False Positive: Transphobic Regimes, Ableist Abandonment, and Evidence-Based Practice

This paper explores the relationship between EBP as a system of knowledge governance, its implementation in library work, and the means by which librarians’ value-neutral commitments to EBP consequently serve the interests of oppressive regimes. I expand on this contention by first exploring the origination and early adoption of EBP first in medical research domains and then in policy-based decision making — not because EBP is especially constitutive of quality knowledge production, but rather because EBP is reflective of a hegemonic commitment to an ideologically positivist presumption that empirical evidence grounded in neutral, unbiased research will lead to beneficial outcomes. To the contrary, these commitments create conditions wherein EBP can be wielded by capitalist and state violence workers as a means of controlling and subjugating at-risk groups. To solidify this claim, I present two case studies. First, I focus on the use of EBP as a force for centering the “needs” of capital — especially over the needs of people with disabilities — during the COVID pandemic. Second, I analyze the means by which the Cass Review makes use of EBP in order to drive transphobic policy goals. I conclude with a call for library workers to reject the notion of neutrality entailed in EBP while instead aiming for a more robust perspective on librarianship through the lens of class liberation and solidarity.