## Long version ### Intro Late items and lost items are a problem for libraries. There are opportunity costs involved, impacts on other users, and expenses associated with processing them. In the online ADHD Community the commonness of small fines and financial penalties for missed deadlines and forgotten obligations is often semi-humorously called the ADHD Tax.  I try to regard this “tax” with equanimity and accept the costs my neurodevelopmental challenges incur. But I also believe it is our responsibility to advocate for equity in those institutions where we are engaged, point out where we see systemic bias happening, and work to improve the institutional impacts we have on our community; so thank you again for your invitation to share my feedback about opportunities to increase accessibility, equity, and transparency for neurodivergent users in the processing of fines and appeals. UW Libraries is a large organization with many parties involved in decision making, and we are subject to standards and requirements set by Washington Administrative Code. I am presenting a single perspective and none of my points are intended as criticism of you or your unit, even if my perception seems one-sided. I will try to offer opportunities and suggestions, based on my own experience and understanding, and I also welcome your questions, clarifications, and your own ideas for improving the experience of all library users. ### Relevance ADHD and Autism are not visibly apparent disabilities, but they are very common neurodevelopmental conditions. These disorders bear scrutiny, stigma, and are often minimized or dismissed socially, interpersonally, and professionally; in part because many of the symptoms are familiar experiences for most people. These differences only rise to the level of “disorder” when symptoms significantly impact a person’s ability to function in life due to their frequency or severity. Individuals with neurodevelopmental differences should represent a significant percentage of UW staff and students, [“a reasonable estimate of all neurominorities within the population is around 15–20%”](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7732033/). This is in a comparable range to the prevalence in the United states of [Black](https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/fact-sheet/facts-about-the-us-black-population/) (14.4%), [LGBTQ](https://news.gallup.com/poll/470708/lgbt-identification-steady.aspx) (7.2%), [mobility](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8531993/#:~:text=Mobility%20was%20the%20most%20prevalent,%25%2D6.3%25\)%2C%20vision%20\(12.8) disabled (13.3%), or [combined](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8531993/#:~:text=Mobility%20was%20the%20most%20prevalent,%25%2D6.3%25\)%2C%20vision%20\(12.8) estimates of hearing and vision (6.1%, 5.2%) impaired individuals. Similarly to other minorities, the long term economic, interpersonal, and health impacts of neurominority status have also been well [documented](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11016205/#:~:text=adults%20with%20persistent%20ADHD%20continue%20to%20experience%20adverse%20outcomes%20in%20various%20life%20domains%2C). Disparities in diagnosis and access to care have also been well established to correlate with [racial and income](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8500365/) status as well as [gender](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8306851/). Many individuals are undiagnosed, and many are masking and may not wish to reveal their own experiences, especially where neurodivergence intersects with other minority status.  ### Positionality I am an undergraduate student at UW Seattle and a classified staff employee at UW Bothell. I enrolled in 2011 at the age of thirty six and I was formally diagnosed with ADHD in 2013. I also meet the DSM criteria for Autism Spectrum Disorder. My experience on the Attention Deficit/Autism Spectrum is a heightened sensitivity to and being chronically overwhelmed by environmental and social demands that are considered “normal” in our culture. I struggle with task switching, prioritization, time perception, working memory, and controlling my attention. I also have difficulty with communication and social interactions, including emotional dysregulation. The severity of my symptoms varies significantly depending on complex circumstances and influencing factors including sleep, diet, exercise, access to medication, and especially stress. Stress impairs executive functioning, which has the compounding effect of making situations and emotions harder to manage, and therefore even more stressful. ### Impacts of Systemic Bias Systemic bias exists where the structures of an organization have disproportionate impacts on certain members of its constituency. While I am focusing on the experience of UW Library’s neurominority users in this email, many of these concerns have close parallels for users with anxiety, depression, and other mental health issues; chronic illness; and mobility or sensory impairment. Additionally, in our library’s service to first-generation international students and English Language Learners, unfamiliar library practices and jargon may create similar challenges. #### 1. The stresses incurred by library fines and fees impact neurominority users differently and more significantly. Monetary sanctions produce [significant stress](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10586471/); by design, library fines and fees create acute and chronic stress for all constituents. There is the acute primary stress of being fined; acute secondary stress in the impacts of other [sanctions](https://app.