I'm sad - library book choice gone bad, very bad - PSA

[rose]

My 12yo ds handed me a library book this morning that I had picked out for him and pointed to a paragraph for me to read. It was a horrible vivid description of a the rape of 7yo girl :( . The book is an autobiography of a Jewish holocaust survivor. She had been hidden by a group of nuns in a convent. I feel so awful that I exposed my son to that. All that I could do was apologize to him. Dh will debrief with him later. It was in the children's section!

 

I'm going to take the book in and ask the librarian to consider moving it into the adult section. I really hope they do something. I hope no one thinks I'm advocating censorship. It should be common sense. Right?

 

Now a PSA. Please, please, please, google every title you pick out for your dc. You just never know when something will bite you like this.

[dollhouse]

Do you mind if I ask the title of the book? I, too, would want to be aware of the difficult subject matter before introducing it.

[regentrude]

I am sorry this happened.  OTOH, I would not expect an autobiography of a Holocaust survivor to contain child friendly material.

[Aiden]

Oh no! I'm so sorry your son was exposed to that without preparation.

 

Like you, I don't advocate censorship, but I do want to be informed about potentially age inappropriate topics and events. Heck, even for myself, I once read a book (as an adult) that had an unexpected rape scene, and the images haunted me for weeks.

[rose]

Do you mind if I ask the title of the book? I, too, would want to be aware of the difficult subject matter before introducing it.

A Hidden Childhood by Frida Scheps Weinstein

[rose]

I am sorry this happened. OTOH, I would not expect an autobiography of a Holocaust survivor to contain child friendly material.

My ignorance, I suppose. The dusk jacket talks about how she was safe from the Nazis because she was hidden in a French convent. I just didn't see it coming.

[justasque]

My 12yo ds handed me a library book this morning that I had picked out for him and pointed to a paragraph for me to read. It was a horrible vivid description of a the rape of 7yo girl :( . The book is an autobiography of a Jewish holocaust survivor. She had been hidden by a group of nuns in a convent. I feel so awful that I exposed my son to that. All that I could do was apologize to him. Dh will debrief with him later. It was in the children's section!

 

I'm going to take the book in and ask the librarian to consider moving it into the adult section. I really hope they do something. I hope no one thinks I'm advocating censorship. It should be common sense. Right?

 

Now a PSA. Please, please, please, google every title you pick out for your dc. You just never know when something will bite you like this.

 

 

Rose, does your library have a Young Adult (YA) section?  Or, if not, YA stickers on the spine of books that have content more suited to older teens?  If not, that is something you might suggest to them, so that readers can differentiate between children's books and YA books.  Generally speaking, you can expect YA books to have themes that are not appropriate for some 12 year olds, so anything with a YA sticker or in the YA section (if there is one in your library) may be something you want to review before handing to your DC.

 

That said, Holocaust stories are usually horrific, and thus some families wait to share those stories until their dc are much older than 12, so that they don't have to gloss over the horror and thus leave the dc with an inaccurate sense of the extent and depth of the evil inflicted on so many during that time.

[gardenmom5]

My 12yo ds handed me a library book this morning that I had picked out for him and pointed to a paragraph for me to read. It was a horrible vivid description of a the rape of 7yo girl :( . The book is an autobiography of a Jewish holocaust survivor. She had been hidden by a group of nuns in a convent. I feel so awful that I exposed my son to that. All that I could do was apologize to him. Dh will debrief with him later. It was in the children's section!

 

I'm going to take the book in and ask the librarian to consider moving it into the adult section. I really hope they do something. I hope no one thinks I'm advocating censorship. It should be common sense. Right?

 

Now a PSA. Please, please, please, google every title you pick out for your dc. You just never know when something will bite you like this.

 

yeah - I got a book for my then preschooler about fireboats. lots of drawings to appeal to kids. the previews I read talked about the history of the fireboat John J Harvey, it being retired, and some friends buying it and fixing it up/restoring it with plans for a restaurant or something. 

