Eagledad

Maybe it was an over exaggeration, but a recommendation to follow the scout's wishes as a first step is not, IMO , a reasonable response. In fact, I think gender identification at this age is so serious that it requires full immediate involvement of the parents. I can't believe calling the parents first wasn't even considered. I also agree with you that the parents are likely already aware of the situation, which is why they would get a few strong words from me for not working and preparing the volunteers of their sons troop for what they are about to experience. I've had that discussion with parents who felt the troop was a safe place to experiment with ADD medication on Troop camp outs without telling the troop. If the parents didn't know their son was considering this change, then that is a different, but just as complicated situation that requires special attention by experts that are likely not in the troop. I believe this is such a political hot potato in our culture at this time that the quick reaction by some folks is more to support and protect the political side of the situation than doing what is best for the scout and his family. That is neither compassionate nor safe for the scout as far as I'm concerned. Barry

No, I'm not a mental health professional. I was not focusing specifically on gender situations. However, once an adult starts down the road of supporting children in their emotions, I believe that support can be abuse. Barry

Yep, this is exactly right. Council would really rather the units figure it out. BUT, still make the call if for no other reason than to protect yourself. What I learned over the years is that you learn who to trust on these kinds of issues. They are old timers who have been around for a while. In our case, he was the District Commissioner. But, it could be anybody. And, if it goes far enough, call the police. But as was said, one you go that rabbit hole, everyone's lives takes a turn. I learned that once family issues raise to a level of community concern, the parents will act. Either by stepping back or finding help. We once had a parent drive scouts to an event drunk. When we approached him, he was so ashamed that he went strait to rehab for three weeks. A very active ASM we confronted for issues left the program and went to therapy. He never got involved again. One family packed their bags and left town, But, kids play their parents too. I have witnessed dozens of scouters (mostly Scoutmasters) get in trouble because they became part of the games between the scout and parents. The SM thought they were building a close trusting relationship, but the scouts saw the relationship as an alliance to use against the parents. Then there the scouts who are truly suffering from mental illness. Each case is different, and each one is unpredictable. The hard ones are the parents who don't give much information because they are embarrassed about it. But, they still expect the unit to treat their son normal. I see many of these kids today as adults and they are still struggling with life. I have a close family member who has experienced a lot in her life, including different roles of gender as well as volunteered homelessness. Which is a very dark life for a women. I believe today's new family scouting BSA would risk her more harm. I wish the BSA could train scouters of the behaviors and signs for struggling scouts and families, but looking back, each case was so different that I struggle to even generalize. What I can say is that even in abusive situations, the parents have to be brought in sooner than later. They have to be part of the solution. And in most cases, they will drive everyone involved (including the unit) toward the best possible solution. Not always, sometimes a higher authority is required, but even then you want to hand it over to the experts and get out of the way. We are just volunteers of a youth scouting organization. Nothing more. Beary

Both the scouts and parents knew when they joined the troop that there would be no secrets between the scout leaders and parents. Scouting is not a safe place when any Scout Leader puts themselves above the parents. Such self-righteous arrogance only leads to trouble and possible harm. observing hundreds of difficult struggles over the years, I can't think of a single one that was better when the parents where the last ones to know. But I can think of many that would not have raised to level it did if the parents were brought in sooner. That being said, our troop experienced many abuse situations, so lets not assume naivety on the subject. I have been called by the local police in the middle of the night to help with family abuse issues. I also have observed a lot of mental illness issues over the years and to just push off these things as simple life choices is naive and dangerous. Adults should have more compassion for youth. Barry

So we are on the verge of debating whether or not to call the parents. This is exactly why I am against the BSA accepting transgender and gay youth. Volunteers now feel licensed and privileged to encourage youth toward a lifestyle that may only be a phase or a mental health condition, and possibly without the parents knowledge. That is child abuse as far as I’m concerned, and at the very least, not friendly. A side note: We had behavior concerns with a 12 year old scout, so we called the parents to inform them of the behavior, and ask for their help dealing with the it. Our SM at the time explained that that their son had been displaying the behavior for two months. Against the advice of the previous SM, the new SM was trying to deal with the behavior without including the parents because he didn’t want the scout to get in trouble. The parents left meeting without saying much, but the CC got a call from their lawyer that night threatening litigation. They didn’t sue, but the reason is another sad story for the scout. I taught in the SM courses to Always, Always Always tell the parents everything. Not because they might sue, but because they are the parents and have the right to know. Barry

I don't care what politically correct experts say, this is a very unusual and sensitive situation that will likely have huge long term implications on the whole family. That is way above most scouters' pay grade. Does he even know what bathroom he will use? Youth protection? I have a family member that identifies her gender differently on different days. Call the parents. Barry