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=478-168-390) intended to enforce the payment of fines (such as transcript holds and blocks), stress created by the University’s payment processing [options](https://www.lib.washington.edu/services/borrow/fines) (covered in more detail later); and chronic secondary stress related to cumulative impacts of repeated fines on self-image, threats of future fines, anxiety about economic impacts of damage to credit scores, and frustration around the financial opportunity costs that the fines incur.  The impacts of these fines disproportionately affect neurominority users. 1. Individuals with neurodevelopmental differences are likely to be fined more often. The [criteria for ADHD](https://www.cdc.gov/adhd/diagnosis/index.html) (inattentive type) reads like a laundry list of issues that make the timely return of library items difficult. Challenges with attention to detail, forgetfulness, processing communication, school attendance, and a variety of other factors contribute to the likelihood of missing library due dates. 2. Individuals with neurodevelopmental differences are more seriously affected by stress induced by fines, including increased rates of [chronic depression](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9518099/) and [immune dysregulation](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8533349/). [Emotional dysregulation](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4282137/) commonly co-occurs with ADHD, and stress contributes to [executive dysfunction](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5756532/) leading to the compounding of the challenges at the core of neurodevelopmental disorders. 3. Individuals with neurodevelopmental differences are more seriously affected by the economic impacts of fines, especially long term impacts like damage to credit scores. Precarious employment, difficulty maintaining routines, financial impulsivity, and numerous other factors contribute to [significant correlation](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7527218/) between ADHD, poor credit scores, and self-harm.  4. The academic impacts on individuals with neurodevelopmental differences should be considered. Neurodivergent students are already at risk in the [academic environment](https://rdcu.be/dJBr3). Fines create an additional barrier for students to access academic resources, through suspension of borrowing privileges, and frequent fines may create anxiety that deter neurominority students from using materials needed for courses. #### 2. The appeals process does not mitigate the impacts of fines and fees on neurominority users. The opportunity to file an appeal does not address the systemic issue of fines and fees that are a symptom of challenges faced by neurominority users. While it may seem sufficient to assess fines and fees, and then rely on the appeals process to mitigate their financial impact on neurominority users, the appeals process has significant issues of its own for neurominority users. 1. Appealing a fine does not mitigate the acute stress of incurring fines and fees, and the demands of writing an appeal creates additional stress. The process of appealing a fine or fee is stressful. Waiting for an appeals decision also extends the duration of that stress. For neurominority users, the demands of writing and submitting a narrative appeal and waiting for an uncertain outcome may outweigh the benefit of having the fine or fee overturned, especially in times of acute academic stress. This may discourage them from filing a justified appeal. 2. Appealing a fine pressures users to disclose disability status. While the appeal does not require disclosure, if the disability is the primary reason for a late return, disclosing the disability may seem like the only option. When a neurominority constituent is hesitant to disclose their status, that concern may discourage them from appealing, even though their disability is relevant to the situation. 3. Appealing a fine demands that neurodivergent users perform tasks that their disability directly impacts. Neurominority users who have difficulty with organization, communication, or following complex procedures, may find the appeals process overwhelming. While Library Accounts Services offers assistance with this process, requesting assistance to complete the form demands significant emotional and logistical labor from the user. 4. Appealing a fine resurfaces a user’s history of disability and discrimination for neurodivergent users. Asking a neurominority user to review and document personal circumstances to request leniency or justify a situation where they are simply unable to perform “normally” requires a neurominority user to conduct the difficult emotional labor of a self-evaluation that may surface a complex history of stigma, doubt, and criticism. #### 3. There are significant issues with the fine payment system and the appeals form as it exists. Even beyond addressing the larger issues of systemic bias in our fine and appeal process, there are significant opportunities in the current system to improve our library’s accessibility and service delivery for neurodivergent users. 