 

I don't recall any mention in the blurbs about it being called into service on 9/11 because all the water mains in lower manhatten were cut. (it can pump 18K gallons of water a minute)  this was a book FOR preschoolers.  so imagine my surprise when I turned the page and there were the twin towers on fire . . . . with an airplane.

 

 

eta: I had to shelter dudeling even more than most parents would a child that age because of his anxiety and his ability to work himself into a tizzy.

[happi duck]

Dd, at around age 9, won a book as a prize at a library program. It was a dk book of random stuff with a cute little dog on the cover.

 

Ends up it had lists of pick up lines, cocktail recipes and some gross very *not* cute stuff. Ends up it was for adults, not even ya!

 

I called dk just to nicely say "might want to consider how this book looks" and they let us order something else for free!

[mommymilkies]

Dd, at around age 9, won a book as a prize at a library program. It was a dk book of random stuff with a cute little dog on the cover.

 

Ends up it had lists of pick up lines, cocktail recipes and some gross very *not* cute stuff. Ends up it was for adults, not even ya!

 

I called dk just to nicely say "might want to consider how this book looks" and they let us order something else for free!

My oldest dd found a book about France (at around age 9) in the kids' section of free/cheap books at the library.  Two years later I found it, started reading it, and let's just say I bet she knows a whole lot more now about picking out lingerie for your affair than I ever hoped she'd need to know. Now I'm pretty strict about checking out all of our books.  :glare:

[rjand6more]

commonsensemedia is a great source to check books and movies. I appreciate that they give details about content.  Then, I decide.  I know what I am comfortable with and content that is not appropriate for her.   My dd is a voracious reader and I can not keep up with her.  So a year ago, I started having her give me lists and I check them.  Each and every one.  Even the YA books because some of them are trash.  I am not highly restrictive at all, but I want to know what she is reading.  I sometimes say no, but most of time I say yes. 

[poppy]

I can't think  of a YA or non-YA book about the Holocaust that wouldn't have badly disturbing elements.     Best case scenario for an autobiography of a Holocaust survivor is still really, really, really, really terrible.  This girl was hidden by nuns so right off the bat we can assume her parents and maybe siblings were killed, right?

 

I wouldn't ask the book be moved. 

[Elfknitter.#]

I checked Common Sense Media earlier and this title didn't pop up. I also checked WorldCat for local library listings; they had it in the adult section. My guess is it was probably mis-cataloged. I'm sure your local librarian will gladly change it once you let them know.

 

 

[December]

I am sure that there are children's books about the Holocaust that do not include vivid descriptions about rape.  What about The Diary of Anne Frank?  It's been years since I've read it but I'm pretty sure there are no descriptions of rape in there.  Now, of course, any book about the Holocaust is going to be disturbing, but there is a difference between disturbing in an age appropriate way and disturbing in a non-age appropriate way.  I mean, I didn't even understand what sex really was until I was 12.  I think I would have traumatized to read a graphic description of rape at that age.  However, I do remember reading books about the Holocaust at the age and handling it fine, but none of the books I read included any sexual elements.

[idnib]

I am sure that there are children's books about the Holocaust that do not include vivid descriptions about rape.  What about The Diary of Anne Frank?  It's been years since I've read it but I'm pretty sure there are no descriptions of rape in there.  Now, of course, any book about the Holocaust is going to be disturbing, but there is a difference between disturbing in an age appropriate way and disturbing in a non-age appropriate way.  I mean, I didn't even understand what sex really was until I was 12.  I think I would have traumatized to read a graphic description of rape at that age.  However, I do remember reading books about the Holocaust at the age and handling it fine, but none of the books I read included any sexual elements.

