Jump to content

New to the Forum?

Tell us a bit about yourself so we can welcome you to the Virtual Roundtable

1149 topics in this forum

    • 7 replies
    • 0 replies
    • 6 replies
    • 4 replies
    • 8 replies
  1. Hello

    • 2 replies
  2. Hi

    • 4 replies
  3. Be on my way

    • 63 replies
    • 6 replies
    • 13 replies
    • 9 replies
    • 8 replies
  4. Hi

    • 4 replies
  5. Hi!

    • 2 replies
  6. New Guy in Oklahoma

    • 10 replies

    • Based on my understand - yes, the unit would be in compliance. However, I tihnk you have to look at why the BSA made this YPT rule.  In essence, YPT rules exist for two main purposes 1) protect youth from situations where abuse is more likely to occur, & 2) protect adult volunteers from being in situations which are more likely to lead to accusations of abuse.  I know there is a third reason - to protect the BSA in lawsuits, but for the sake of discussion, let's not focus on that at this time.  I expect that the BSA leadership felt that situations with a female youth was alone with two adult males was a scenario where there was enough possibility of abuse or allegations of abuse that they created this rule. Imagine a scenario where a female adult leader is on premises but out of sight and two adult male leaders are alone with a single female youth.  My understanding is that this would meet the YPT requirements.  Yet, it doesn't do anything to minimize the possibilty or abuse or abuse allegations over the original rules. This is where I think that the BSA YPT rules are inherently unwiedly.  The BSA would have been better taking a more progressive stand by staying with their original two-deep rules or by taking an approach where no individiual youth of a one gender can be alone with one or more adults of a different gender.  i.e., two youth females and two adult males - OK.  one youth female, one adult female, one adult male - OK.  one youth female, one youth male, one adult female, one adult male - OK.  one youth male, two adult females - not OK.  etc.
    • I find the 8 methods are largely complimentary and go to building a diverse exerpience for Scouts.  For example, if you focus mostly on advancement - then eventually Scouts get bored.  If you focus mostly on outdoors - the same.  So, I don't think I'd rank them - but instead ask myself - what's the best I can do in each? The strongest troops that I know seem to do well in all. Sure, not every one requires the same level of effort - but it doesn't mean it's any less important.  For example, an active outdoor program requires lots of time whereas uniforming does not.  Uniforming is more about setting the proper expectations early and simply reminding Scouts along the way.  Sure, with uniforming you can put some energy into things like uniform closets and "Class B" uniforms -  but even those don't require too much effort once they get going. I'd also suggest that focusing on all 8 of them provides opportunities for more scouts & adults to get involved.  Scouts may get bored by high school with just patrol method, camping, and advancement.  That's where the focus on personal growth, leadership development, and adult association pays off.  Adult Assocation and outdoor program create opportunities for more adults to take on small rolls.  
    • $0, but our yearly pack fees are on the higher side. 
    • And "2 deep leadership" is not the same as "no one on one contact".
    • Amazed at times how many scouters do not fully understand the concept of 2 deep leadership.  We had a parent show up at 10pm last month during our chapter ordeal (one of 3 chapters at the camp that weekend) because the SM had told him that they only had one adult there from the troop and had to have 2 deep leadership.  Between the 3 chapters, along with lodge advisors, there were easily 20 or more adults, not to mention the adults going through ordeal.  Imagine how unwieldy things like ordeals and such would become if every scout had to have 2 adults from his troop present. 
  • Who's Online (See full list)