1. The [Appeals FAQ](https://www.lib.washington.edu/services/borrow/appeals) is not written in [plain language](https://governor.wa.gov/issues/efficient-government/plain-language). It is overlong, full of jargon, and relies on unnecessary legal and academic terminology that may be confusing, especially for neurominority users. The language is not user-centered and serves as a barrier to access, not an enabler that encourages users to file appeals. For example: The current text: “The Libraries understands that fines and fees can be a detriment or barrier and aims to give our users a process to mediate them. The form gives space to explain why library error or extenuating circumstances may have contributed to the situation, or whatever information the user feels is relevant.“ Could be: “Fines and fees are expensive. If paying your fines is a problem, please let us know. You may ask for help with this form.” 2. The Appeals FAQ is not transparent in terms of the criteria or process used in evaluating appeals, nor in terms of what the user should expect in fine reduction.  For individuals with a disability, justifying late returns through a process which feels arbitrary may resurface a history of facing doubt and feeling misunderstood. To encourage neurominority users to appeal, a clear rubric outlining acceptable justifications and expected fine reductions would be more accessible. 3. The Appeals form requests information not readily available to the user, placing a significant burden of data collection onto the user to identify owning library, barcodes and other unfamiliar technical details. This is an access barrier likely to discourage neurominority users from filing appeals. Although this information may seem “easy” to access, for a neurodivergent individual it can be difficult to accurately assess the complexity and time required for this process, and may prevent them from appealing. 4. The online system for the payment of fines has significant accessibility issues. The login page for the merchant services page is extremely confusing. It isn’t clear that there are two different options for logging in. There isn’t a ‘reset password’ option. The request for a mobile phone number and carrier is unusual, the form can’t be completed with a phone number without a carrier, and the list of carriers isn’t complete. The use of Touchnet.com as a payment processor forces the user to give sensitive financial data to a third party rather than authorizing payment through a common platform like Paypal, Google Pay, or another well known and trusted vendor. Submitting credit card numbers over the phone is just as insecure. These barriers are an issue for all of our users, but for a stressed-out neurodivergent user they can lead to extreme frustration and a future reluctance to engage with the library altogether.  5. The system of referring fines to a department on another campus has the appearance of avoiding direct accountability to our users. While I as a staff member understand some of the reasoning behind our practice of referring all questions about fines to Library Account Services, upset users may hear “You can pay that fine in person on another campus.” as a way for library staff to defer responsibility and accountability to institutional authority. This creates barriers to future engagement. It has the ring of “Sorry, that’s not my department” and it is a referral that I absolutely hate to give to our users, especially when I know there may be an access barrier involved. 6. The practice of referring (or threatening to refer) users to collections, particularly for returned items, small amounts, and in advance of the time available for filing an appeal, may be perceived as a serious breach of trust and care for library users. Students, faculty, and staff are part of a learning community which should be mutually supportive and compassionate. Credit scores have significant impacts on many of the most important aspects of library users’ lives: housing, employment opportunities, even access to medical care through costs of insurance. These impacts are outsized for those marginalized individuals who are already most vulnerable for reasons of their disability. The value of small fines appears to have little impact on the economic health of a large institution, the cost of collection likely exceeds the value of the fines, and referring users to credit collection agencies may appear coercive, exploitative, or retaliatory. ### Conclusion It is difficult to convey the personal significance of having a chronic and lifelong disability, especially one that may be undiagnosed or is frequently dismissed. It can have major impacts on an individual’s sense of identity, their role in their community, and especially their sense of self worth.  