My first reaction is talk to the parents. Barry

What is a reasonable amount of time before it's not adding time? Three weeks, two weeks, two days? There are a lot of troops that hold only one BOR night each month because the troop doesn't have the resources for more. Rarely does the forum get upset with that policy. If the scouts' know the policies a head of time, they can manage their agendas and schedules. So, I have trouble with this adding requirements and time thing. For me, the question is why. If the SM is forcing attendance because of the much bigger problem of program driving away scouts (and we really don't know that to be true), then the SM needs to shift the focus for the sake of all the scouts, not just the older scouts or scouts wanting a conference. Barry

Exactly. But, typically the fix is not so easy. I've said here several times on this forum that the older scout program is the troops primary indicator of the health of the whole program. If the older scouts aren't coming, the whole program needs some adjusting. Barry

Adding a requirement? Please don’t mention that in your polite chat. Unit policies on conferences and BORs don’t surprise me anymore. Until I got active on forums, I thought everybody did them like us; Any time any day. But I was put in my place several times. I was even scolded on this forum for awarding my Webelos their activity pins at every den meeting. Every unit seems to have their own policies that work for them. So, while I agree you need to have a chat, I wouldn’t use the “everyone else does it different” cliche, because everyone else does do it different...from everyone else. Instead, approach the SM with your understanding of the BSA policy followed with your interpretation of the reasoning for policy instructions. Don’t start by putting your SM on the defensive because I, lol, silly me, I mean some SMs don’t handle hostile conversations well without sometime to consider the presented points. Considering some of the policies from other scouters on this forum, your SM isn’t that far off the track. And I’m sure he is thinking the same way. So, you need to present your interpretations pretty convincingly and warmly. Then move because this is not a hill to die on. I recommend supporting your interpretations with as much published documentation as you can do that your points aren’t just your theories. But instead long time traditional reasoning that has been in scouting for many generations. Then allow him to time to consider your points. Who knows, the policy might change after a few weeks , or even a few days. Barry

A lot was going on in my life around your sons age and I had to make some hard choices, one of them was staying with the troop or move on to a Scuba Explorer Post. Without actually seeing your sons relationship with the troop and the program, I can't advise on a direction. But, looking back at the choices I made back at the age of 15, I can say those decisions followed me well through my adult life. My faith guides my life, and part of that guidance is "Patience". Patience gives us the time to get past our emotions and let logical reasoning guide our decisions. Many of our scouts were active in other outside activities while staying active in the troop. But we were open-minded to outside opportunities because they added opportunities to the scout's life experiences. That being said, I had a few SM Conferences where I guided the scout to understand the chaos in his life as a result of to many pans in the fire. As his father, I would look at the opportunities for you son to practice making challenging decisions. As a Scout Leader, I'm concerned about character growth and I would mentor him that life is often hard, and what ever choices we make will have conclusions that will lead to more choices. I would rather his choice would be to learn how to deal with difficult situations, so as to learn skills for his future in life, than to run with the possibility of regrets years down the road. I'm pretty much black and white with my guidance, but the decisions are always theirs. I've been there, these are tough decisions. Patience. Barry

The forum should take up "Conditional Scouter" as a symbol for quality scouting. Both Baden Powell and Bill Hillcourt are Conditional Scouters by definition of how they presented and protected the scouting program. Both these men are held in the highest honor for youth scouting. In the Spirit of scouting's founders, Conditional Scouters are a brotherhood of guardians that protect the mission 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. I am a Conditional Scouter and proud of it. I am a Scouter.com Conditional Scouter and proud of it. Barry

I find National to be the big question. They seem to have bungled this enough that who knows what's next. It's almost as if they are sitting and waiting to finish development of the program with reactions to the volunteers hurdles. Barry

That was my first thought as well. All choices are, or should be, conditional on ethical principles and moral values. In fact, the point of scouts learning from their decisions in the program is developing habits of making choices conditional to the Oath and Law. My following 2nd thought was the term isn't scout like for a values program. Thanks Barry

What I said was that the phrase "family scouting" wasn't common in a boy scout discussion. Families may have camped with a troop, but it wasn't common enough to suggest family scouting. The BSA has started something I'm not sure they can stop. Even if Family Scouting will only be reserved for the pack, I'm not sure parents will leave it there. Especially now that big sister is in one of the patrols. And, if membership is the goal, would National really want to restrict it. Barry

I guess that is one way to deflect it. However, consider the scouting family of the ASM dad, CC mom, daughter Sally and son Bob in two separate patrols, and little Cub Scout Susie all on the same Troop campout. I'm not sure anyone cares who is responsible for little Susie, it's a family fun scouting weekend. Get two or three of those families involved.......... I think that's what Eagle94 referring to. For the last 100 years, family scouting and boy scouting were never two phrases mentioned together while discussing the boy scouting experience. I've heard it talked about quite a bit this year. Maybe that is a genie that should never have left the bottle. The moderators are going to eventually switch out the Patrol Method forum to a RV discussion forum. And Religion will never get it's own forum. Barry

Never mind, I found it on Google. Barry

Accountability isn't bullying, it's balance. Sorry to see you go, the list will miss you. Barry

