bug 32444] Identify patrons as a group or family unit

[bugzilla-daemon at bugs.koha-community.org]

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=32444

Wally DesChamps <wdeschamps at prospertx.gov> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |wdeschamps at prospertx.gov

--- Comment #1 from Wally DesChamps <wdeschamps at prospertx.gov> ---
Christopher makes valid points.  From our (legal, privacy) perspective, we
accept that adults cannot have access to other adults' accounts without the
account's owner allowing access him/herself; i.e., giving the spouse their
login credentials.  Divorce and other family drama not where we want to be
involved. 
 Further, juveniles are not allowed memberships without an adult guarantor who
assumes legal responsibility for that juvenile's library account until that
juvenile reaches the age of majority.

In our library, guarantors are only flagged when one or more guarantee's
account has fines (which for us doesn't occur until the item becomes "lost"
(i.e. 21 days) or damaged resulting in a replacement fine.  A Guarantor's
account is not alerted or flagged due to any other restrictive state of a
guarantee's account (i.e., "normal" overdues).

However, it would be great to have other "household" (to include other adults)
included in a "hey, something is amiss with an account in your household"
notice and/or restriction.

I understand the baby-steps approach.  Our focus in on loss prevention as it
relates to the adult who is held legally responsible for their guarantees (who
are minors...we do not allow guarantees to be 18+).  We have considered
completely revamping our membership to only adult accounts and assigning patron
categories in item-limit increments.  But older guarantees feel empowered to
have their own card, and short of us investing in a card generator/printer so
that multiple people in the family can have their "own" card (but same card
number), this really isn't feasible, nor does it offer the most accurate
statistics regarding membership and individual patron usage.  

If Christopher's approach is the most viable way to eventually provide true
(and customizable) "links," I support this bug.  That said, though, our desire
for true links is to help us enhance our loss prevention efforts and better
monitor and inhibit patrons who abuse the system with multiple children's
accounts to get around the rules by manipulating the system.  Therefore, I am
happy with any forward movement in this realm as long as the goal is to make
the "guarantor/guarantees" (plural guarantees) all "function" like one
"account" [household/organization] with individual "sub-accounts"
[guarantor/guarantees].

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
You are the assignee for the bug.