In social work there is a model of harm reduction, an approach intended to reduce the negative consequences of chemical dependency disorders. Drug abuse has negative consequences, but focusing on responses that are intended to reduce harm, improve the overall quality of life of users, and offers them non-judgmental, non-coercive services, builds trust, compliance, and produces better overall outcomes than coercive or punitive approaches.  Late items can have an impact on all users. Some of our institutional practices for encouraging the timely return of items have significantly greater impacts on certain users. The requirement for the UW Libraries to assess fines and fees is established in the Washington Administrative Code. There also appears to be a great deal of latitude in how those requirements may be fulfilled by our institution, and I hope we are all working towards identifying better ways to resolve fines and fees that offer our users supportive positive regard.  I invite you to share this perspective as you feel is useful and appropriate toward improving library services. Equity is an important issue to me, and neurominority user access is an issue I intend to continue to ensure is being considered over the long term. To that end I may eventually share some of this information with others in the library, but I can imagine that could seem insensitive to you or your unit. So please let me know if you have ideas about ways of constructively promoting these ideas or if you have concerns or would like to respond to anything in this document before I share it.  Thanks for your patience with this response. Feel free to contact me or [share your comments](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OlJE04og2b-fz9uwHSrChqmUCKeL_1QmipxXOOofPvA/edit?usp=sharing). I would be happy to respond if you have any questions or responses, or if you would like to discuss any of this in person or on zoom. Sincerely james ## Short Version “We bear the responsibility to investigate and dismantle policies and practices that perpetuate inequities and have devalued, neglected or harmed BIPOC and other minoritized communities. We are committed to engaging in an ongoing process of identifying and confronting ways in which organizational and institutional culture, bias, and discrimination may inhibit the lives and education of groups that have been marginalized in our society, on our campuses, and in our libraries.”  - [From the UW Libraries EDI and Anti-racism position statement](https://lib.uw.edu/about/edi/). ### Neurodivergent library users are a significant and vulnerable minority group of our library users.  1. Neurominority individuals make up around 15–20% of the general population. This includes those with ADHD, anxiety, depression, brain injury, autistic people, and those with other significant biopsychosocial differences.[(1)](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Lt1PSgsUaepOhxnKdurG_aUnOagSCl_EJds4GeeYuXw/edit#bookmark=id.moba4a1ebeig)  2. The negative long term economic, educational, interpersonal, and health impacts of neurominority status have been well documented.[(2)](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Lt1PSgsUaepOhxnKdurG_aUnOagSCl_EJds4GeeYuXw/edit#bookmark=id.bdqxt4isyygw) Rates of diagnosis and access to care correlate with racial, gender, and income status.[(3)](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Lt1PSgsUaepOhxnKdurG_aUnOagSCl_EJds4GeeYuXw/edit#bookmark=id.o0h5x2at8rde),[(4)](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Lt1PSgsUaepOhxnKdurG_aUnOagSCl_EJds4GeeYuXw/edit#bookmark=id.fio96w495dne) Many individuals are undiagnosed, and many do not wish to reveal their diagnosis due to social stigma,[(5)](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Lt1PSgsUaepOhxnKdurG_aUnOagSCl_EJds4GeeYuXw/edit#bookmark=id.sbdy8oxaxgo4) especially where neurodivergence is intersectional with other minority status. 3. The following issues may also affect other vulnerable minority groups. Particularly our library’s first-generation, international, and English Language Learners, and users with chronic illness, mobility or sensory impairment may have similar experiences. ### The stresses incurred by library fees and debt collections impact neurominority users differently and more significantly. 1. Individuals with neurodevelopmental differences are likely to be charged fees more often. Challenges with attention to detail, forgetfulness, confusion, communication, school attendance, and a variety of other factors contribute to the likelihood of missing library due dates.[(6)](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Lt1PSgsUaepOhxnKdurG_aUnOagSCl_EJds4GeeYuXw/edit#bookmark=id.ta6vepd1qov2) 2. Individuals with neurodevelopmental differences are more seriously affected by stress induced by fees and debt collections. Stress contributes to executive dysfunction[(7)](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Lt1PSgsUaepOhxnKdurG_aUnOagSCl_EJds4GeeYuXw/edit#bookmark=id.hkdxrckh4zn2), emotional dysregulation[(8)](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Lt1PSgsUaepOhxnKdurG_aUnOagSCl_EJds4GeeYuXw/edit#bookmark=id.xlh1jct0ekj1) and has significant health effects on neurominority users including increased rates of chronic depression[(9)](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Lt1PSgsUaepOhxnKdurG_aUnOagSCl_EJds4GeeYuXw/edit#bookmark=id.vwmrwfnl53rx) and immune dysregulation.