 

The 50th anniversary definitive edition has sexuality in it. These were removed from the earlier editions and were added back in. You can read an article with a few excerpts here. Just FYI that it may not be what you remember.  :)

[Farrar]

Our library had plenty of Holocaust books in the nonfiction section and we checked out nearly all of them when we were studying that period (though we only actually read a few). I would have been fine with my kids reading any that I saw 12 yo if they had wanted to do so once they had a sense of the topic. It sounds like this was just a mistake - the book was put in the wrong section. When I looked it up, everything indicated that it was an adult book. I think maybe the shelvers or the categorizers just saw "childhood" in the title and made an incorrect assumption.

 

I guess what I'm saying is... this is rotten that your 12 yo was exposed to that, but I don't personally feel like I'm going to pre-read everything. Mistakes happen and I'm okay with the risk of the children's section at the library.

[December]

The 50th anniversary definitive edition has sexuality in it. These were removed from the earlier editions and were added back in. You can read an article with a few excerpts here. Just FYI that it may not be what you remember.  :)

 

I think it's really sad anyone would equate detailed anatomical descriptions of what female genitalia looks like to detailed descriptions of RAPING A 7 YEAR OLD.  

[Ipsey]

My 12yo ds handed me a library book this morning that I had picked out for him and pointed to a paragraph for me to read. It was a horrible vivid description of a the rape of 7yo girl :( . The book is an autobiography of a Jewish holocaust survivor. She had been hidden by a group of nuns in a convent. I feel so awful that I exposed my son to that. All that I could do was apologize to him. Dh will debrief with him later. It was in the children's section!

 

I'm going to take the book in and ask the librarian to consider moving it into the adult section. I really hope they do something. I hope no one thinks I'm advocating censorship. It should be common sense. Right?

 

Now a PSA. Please, please, please, google every title you pick out for your dc. You just never know when something will bite you like this.

 

I'm sorry that happened and I hope you will manage it in a positive way that doesn't make this into a tragic, defining moment for your son.

 

Gently: You can't keep your children, always and forever, from hearing/seeing/reading something startling. It's how you manage it afterward. 

 

Really, if your goal is to filter and Google everything your children come in contact with, you're going to be exhausted and miserable.

 

As unhappy as this situation is for you, it can be a very important experience for your whole family and not just because you have a new personal goal of Googling, presumably every book/movie/magazine etc. that your children are ever exposed to, but to learn some maturity, even when it comes through a negative encounter.

[poppy]

Anne Frank died at 15, really horribly, alongside her sister and mother. She was a remarkable writer but that is not a happier or more OK story, in my eyes.

[LucyStoner]

This is why I preread anything that I assign my son to read. Obviously, I can't read everything he is reading since he reads a ton but I use reviews and and the common sense media site to gauge the fiction he chooses for himself. He's pretty good about picking stuff he is ready for. If it's something I picked though, I read it first unless it's something I read a long time ago and know is age appropriate. One reason for this is that I don't think I can assign a book I can't discuss.

[goldberry]

I think it's really sad anyone would equate detailed anatomical descriptions of what female genitalia looks like to detailed descriptions of RAPING A 7 YEAR OLD.  

 

Um, she didn't?  Someone said it had no sexuality in it and she was just saying it did.

[Ipsey]

This is why I preread anything that I assign my son to read. Obviously, I can't read everything he is reading since he reads a ton but I use reviews and and the common sense media site to gauge the fiction he chooses for himself. He's pretty good about picking stuff he is ready for. If it's something I picked though, I read it first unless it's something I read a long time ago and know is age appropriate. One reason for this is that I don't think I can assign a book I can't discuss.

 

I was curious about this book and see that it was nominated for a Pulitzer, but there are no reviews of it that I've seen beyond reader reviews on Amazon and Goodreads. No one mentioned a rape scene.

 

I don't doubt it was there, but perhaps the OPs opinion of what makes a "graphic" rape scene may be different than many readers.  

 

Any account of the rape of a child is bound to be upsetting, but it can be done without being "graphic". "Julie of the Wolves" comes to mind, and it is considered a book for younger readers.

