Jump to content

Eagledad

Members
  • Content Count

    8595
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    105

Everything posted by Eagledad

  1. And this is the reasoning where we disagree. You are suggesting the impossible. The BSA set the system in place to protect the kids. But, they aren't negligent for the bad actions of individuals. Barry
  2. True, but it could be the death nail. And, honestly, your response suggest how far you are willing to let this go. You are probably justified, I wouldn't go there anymore. You are victim looking for restoration of your life. Plain and simple. You can't control the system trying to work that out, so don't get in the habit of justifying the wreckage. Surly you can respect our passion for the mission and vision of the program and the impact of its loss to our culture. I'm not saying our pain is greater than your's, but the inequity of how it's being resolved just feels immoral. B
  3. The organization was struggling before the law suit. There is a risk. But if you want to get more into details, lets say at the very least the program as intended by the current mission and vision is at risk. Barry
  4. Your basic reasoning all along has been the numbers. Many of us were personally solicited (pushed) by law firms to join the law suit. When everyone is asked to join, the numbers become meaningless against my experience. Barry
  5. Well said. I'm not sure where I stand with putting some burden of the compensation on everyone for the bad acting of a very few. That is a worthy discussion. But, the risk is that the inconvenience is the total loss of the BSA. I think it reflects the unfairness of the situation. Barry
  6. OK, but somehow the splits loose posts. Or I just don't see the new threads. If that is the case, I apologize. I do agree with the splitting, but this is like the gay issue years back, it's complicated and so intertwined that one specific thread is almost next to impossible. Barry
  7. Really! How! As I said, elephant in the room. Yep, standard blow off when emotional reasoning isn't convincing. I'm reasonable, Most here are reasonable. Convince us BSA is truly at fault. Here is you problem with me and several of us, I was heavily involved with the BSA for over 30 years at both the youth and adult ages and at all levels of administration. I worked and trained with thousands of adults and scouts. I never heard of an act sexual abuse. Now, I'm not so naïve to believe it didn't happen, and that the numbers are in the hundreds over the many dozens of year
  8. And giving them full blame to the point of non existence is just as insane. Ironically, you want to make every scout today, and the future, victims. And there it is, deep pockets. I have no trouble with the truth that the BSA is the target because they are the only capable source of compensation for sexual victims. At least that would be honest. I don't believe that fair, and that is the intellectual conversation that you are scared to have. But, it is the elephant in the room. Barry
  9. This is not a fair conversation. Nobody here wishes you ill will, in fact just the opposite. This is not about us against them, as a couple here keep suggesting, it's about question of fairness over the future of a century old youth organization.. But, every time the discussion veers toward that question, the mod steps in and reformates (deletes) that part of the discussion and then says stick to the subject. Then, the thread starts out away from the question of fairness, but eventually works it's way back, AGAIN. I believe many of the members here want to express a frustration. But, not the m
  10. One would only have to list the percentage of male adults to discount sexual abuse risks in the GSUSA. In general, fathers are not very welcome. That is their real YP, something that the BSA, or most other youth scouting organizations can't do. Barry
  11. Yes, but it's easy to argue if they wanted. How many adults haven't rode a bicycle in five years, yet do they still have the skill? Does the current course change every year? And, if the adults are practicing youth protection all the time, does the "current" training have significant meaning in the field? I have deal with this same issue here at work. We take a lot of annual training that hasn't changed in 15 years, but the managers are held accountable to our participation, so we have to repeat it, over and over. And because of the anti-BSA folks we see even here on the forum, a pre-test
  12. I'm sitting here thinking about the families who struggled with funds and eventually chose to leave the program. In many cases it wasn't the funding that drove them off, it was the participation expected of the parents time. The real issue is that parents of low income families don't have a lot of time to participate or volunteer. Funds (lack of) are the easy excuse, but not the reason. I saw this a lot with Tiger families. I remember one mother who was nervous about her deaf son joining our troop. She felt compelled to participate to insure he would be safe in our program. That was desp
  13. I can't recall anyone saying that scouting was a bargain, poor choice of words. But, they will say the value of what they got from scouting is worth the price. Still, I know the cost can be intimidating. Our units, district, and council, always had scholarship funds available FOR ANYONE that wanted to participate, but was limited by their funds. If families wanted to participate, funding is there. But, in general, the families that ask for help were the ones that felt the program was worth the asking. Same goes with the families that could afford the cost. If scouting has to measured as a barg