[(10)](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Lt1PSgsUaepOhxnKdurG_aUnOagSCl_EJds4GeeYuXw/edit#bookmark=id.7s16w5yv8op3) 3. Individuals with neurodevelopmental differences are more seriously affected by the economic impacts of fees. Precarious employment, difficulty maintaining routines, financial impulsivity, and numerous other factors[(11)](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Lt1PSgsUaepOhxnKdurG_aUnOagSCl_EJds4GeeYuXw/edit#bookmark=id.w3g7y0eg9ycv) already contribute to significant correlation between neurominority users, economic instability,[(12)](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Lt1PSgsUaepOhxnKdurG_aUnOagSCl_EJds4GeeYuXw/edit#bookmark=id.n2albpr7dgyd) and self-harm.[(13)](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Lt1PSgsUaepOhxnKdurG_aUnOagSCl_EJds4GeeYuXw/edit#bookmark=id.a078fuvmcp74) 4. Neurodivergent students are already at risk in the academic environment.[(14)](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Lt1PSgsUaepOhxnKdurG_aUnOagSCl_EJds4GeeYuXw/edit#bookmark=id.jmdnz4xzwvsn) Textbook costs create a significant barrier to academic success.[(15)](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Lt1PSgsUaepOhxnKdurG_aUnOagSCl_EJds4GeeYuXw/edit#bookmark=id.osjihaz4d95j) [(16)](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Lt1PSgsUaepOhxnKdurG_aUnOagSCl_EJds4GeeYuXw/edit#bookmark=id.w13uwnbw1r72) Frequent fees and suspension of borrowing privileges may deter neurominority students from using materials needed for courses.[(17)](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Lt1PSgsUaepOhxnKdurG_aUnOagSCl_EJds4GeeYuXw/edit#bookmark=id.ugmfpsmtup11) ### The appeals process does not eliminate the significant impacts of library fees and debt collections on neurominority users. 1. The process of appealing a fee is stressful, and waiting for an appeals decision extends that stress. For neurominority users, the demands of writing and submitting a narrative appeal and waiting for an uncertain outcome may discourage a justified appeal. 2. Appealing a fee pressures users to disclose disability status. If their disability is the primary reason for a late return, disclosing the disability may seem like the only option. When a neurominority constituent does not wish to disclose their status, they may be discouraged from appealing, even though their disability is relevant to the situation. 3. Appealing a fee demands that neurodivergent users perform tasks that their disability directly impacts. Neurominority users who have difficulty with organization, communication, or following complex procedures, may find the appeals process overwhelming. Asking for assistance to complete the form requires significant emotional and logistical labor from the user. 4. Appealing a fee resurfaces a user’s history of disability and discrimination for neurodivergent users. Asking a neurominority user to review and document personal circumstances to request leniency or justify a situation where they are simply unable to perform “normally” requires them to conduct and expose a self-evaluation that may surface a complex history of stigma, doubt, and criticism. ### There are serious issues with user’s options for paying fees and the appeals form.  1. The Appeals FAQ is not written in plain language. It is long and uses legal and academic language that may be confusing for users. The language is not user-centered. This may  serve as a barrier to access, not an enabler that encourages users to file appeals. 2. The Appeals FAQ does not clearly explain the criteria or process used in evaluating appeals, or what the user should expect in fee reduction. To encourage neurominority users to appeal, a clear rubric outlining acceptable justifications and expected fee reductions would be more accessible. 3. The Appeals form requires the user to identify the owning library, barcodes and other unfamiliar technical details. Although this information may seem “easy” to access for staff — for a neurodivergent individual it can be difficult to accurately assess the complexity and time required for this process, and may prevent them from appealing. 4. The online system for the payment of fees has significant accessibility issues. These barriers are an issue for all of our users, but for a stressed-out neurodivergent user they can lead to extreme frustration and a future reluctance to engage with the library altogether.   - The login page for the merchant services page is confusing; it isn’t clear that there are two different options for logging in.  - There isn’t a ‘reset password’ option.  - The request for a mobile phone number and carrier is unusual, the form can’t be completed with a phone number without a carrier, and the list of carriers isn’t complete.  - The use of touchnet.com requires the user to give sensitive financial data to a third party rather than the choice of a common and trusted payment platform. - Submitting credit card numbers over the phone is insecure. 5. The system of referring fee payment and appeals to a department on another campus has the appearance of avoiding direct accountability to our users. Upset users may hear “You can pay those fees in person on another campus.” as a way for library staff to defer responsibility and accountability to institutional authority.  