 

Anyway, I have no idea which category this one paragraph would fall into (by my own reckoning) but I do see that the book was considered YA on Amazon.

[Elfknitter.#]

As it was published in 1985, so far the only thing I have found is from NY Times. But no mention of a rape scene there either.

 

I must not be looking in the right place but I don't see it listed as YA on Amazon. I find subject heading of World War II and Jewish History.

[Aiden]

Any account of the rape of a child is bound to be upsetting, but it can be done without being "graphic". "Julie of the Wolves" comes to mind, and it is considered a book for younger readers.

 

 

Wait, what? Does Julie of the Wolves have a rape scene? My sixth grade teacher gave every child in her class a book for Christmas, and that's the one she gave me. I read it, I loved it, I don't recall anything that disturbing in it ... But then, I was the extremely sheltered child who didn't even realize until adulthood that the song "I'm Keeping My Baby" (by Madonna?) was talking about an actual baby, meaning TeA before marriage, not just a defiant "I'm going to keep dating my boyfriend whom I call baby as an endearment" ... Maybe I should reread Julie and see what I missed!

[idnib]

I think it's really sad anyone would equate detailed anatomical descriptions of what female genitalia looks like to detailed descriptions of RAPING A 7 YEAR OLD.  

 

:confused1:

[justasque]

As it was published in 1985, so far the only thing I have found is from NY Times. But no mention of a rape scene there either.

 

I must not be looking in the right place but I don't see it listed as YA on Amazon. I find subject heading of World War II and Jewish History.

 

The School Library Journal review in one of the three Amazon listings for the book refers to it as YA.  It's easy to miss, but it's there at the beginning of the review.

[poppy]

There is a detailed summary of the book here that does not mention any kind of sexual assault or violence. Puzzling.

[cave canem]

Wait, what? Does Julie of the Wolves have a rape scene? My sixth grade teacher gave every child in her class a book for Christmas, and that's the one she gave me. I read it, I loved it, I don't recall anything that disturbing in it ... 

That's funny.  Years ago another mom and I were choosing books for a class we were doing together for some youngish children.  She nominated Julie of the Wolves, and I demurred, because I remembered from sixth grade that the book included Julie being raped by the boy she was promised to marry or was actually already married to since infancy by some agreement between their parents.  The other mom disagreed that anything like that was in the book.  I showed her the passage in the book and, after reading it, she said that it did not depict a rape and she didn't see what my problem was with it.  I couldn't find out what she thought was actually going on in the passage, though.  The boy does use the word "mate."

[PIE!]

That's funny.  Years ago another mom and I were choosing books for a class we were doing together for some youngish children.  She nominated Julie of the Wolves, and I demurred, because I remembered from sixth grade that the book included Julie being raped by the boy she was promised to marry or was actually already married to since infancy by some agreement between their parents.  The other mom disagreed that anything like that was in the book.  I showed her the passage in the book and, after reading it, she said that it did not depict a rape and she didn't see what my problem was with it.  I couldn't find out what she thought was actually going on in the passage, though.  The boy does use the word "mate."

 

I haven't read it in a while, but I thought he wanted to, but she got away. Hmm, maybe I ought to reread it.

[December]

Um, she didn't?  Someone said it had no sexuality in it and she was just saying it did.

 

Nope.  I said, "What about The Diary of Anne Frank?.... I'm pretty sure there are no descriptions of rape in there."  And that's when she responded to me with the link that it contains anatomical descriptions, as if that was on the same page as rape. 

[Ipsey]

Nope.  I said, "What about The Diary of Anne Frank?.... I'm pretty sure there are no descriptions of rape in there."  And that's when she responded to me with the link that it contains anatomical descriptions, as if that was on the same page as rape. 

 

I would be extremely surprised if that was what she meant.