What is a "conditional scouter"? Barry

I’m not a professional. I’m an old time retired scoutmaster with passion for the traditional patrol method program. I’ve been very critical of the recent changes, including admitting gays and transsexuals. Not because I have phobias, I believe I’m more compassionate for these kids. But National is putting volunteers in the position of encouraging behaviors that these youth may regret when they mature into adults. I don’t believe accepting girls 14 and younger is good for the program because it will take away from the boys at a National level. It doesn’t matter if some troops are totally male, National will have to direct the whole program as mixed genders. Girls and boys don’t mix well in a patrol method type program before reaching puberty because boys generally think in the big world picture while girls are very detailed oriented. Patrol method works for boys because they are forced to build habits of working details. Girls, by instinct, won’t let them do that without heavy adult interference. None of that works well in a patrol method program. But, I’m also pretty good at looking at things pragmatically. What I posted is an honest assessment of what I see coming based from observations of the program and National for the last roughly 50 years. Troops will become adult run after school camping programs and eagle factories. The addition of girls will bring in more adults without a scouting experience, and those adults typically push advancement the hardest over the other methods. They can’t help themselves; they don’t know how to do the other scouting stuff very well, but they know how to follow a checklist. It’s human nature. Barry

The next four years will be interesting to watch. The BSA looses around 50% (give or take) of Scouts crossing over to troops. Actually I believe it’s slightly more with crossovers who join troops but never show up. Those numbers don’t count as dropouts until next rechartering. Anyway, the main cause of the large drop out is a boring program. But the girls, and parents of the girls, have a different motivation for crossing over. I have said for many years that parents have a lot of say in their kids staying in scouting. More so at the cub ages, but a significant amount at the troop age as well. If you want to keep the youth, build a program that appeals to parents. We have seen even on this forum a lot of adult energy for girls in the program, so I don’t see a boring program holding them back. Eventually the passion and energy of the new program will settle down and balance back to the quality of program content. I’m curious how the numbers will fall. I believe family scouting will change the present troop program a lot. Not so much in written program structure, but more of how the adults will interrupt implementating the program structure. Personally, I believe the troop program will morph closer to a Webelos III. But, if that style of program keeps the parents more energized, then a Webelos III may not be bad when National’s main objective is maintaining BSA numbers. We’ll see.(I need a popcorn eating emoji) Barry

I got to hand it to you CP, you are consistent. Your creatively stretched reasoning reminds me of Evil Knievel jumping the Grand Canyon. And when creative reasoning doesn't work, intimidate change with threats. Yep, sounds very inviting. Barry

I didn't imply anything. I asked a question that would simply guide a frame of thought in working with Den Chiefs. A lot of times scouts of this age have a different perspective of the responsibility than the Den Leader, pack leaders and Scoutmaster. Den Chief is a lot of responsibility for both the Troop and Pack and how the scout perceives that responsibility is important or for both units. A negative experience can hurt the troop program a lot if the pack has a bad experience. So, how the SM guides, coaches and mentors Den Chief is important. Barry

Good post. I believe "reasonable" is a good base for judging performance. The struggle for many of us is the individuality of each scout in their effort to perform. I'm not one who cares one way of the other about "adding requirements" because I respect the challenge of judging a scouts performance. But, I do like to caution scouters that as soon as a fixed rule is set in stone, it will be challenged with an unexpected situation. It's great to add a hard expectation to draw lines between success and failure. But at the same time, these rule often restrict creativity of unusual situations. I typically ask adults, what is the troop gaining by adding requirements like the 50% meeting rule. I mean really, how did they come up with that number. But, I understand that some added rules or guidelines are needed for a unit to move forward, especially new units. However, at some point the unit should mature past the added rule and used their hard earned wisdom to judge individual effort. I had a 15 year old Life Scout volunteer to run a Boy Scout Skills day for a Webelos leader who had requested it. He knew exactly what to do and was excited about it. But, he informed me two weeks before the event that he couldn't be there. However, he promised he would make sure the event would occur as planned. And it did. The Den Leader said her scouts loved it. Now, was that scout irresponsible by not showing up to an event he promised to lead, or should he be complemented for his performance delegating, training, and planning a very successful activity. By the way, the scout didn't ask for, nor did he, recieve any credit for the activity. Well, I did brag about him a lot. His dad is my neighbor and is a little tired of hearing about it after 20 years. That scout has two kids now after all. Still....... When general rules are set for groups of individuals, individuality will eventually force the rule to get in the way of the main objective. Our troop pushed the PLC to take as much responsibility as possible, so they also would set rules like the 50% rule, or discipline rules, or something to help them in their responsibilities. But as the scouts learned and matured, the rules were replaced with wisdom. Always keep and open mind so the path to the goals is always clear. Barry

LOL, ok ok. Seems folks are afraid of the big questions. Maybe one of the hardened adults has an opinion. Barry