Re: RIGHT TO DENY ADMISSION
(no name) ((no email))
Sun, 26 May 1996 17:33:07 -0500
I just finished discussing this issue with Jessica right after she has
awaken from a nap this afternoon. We have two different points-of-
view on this issue, both which I feel are valid. I'm not going to say
much on her point-of-view, but she may feel ready to post it herself.
The BSA allows the "Chartered Partner" (the organization agreeing
to enter into a relationship with the BSA, through the local Council)
the OPTION of restricting membership and leadership of that unit in
any legal manner it sees. The restriction has to make sense and has
to be consistant with the BSA's religious and non-discriminatory
policies. I've been trying to find a reference to this option somewhere,
but I can only find references to restricting Exploring membership in
law enforcement, fire services, emergency services and similar units.
Most units in the BSA's earlier days were "restrictive" to a degree of
some sort: you lived in a particular neighborhood, you belonged to
a particular Pack and Troop. There was little "resistance" about it...
most kids didn't even think about the fact that they could go to another
Troop....their parents thought about it even less. Our publications
even "supported" this contention that "after you graduate from your
Pack, you became a member of your community's Troop" and talked
about your "family of Scouting" in the community.
As the number of units closed up in the 70s and 80s, the parents and
Scouts were encouraged to "shop around" more and that's where
many units informally lifted their "restrictions"...it was either that, or
faced merger or death of the unit. Again, our literature supported this
"shopping around" and said less and less on "you may find a Troop
which is also chartered by the same organization that charters your
Pack".
There was another factor: the emergence of speciality Explorer units,
many of which were chartered to police and fire departments. In order
to accommodate their insurance underwriters and chiefs, they had to
install "requirements for membership" which included clean criminal
records, a age requirement (most was 16), and in some cases, a height
and weight requirement. This wasn't "discriminatory", it was common
sense, since in the case of volunteer fire and rescue departments, you
have to be tall enough to get into the vehicle or to hang on without
fear of falling; you have to be thin (and in good physical shape) enough
to endure the physical nature of rapid movement and reaction.
The BSA went along with this request from police and fire departments.
Some Scouting units employed restrictions based on school districts
and worked with neighboring units to insure that those living outside
the district but still wanted to be a Cub or Scout get placed into a unit
that is closest to their home. Again, this is nothing more than common
sense on the part of the chartering organization and the unit.
However, restricting membership is seen as a negative, as a discriminator
against those as Jessi stated, "live just right over the line" and wanted
to become a Cub or Scout because "they are friends with someone in
that unit". They could be disswayed from becoming Scouts altogether if
they can't be with their friends. Most units are accommodating and will
accept a kid "right over the line" if all possible. However, for me growing
up, "right over the line"-- someone living in an apartment facing where I
lived -- could take them upwards of thirty minutes to get to to take them
home and to pick them up if the kid wasn't willing to jump the fence,
cross four lanes of very busy traffic on a major highway, and then jump
the other fence in order to be picked up with me!!
When reading Carroll Hale's (Hey Carroll...long time no hear!!) recount
of how St. Mark's Pack handled their membership, Jessica asked me
if that could be just a bit petty...after all, she said, they could wait the
additional time for the city school kids to get to St. Mark's. When I
explained that many of the teachers and staff were also the Den Leaders,
and when I explained that many of the kids were having problems getting
to St. Mark's from other parts of the city, she said "I understand and
thanks for explaining it to me...but I still don't like it. When I was Den
Leader, I had to be very flexible and waited for all my boys to get to our
home; I don't see why they couldn't do the same."
I think sometimes we forget that in most cases, we are trying to provide
a community or neighborhood-based program with adult volunteers that
for the most part, have a limited amount of personal time. Less now than
our parents used to have, or that other adults used to have in the past.
No, let me restate this: We are trying to provide a community or
neighborhood-based program with adults that for the most part, have
different time priorities than we used to see among adults. The
amount of "free time" hasn't really changed; it's the fact that now, we
have family events to go and participate in; our children have more
choices and *use those choices* to their benefits (which means that
as a result, we have less time because we are serving as "limo drivers"
and "personal managers" for our children as they go from one event
to another and then home). When we do volunteer our time as Scouters,
we have to take into account our family "needs and wants", and we
either accommodate our family or our interests (in this case, Scouting)
with a very few of us doing both.
This leads to some units wanting to "narrow down" the amount of
"hassle" that they have to deal with by *legally* restricting where they
would pull membership from and under what environmental conditions.
Membership restriction has *always*been a part of the BSA's program,
and in a large part, was how we became so large in the 50s and 60s...
because EVERYONE wanted their own "Scout Troop" and "Cub Pack"
and the BSA accommodated everyone by providing them with the
resources to do so. But today, not everyone wants a Scouting unit
or even feels that their part of town *needs* a Scouting unit, and those
few units left are forced to be as flexible as possible in accepting kids
from all over into their units. In some cases, I have been in Districts
whereby some Troops and Packs were county-wide, and it took literally
almost ALL NIGHT to get everyone back home and then you back home
after a Troop meeting!!
While my wife (and others) will disagree with me, I think that St.Mark's
and other units that restrict their membership based on something
LOGICAL and AGREEABLE (like where the kid goes to school or
lives within), are providing a good program for both youth and adults.
It's when they restrict using things like "on the east side of the railtracks
in town" (when everyone KNOWS that only blacks and poor whites
live on the west side of the tracks), do I have a personal problem with.
And I've been in Councils and Districts where EXACTLY that kind of
"restriction"--which IS discriminatory-- went on for YEARS.
Settummanque!
(MAJ) Mike L. Walton (Settummanque, the blackeagle) (
co-Owner, Blackeagle Services of Kentucky (502.826.7046) __)_
174 Chapelwood Drive, Henderson, Kentucky 42420-5036 | ** |]
(H) 502.827.9201 (F) 502.826.7046 (W) 888.284.4848 (yea!) coffee?
anytime!
(Email) blackeagle@hcc-uky.campus.mci.net/kyblkeagle@AOL.COM
(WWW) http://scout.net/~cardinal/index.htm
"Geoworks & Leaders' Online--because EVERY PC can open doors!!!"
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City | 