 

At the end of your previous post, you talked about sexuality in general in Holocaust books (if I recall correctly, unfortunately I don't have an eidetic memory.)  I think it's likely that the idea she was working from. A little extension of grace and understanding goes a long way. 

[Joker]

I am sure that there are children's books about the Holocaust that do not include vivid descriptions about rape.  What about The Diary of Anne Frank?  It's been years since I've read it but I'm pretty sure there are no descriptions of rape in there.  Now, of course, any book about the Holocaust is going to be disturbing, but there is a difference between disturbing in an age appropriate way and disturbing in a non-age appropriate way.  I mean, I didn't even understand what sex really was until I was 12.  I think I would have traumatized to read a graphic description of rape at that age.  However, I do remember reading books about the Holocaust at the age and handling it fine, but none of the books I read included any sexual elements.

 

 

Nope.  I said, "What about The Diary of Anne Frank?.... I'm pretty sure there are no descriptions of rape in there."  And that's when she responded to me with the link that it contains anatomical descriptions, as if that was on the same page as rape. 

 

 

I'm another who didn't take that comment the way you did. I took her comment to be in response to the bold.

[justasque]

I am sure that there are children's books about the Holocaust that do not include vivid descriptions about rape.  What about The Diary of Anne Frank?  It's been years since I've read it but I'm pretty sure there are no descriptions of rape in there.  Now, of course, any book about the Holocaust is going to be disturbing, but there is a difference between disturbing in an age appropriate way and disturbing in a non-age appropriate way.  I mean, I didn't even understand what sex really was until I was 12.  I think I would have traumatized to read a graphic description of rape at that age.  However, I do remember reading books about the Holocaust at the age and handling it fine, but none of the books I read included any sexual elements.

 

 

The 50th anniversary definitive edition has sexuality in it. These were removed from the earlier editions and were added back in. You can read an article with a few excerpts here. Just FYI that it may not be what you remember.  :)

 

 

I think it's really sad anyone would equate detailed anatomical descriptions of what female genitalia looks like to detailed descriptions of RAPING A 7 YEAR OLD.  

 

I think idnib was merely giving you, the OP, and other thread readers a heads up that the Anne Frank we may come across today has sexual content that was not in the version that was originally published (as many here may have only read the earlier version).   I didn't read her comment as equating the passages in the two books or the experiences they describe.

 

[December]

I'm another who didn't take that comment the way you did. I took her comment to be in response to the bold.

 

^{Ok, I guess that makes more sense.  I wasn't even including Anne Frank among the books I read as a twelve year old (I was significantly older than that when I read it ) so it didn't occur to me that she was referring to that part of my comment.}

[Ravin]

I found quotes from the author of Julie of the Wolves indicating that the scene in question was not intended to be construed as rape. http://areadersramblings.blogspot.com/2010/09/banned-book-week-julie-of-wolves-by.html?m=1

[idnib]

I would be extremely surprised if that was what she meant.

 

At the end of your previous post, you talked about sexuality in general in Holocaust books (if I recall correctly, unfortunately I don't have an eidetic memory.)  I think it's likely that the idea she was working from. A little extension of grace and understanding goes a long way. 

 

 

I'm another who didn't take that comment the way you did. I took her comment to be in response to the bold.

 

 

I think idnib was merely giving you, the OP, and other thread readers a heads up that the Anne Frank we may come across today has sexual content that was not in the version that was originally published (as many here may have only read the earlier version).   I didn't read her comment as equating the passages in the two books or the experiences they describe.

 

 

 

Yes, I was referring to the last sentence about sexuality in Holocaust books and just giving everyone a heads-up that there's a newer, more complete edition that may be more intimate than what posters read in their own school years.

 

Thank you for those who clarified for me while I was away from the computer.

 

Being accused of equating the two things is crazy to me. I'm so angry right now.

 

How could someone even think that someone would equate a description of labia with the rape of a 7yo? At some point wouldn't the person typing think their accusation was so preposterous that they might have misunderstood? Maybe that would be better than doubling down and using all caps to shout at me? And then doubling down again when someone tried to clarify on my behalf? What?

