‘MEDICINE FOR THE SOUL’ BIBLIOTHERAPY AND THE PUBLIC LIBRARY A study submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Librarianship at THE UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD

This research explores the perspectives of public library staff on the subject of bibliotherapy. Bibliotherapy is either using non-fiction advisory texts to help people understand and deal with mental and physical health problems, primarily mild mental health difficulties including mild to moderate depression, or it is using fiction books to provide enjoyment for people with similar health problems. The research was conducted from a grounded theory perspective, using the influences of post-modern theory, with an emphasis on the importance of language. As the aim was to collect and understand the opinions of staff, a qualitative approach was taken, using in-depth interviews to ascertain views and practices. A thorough inter-disciplinary literature review, including literary criticism, medical, psychological, reader development literature was undertaken to ascertain the place and practicalities of bibliotherapy within public library service provision. This found that while a great deal of research supports the concept of bibliotherapy, there has been little attempt to study its application in practice. The research revealed that the scheme Books on Prescription has been widely utilised by libraries as a form of bibliotherapy using self-help books. Creative bibliotherapy schemes are less widespread, but librarians often feel that they provide informal bibliotherapy via reader development and readers’ groups. Many public library staff felt that bibliotherapy schemes were of great benefit both to patrons of the library, and to the library itself. It was thought that bibliotherapy helps to reduce the stigma connected with mental health problems, as well as contributing to the social inclusion and healthy communities agendas. Experiences reported by staff about their clients on bibliotherapy schemes were positive and optimistic in terms of service expansion. Bibliotherapy schemes were primarily run as partnerships with healthcare organisations, and the importance of building a strong partnership was stressed. Partnership working also assisted with funding bids. There was a lack of a clear definition of bibliotherapy, though all surveyed agreed it was a useful service. The evaluation of the services, especially from the point of view of users, was missing, and provides a topic for further research.