Re: 2ND post: Need Some Advice (Life to Eagle)
settummanque, or blackeagle (blkeagle@DYNASTY.NET)
Thu, 13 Nov 1997 20:30:39 -0600
Bruce Cobern wrote in response to Jim Peterson's question:
>I understood exactly what you are saying. I think you are stuck.
>Question 1: Did these boys fill one of the positions of responsibility in
>the troop for ANY six months since earning Life? If so then they have >met
that requirement. Similarly, were they active participants (begging for
>the moment the definition) for ANY six months since attaining Life?
>Again, if so they have met the requirement.
>
>If not, did they meet either or both of these requirements as members of
>the Post? If so, then I believe they have met the requirement, regardless
>of whether they wish to advance through the Post or the Troop. If they
>wish to use Post time to qualify in the troop then I believe the SM should
>have a discussion with the Advisor about how active they actually were >in
the Post.
To piggyback onto what Bruce stated here with regard to Explorer postions,
leadership positions within the Post or Ship are good enough and can be used
in lieu of the leadership position requirement for Boy or Varsity Scouts.
The key here, Jim, is what Bruce stated in the last sentence above....the SM
and Post Advisor should be talking with each other about the
Scout/Explorer's progress.
>As to definitions, national WILL take the position that as long as they
>have been registered in Scouting for the required time, and had not been
>removed from your unit, they have met the requirement.
So true. The current "thought pattern" from their point-of-view (rightly or
wrongly) is that "if a Scout is an active member of a unit, does his best to
participate with that unit, and have met all of the other requirements, he
is considered "in good standing" and therefore in this case, the
participation requirement has been met fully.
> So, did your troop
>do anything to terminate their membership?
Or to transfer them to the Post??
>There is absolutely NO requirement that either of these two requirements
>be met in the LAST six months before the Eagle board. If he makes Life at
>15, stays till he is 16, then disappears until just before his 18th
>birthday he has met the requirements, way back when.
Which is something that Bruce and I and some others have been around and
around with, Jim.....there's no requirement, but common Scouter sense says
that those things should be met as an active Life Scout and member of the
Troop's program. But, the bottom line is what *National* thinks, and they
will side with the same thought process (good or bad) that Bruce stated here
above.
>> This issue began to surface last spring at our annual leader's
>> retreat and planning session. At that time we drafted an
>> attendance and participation statement. It was centered around
>> the "show scout spirit" requirement. We stated that since the
>> SM does not observe the scouts at school, at home or in the
>> community that the only environment in which to observe the
>> scout was in troop meetings and activities. Therefore, the SM
>> could only evaluate whether or not the scout demonstrated that
>> he lived by the scout oath and law was at troop meetings and
>> activities. Unfortunately, that is a subjective call...is ONE
>> meeting every two months enough to "observe"? Hmmmmmm.
Yes it is. Remember that you're NOT "observing his behavior". What the
Scoutmaster (SM) shoud be observing is how the Scout interacts with others
in the Troop during Troop operations and Troop activities. The Scout should
be living the Scout Oath and Law daily, and that's what the requirement
states.
Bruce adds:
>If the SM doesn't see how these boys act outside of Scouting, then HE
>needs to expend the energy to go and find out, if he really has any
>doubts. He, or the unit, can't just say that because we only see you in a
>Scouting context that is all we will judge.
Sometimes, this is unrealistic (especially in larger cities where the Scout
attends high school a long way from his community or neighborhood). That's
where those other references...the high school people, the Scout's employer,
the neighbors, others....come in handy to assist the Scoutmaster and the
members of the Board of Review with that "evaluation of his character and
citizenship".
While the SM only sees him during Troop meetings and outings, there's a
entire other web of folks that sees and observes the Scout on a daily basis
outside of Scouting....church leaders and Sunday School teachers and
coaches, sports coaches and leaders, other students, teachers, like I
mentioned above with employers and neighbors, and co-workers. I would also
ask some of his friends as well if I was concerned.
>In summary, AFTER THE FACT, I don't think there is really much you >can do,
especially if these boys had met the time and leadership >requirements in
the troop before moving to the post.
There's something that I would do if I'm concerned that Bruce didn't
mention....I can enclose a letter to the Eagle Board of Review and ask the
Scout Executive to forward it along with the other materials to the National
Court of Honor for viewing and review; or the Scout Executive can draft up a
letter stating your concerns and forward it along with the Eagle packets to
National. In this way, your concerns are addressed at both the local and
national levels, and it allows the Scouts involved to respond at the closest
levels without an appeal.
Bruce and I sometimes disagree on advancement matters, but this is one of
the few times that we both agree....if the boys met the requirements as
stated, there's not much that Scoutmaster nor Advisor can do about them not
attaining Eagle.
As far as getting their Eagle Scout Badges while part of the Post, it
doesn't make any difference at all....and it could help with sustaining the
status of that Post beyond the interests of those two adults "keeping it
together".
Perhaps a joint Post- Troop Awards Program/Court of Honor could be arranged
in which the Eagle Scout Badges are presented by the Troop and Post jointly.
Be creative....this comes only ONCE in the life of a Scout!!
Thanks, Bruce, for allowing me to piggyback onto your great comments to Jim
and all of us!
Settummanque!
(c) 1997 Mike Walton ("no such thing as strong coffee,...") (502) 827-9201
(settummanque, the blackeagle) http://dynasty.net/users/blkeagle
241 Fairview Dr., Henderson, KY 42420-4339 blkeagle@dynasty.net
kyblkeagle@aol.com or waltonm@hq.21taacom.army.mil
---- FORWARD in service to youth ----
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City | 