6. The practice of referring users to a debt collections company may be perceived as a serious breach of trust and care for library users, particularly to collect fees on items that have been returned or for small amounts. 7. Damage to user’s credit scores may have significant impacts on many of the most important aspects of their lives: housing, employment opportunities, even access to medical care through costs of insurance; making referrals to the debt collections industry appear coercive, exploitative, or retaliatory. These impacts are outsized for those marginalized individuals who are already vulnerable for reasons of their disability. ### Sources 1. Doyle, Nancy. “Neurodiversity at work: a biopsychosocial model and the impact on working adults.” British medical bulletin vol. 135,1 (2020): 108-125. doi:10.1093/bmb/ldaa021 2. Henning, Colin T et al. “Longitudinal Associations Between Symptoms of ADHD and Life Success: From Emerging Adulthood to Early Middle Adulthood.” Journal of attention disorders vol. 28,7 (2024): 1139-1151. doi:10.1177/10870547241239148 3. Aylward, Brandon S et al. “Racial, Ethnic, and Sociodemographic Disparities in Diagnosis of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder.” Journal of developmental and behavioral pediatrics : JDBP vol. 42,8 (2021): 682-689. doi:10.1097/DBP.0000000000000996 4. Mowlem, Florence D et al. “Sex differences in predicting ADHD clinical diagnosis and pharmacological treatment.” European child & adolescent psychiatry vol. 28,4 (2019): 481-489. doi:10.1007/s00787-018-1211-3 5. Bisset, Matthew, et al. “Recent Attitudes toward ADHD in the Broader Community: A Systematic Review.” Journal of Attention Disorders, vol. 26, no. 4, 2022, pp. 537–48, [https://doi.org/10.1177/10870547211003671](https://doi.org/10.1177/10870547211003671). 6. Riccio, Cynthia A., et al. “Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: Manifestation in Adulthood.” Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, vol. 20, no. 2, 2005, pp. 249–69, [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acn.2004.07.005](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acn.2004.07.005). 7. Girotti, Milena et al. “Prefrontal cortex executive processes affected by stress in health and disease.” Progress in neuro-psychopharmacology & biological psychiatry vol. 85 (2018): 161-179. doi:10.1016/j.pnpbp.2017.07.004 8. Turkia, I. Ben, et al. “Emotional Dysregulation and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).” European Psychiatry, vol. 64, no. S1, 2021, pp. S217–S217, https://doi.org/10.1192/j.eurpsy.2021.579. 9. Sahmurova, Aida, et al. “ADHD Symptoms as a Stressor Leading to Depressive Symptoms among University Students: The Mediating Role of Perceived Stress between ADHD and Depression.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 19, no. 17, 2022, pp. 11091-, [https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191711091](https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191711091). 10. Saccaro, Luigi F et al. “Inflammation, Anxiety, and Stress in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.” Biomedicines vol. 9,10 1313. 24 Sep. 2021, doi:10.3390/biomedicines9101313 11. Ahlberg, Rickard, et al. “Real-Life Instability in ADHD from Young to Middle Adulthood: A Nationwide Register-Based Study of Social and Occupational Problems.” BMC Psychiatry, vol. 23, no. 1, 2023, pp. 336–336, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-023-04713-z. 12. Biederman, Joseph, and Stephen V. Faraone. “The Effects of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder on Employment and Household Income.” Medscape General Medicine, vol. 8, no. 3, 2006, pp. 12–12. 13. Beauchaine, Theodore P et al. “ADHD, financial distress, and suicide in adulthood: A population study.” Science advances vol. 6,40 eaba1551. 30 Sep. 2020, doi:10.1126/sciadv.aba1551 14. Weyandt, Lisa, et al. “The Performance of College Students with and without ADHD: Neuropsychological, Academic, and Psychosocial Functioning.” Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, vol. 35, no. 4, 2013, pp. 421–35, [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-013-9351-8](https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-013-9351-8). 15. Clinton, Virginia, and Shafiq Khan. “Efficacy of Open Textbook Adoption on Learning Performance and Course Withdrawal Rates: A Meta-Analysis.” AERA Open, vol. 5, no. 3, 2019, pp. 233285841987221-, [https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858419872212](https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858419872212). 16. Jenkins, J. Jacob, et al. “Textbook Broke: Textbook Affordability as a Social Justice Issue.” Journal of Interactive Media in Education : JiME, vol. 2020, no. 1, 2020, pp. 3-, [https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.549](https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.549). 17.   Crist, Beth, and Meg DePriest. “Removing Barriers to Access: Eliminating Fines and Fees for a Win-Win for Your Library and Teens.” Young Adult Library Services, vol. 17, no. 1, 2018, pp. 14–17. **