 

Unbelievable.

[Elfknitter.#]

The School Library Journal review in one of the three Amazon listings for the book refers to it as YA. It's easy to miss, but it's there at the beginning of the review.

Thanks. My search turned up a different listing which didn't have the editorial reviews.

[Shellydon]

Our children's section in the library includes lots of teen stuff like 'How to use a condom' and 'Guide to teen sexuality'  When I complained, I was told that the publisher labels the book for children (versus adult) thus they go into the children's section.  The YA section of the library contains vampire books.

[Cammie]

I have a voracious and WAY above grade level reader at home - so I did pre-read everything for a long time.

 

That being said here are some things that I found surprising.

 

Numerous books by Roald Dahl are NOT kids books - even if the school librarian doesn't bother to check and just stocks all Roald Dahl books.

 

There was another children's author (blanking) who again had some decidedly non-kids books.

 

Anthony Horowitz is another one. Great kids books.  The new Sherlock Holmes books - very NOT kid appropriate.

[Serenade]

The 50th anniversary definitive edition has sexuality in it. These were removed from the earlier editions and were added back in. You can read an article with a few excerpts here. Just FYI that it may not be what you remember.  :)

 

I imagine that Anne and her dad would be mortified if they knew that stuff was being printed and shared with the world.  

[December]

Yes, I was referring to the last sentence about sexuality in Holocaust books and just giving everyone a heads-up that there's a newer, more complete edition that may be more intimate than what posters read in their own school years.

 

Thank you for those who clarified for me while I was away from the computer.

 

Being accused of equating the two things is crazy to me. I'm so angry right now.

 

How could someone even think that someone would equate a description of labia with the rape of a 7yo? At some point wouldn't the person typing think their accusation was so preposterous that they might have misunderstood? Maybe that would be better than doubling down and using all caps to shout at me? And then doubling down again when someone tried to clarify on my behalf? What?

 

Unbelievable.

 

I am angry too.  If you want to give a general heads-up to the board, that's all well and good. But you quoted me and specifically referred to my post.  Try to see it from my point of view.  I am trying to explain why a graphic description of a child being raped might disqualify a book from the children's section of the library and you come along and point out that Anne Frank's book contains descriptions of genitalia as a direct response to me.  It was a very jarring response to a comment about child rape.  

[idnib]

 It was a very jarring response to a comment about child rape.  

 

It was jarring because it made no sense to consider it a response to a comment about child rape.

 

I said the book had sexuality in it. I don't consider rape to be sexuality. And what kind of a person would add a smiley to a post about child rape?

 

When I find something jarring, I pause and wonder why rather than shout at the well-meaning stranger.

 

I'm sorry you are angry. And I sincerely regret using your comment about not remembering sexuality in Holocaust books to give people a friendly heads-up. Perhaps if we were talking in person it would have been more obvious that I was responding to the last thing you said, not the first.

[MercyA]

I haven't read it in a while, but I thought he wanted to, but she got away. Hmm, maybe I ought to reread it.

 

Yes, she got away, but it was a disturbing scene. You can read it here. (Disclaimer: I know nothing about the blog where it's posted.) I personally got rid of Julie of the Wolves because of that scene and the overall dark tone of the book. 

[luuknam]

I'm sorry that happened and I hope you will manage it in a positive way that doesn't make this into a tragic, defining moment for your son.

 

Gently: You can't keep your children, always and forever, from hearing/seeing/reading something startling. It's how you manage it afterward. 

 

Really, if your goal is to filter and Google everything your children come in contact with, you're going to be exhausted and miserable.

 

As unhappy as this situation is for you, it can be a very important experience for your whole family and not just because you have a new personal goal of Googling, presumably every book/movie/magazine etc. that your children are ever exposed to, but to learn some maturity, even when it comes through a negative encounter.

