The Watertown Free Public Library is at the center of a controversy around a summer reading list.
The book “A Map for Falasteen: A Palestinian Child’s Search for Home” by Maysa Odeh was included on the library’s list of recommendations for second graders. Some local Jewish residents say the book is inappropriate for young readers. Other residents argue that the list should remain as it is.
The debate has since garnered reaction from people across the country.
Rachael Sack, a Watertown parent, said during the July 31 Library Board of Trustees meeting that she believes “A Map for Falasteen” should not be recommended to young readers who do not understand the history of the Palestinian territories and Israel. She said the book “incites fear-mongering” by framing Israel as the oppressor.
“I am not here to ask for a book to be banned. I am not here to ask that you remove Palestinian books, but I am here to question why you would choose a second-grade book that speaks of guns and tanks and freedoms being taken away,” Sack said during her public comments.
Debra Neiman, another Watertown parent and concerned member of the Jewish community, also spoke at the meeting.
“While I understand the value of diverse cultural perspectives, I believe this particular book crosses the line from cultural education into political messaging that is not appropriate for young children,” said Neiman.
Social media posts regarding the debate sparked further controversy and incited comments about antisemitism and the ongoing conflict in the Middle East.
Merrie Najimy, a Watertown resident and former president of the Massachusetts Teachers Association, said some of the response to “A Map for Falasteen” is fueled by anti-Palestinian sentiment.
“Educators and librarians have always been under attack by fascist movements, because they are amongst those on the front lines fighting racism, censorship, protecting democracy and speech,” Najimy said.
Kelly Liddingham, another parent, also cited the First Amendment in her comments.
“The library’s role is not to endorse specific viewpoints, but to provide access to the full spectrum of ideas — even and especially those that some may find uncomfortable,” she said. “This isn’t just a professional value, it’s a constitutional right.”
Sack wrote in a letter to the Watertown News that prior to the July 31 meeting, she and other concerned residents had asked library leaders to meet with them to discuss the book’s inclusion on the reading list, but their requests were ignored.
Parent and teacher Katie Abo told GBH News that she hasn’t read the book and doesn’t support book bans, but would like the library board to consider public opinions.
“I believe this is an issue between the library and concerned residents wanting to be heard by the trustees,” she said.
The library said it doesn’t remove books from reading lists, and stressed that none of the titles on the list are required reading.
“There is not any one person responsible for the selection of titles on the summer reading list,” the library board wrote in a statement, which was read aloud by chair Leanne Hammonds at the July 31 meeting. “The list is initially drafted by professional library staff and those suggestions are sent to the Watertown Public Schools for their review before finalizing and publishing the final list.”
The board said the library director accepted the request for reconsideration in “good faith as a courtesy, and treated it as feedback similar to public comment.”