  14. We had a similar situation in our district 25 years ago. Everyone knew about it, but they couldn’t do anything because all adults involved were consenting to the situation. The troop and charter liked the guy as a SM, so council didn’t want to get in litigation over it. Council found a reason to kick him out when someone witnesses him offering a scout a beer. Barry
  15. If the BSA is taken out, history will show it as a victim of this culture. The noble reputation won’t change and it will be talked about with envy for many years. I’ve passed along countless stories of my dads scouting adventures during WWII. I’ve heard my sons pass along mine, as well as their own. My grandkids will pass them along as well. A fitting legacy for a great program. Barry
  16. I never said you shouldn't be here, I said, "why are you here?". Meaning, what do you want from this forum? The answer is not clear to me. I wasn't attacking, I was seeking clarity. I didn't word it well, my bad. And what are your boundaries. You keep, let's say, moving the goal posts. Let's keep this simple so that we know when each know the boundary's; in one (just one) simple sentence, what do you want from this thread. Honestly, I think you will struggle with your boundaries more than us. What does that mean? Who is WE? Sounds like a scorched earth mission? Is
  17. But, your off topic post is responding to your own off topic posts. When your post are out of bounds, should you not expect opposing responses? Fuel on the Fire? Saying nothing sometime has the most positive effect in keeping the discussion strait. Barry
  18. It's a scary world for kids today. I heard a statistic that percentage of kids born in a single parent family in the 1950s was something less than a quarter of today. We had a lot of scouts who struggled in their personal lives, but as a scout leader, I found divorce by far to be the most common contributor for scouts personal suffering. Something like 50% of our nations children come from divorced parents. The statistics of the struggling behaviors for adults who were children of divorced families is heart wrenching. But, the culture just seems to keep piling on our youth. The issue wi
  19. Suggesting that the loss of scouting for future youth is not a form of moral loss to the culture (my words for abuse) is to suggest the program itself does not promote moral and character growth. That would mean that the BSA mission of " to prepare young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law." is not valid. I have personally witnessed in my own personal observations of many scouts who came to scouting to get away from abusive, harmful and stressful environments in their personal lives. They craved a place w
  20. Again, I can't see it. I believe they may have data in the areas they have more direct control like the MBs. But not unit level unless the units were more forthcoming. I was told (unofficially) about 25 years ago that the biggest source of abuse in the BSA was MB counselors. Which, made sense at the time because youth protection policies where just starting to include MB counselors. I could see some better data their because counsels have a little more control at the level of the program. National could have more data, but it would surprise me. Barry
  21. All of your points may be part of the reason. My observation of the BSA bureaucratic and managing functions of the organization is that they aren't organized or efficient enough to acquire such data. How much of abuse calls are actually abuse and not just threats by parents to get their way. It's a lot. Or, how much real abuse is handled within the unit and never reported outside the unit. Again it's a lot. What one parent's definition of abuse is another parents idea of discipline. Very common in sports also. And then, how can that even be categorized? I have a great deal of experience w
  22. We learned the hard way that sometimes the best reaction to bad behavior is to quietly ask the scout to call their parents. They always made the call. Not as a punishment, but for a period of calm. Many times bad behavior (really bad decisions I guess) requires time for thought instead of instant reaction. Many of the scouts felt calling parents was a punishment. But, they also knew it was a last resort and they pushed too far. Once they were asked to make the call, there was no going back. And it wasn't just the adults, the senior scouts could make the decision. They rarely did without
  23. Yes, you are right. When parents visited our troop, I told them that the troop (troops in general) is a safe place. Most misinterpret that to mean that scouts are safe from physical and mental harm, but I explain what it really means is scouts are safe from persecution for their bad decisions. The nature of learning and maturing from wrong decisions is making wrong decisions. The challenge for the adults is accepting wrong decisions as growth toward good character, not bad character in of itself. Most adults find that a hard challenge because our parenting nature is to coach change
  24. No, not all is related to child safety. My teacher kids tell me many of the safe guards and policies are for protecting the teachers. Kids aren't stupid, they know how to take advantage of a system and some are willing. Scouting is becoming a thing of the past because the success of the program relies on trust. Even this discussion is how to undermine that process. Scouting is a practice of applying the Scout Oath and Law instead of rules and policies. The culture (or is it counter-culture) wants rules and polices. Barry
  25. More than once I took a scout home after a campout because their parents never showed up. It only happen once for that scout because it was one of the few times the parent had to meet a grumpy scoutmaster. Barry
×
×
  • Create New...