 

I mostly agree, though I think maybe the OP didn't mean it that extreme. There is a difference between a 12yo picking out a book at the library on his own and it containing a rape scene, vs mom picking out a book for the kid and giving it to the kid to read. There is a level of trust when you give a book to a kid, so you may want to know what you give to your kid if you don't want to hurt that trust. So, unless you're cool with unwittingly giving your kid books with graphic rape scenes or other issues, you might want to research what you pick out for your kid... which is not the same as censoring/previewing everything the kid reads.

 

ETA: our library system has it in closed stacks because it's an 'older' book, but in the catalog record it has the library journal review which lists it as YA (if I click on summary/reviews... they've got tabs for holdings, description, comments, summary/reviews, staff view (which is visible to patrons and lists it as YA/adult if I'm reading it correctly... staff view is pretty cryptic and mostly for computers, I think)).

[Cinder]

I have a voracious and WAY above grade level reader at home - so I did pre-read everything for a long time.

 

That being said here are some things that I found surprising.

 

Numerous books by Roald Dahl are NOT kids books - even if the school librarian doesn't bother to check and just stocks all Roald Dahl books.

 

There was another children's author (blanking) who again had some decidedly non-kids books.

 

Anthony Horowitz is another one. Great kids books.  The new Sherlock Holmes books - very NOT kid appropriate.

 

 

Judy Blume? She's the first author I thought of when I read this.

[vonfirmath]

Judy Blume? She's the first author I thought of when I read this.

 

That's who I thought of too.

[justasque]

I have a voracious and WAY above grade level reader at home - so I did pre-read everything for a long time.

 

That being said here are some things that I found surprising.

 

Numerous books by Roald Dahl are NOT kids books - even if the school librarian doesn't bother to check and just stocks all Roald Dahl books.

 

There was another children's author (blanking) who again had some decidedly non-kids books.

 

Anthony Horowitz is another one. Great kids books.  The new Sherlock Holmes books - very NOT kid appropriate.

 

Add to the list Meg Cabot - her Princess Diaries is pretty YA despite the kid-friendly Disney movie adaptation; to make things complicated she's apparently doing an adult novel as part of the YA Princess Diaries series.

 

Also Carl Hiaason - Hoot, Chomp, Scat, and Flush are all great for the 9-12 age bracket.  Skink is aimed at older teens, and the rest are very much in the adult category.  

[Elfknitter.#]

Just a comment... that School Library Journal review is from 1985 when much of YA literature was considered to be for high school and early college aged. Today, YA has evolved to include Tween aged readers. SLJ reviews of today will list a grade range (grade 4-6, or grade 8+ for example), making it easier to determine if a title could overlap into a children's room or really belongs more in a teen or adult area.

[Cinder]

Add to the list Meg Cabot - her Princess Diaries is pretty YA despite the kid-friendly Disney movie adaptation; to make things complicated she's apparently doing an adult novel as part of the YA Princess Diaries series.

 

Also Carl Hiaason - Hoot, Chomp, Scat, and Flush are all great for the 9-12 age bracket.  Skink is aimed at older teens, and the rest are very much in the adult category.  

 

Yes, I was just coming back to add Hiaasen but you already did.

[sassenach]

I am sorry this happened.  OTOH, I would not expect an autobiography of a Holocaust survivor to contain child friendly material.

But there are holocaust survivor books that, though still disturbing, are appropriate for a 12yo. A 7yo being raped is another level up, imo, and would be completely unexpected in a book in the children's section of the library.

 

I can't think  of a YA or non-YA book about the Holocaust that wouldn't have badly disturbing elements.     Best case scenario for an autobiography of a Holocaust survivor is still really, really, really, really terrible.  This girl was hidden by nuns so right off the bat we can assume her parents and maybe siblings were killed, right?

 

I wouldn't ask the book be moved. 

Why not? What makes this content appropriate for the children's section?