fred johnson

Go away. Inconsistent piece of the program used mainly by parent hounded scouts. Few earn them. Even far fewer wear them as designed. They are a distraction. I'd prefer packs get back to the original concept of getting scouts outside and doing things. Perhaps I'd rather see scouts with scout vests and then a set of volunteers at pack meetings who will help the scout immediately stick their patches on their patch vest. Walk out of the meeting with the new patches on their vests. Hate to say it, but otherwise most get stuck in the drawer never to be seen again.

Thank you moosetracker. very helpful comments.

I like the dinner before troop meeting fundraising. Great and creative idea. I do not think the fundraising app means you are expected to raise funds from family and friends. IMHO, it means if you are going to extend fundraising outside of your normal scouting sphere (church, scouts, family, etc) to the public, then you need to coordinate that fundraising effort with other fundraising efforts. For example, scouting for food, friends of scouting, million dollar day, etc. A potential issue is soliciting heavy from local businesses by walking them door to door and then also having the friends of scouting effort raising funds. They collide and defeat each other. Door to door business visits would probably be bad. A car wash would probably be fine. Or extra popcorn sales. Or ....

I would not be hard hard line on it. If the scout needs to raise funds for it, fine. But I'm betting it will be hard. People like to donate to make things happen, not to shift And the parents did help. And the troop helped thru the Eagle process. BUT ... the Eagle process is done. It's signed off. Complete. ********************************** But my opinion is my opinion. I would have it even if I agreed to let the kid raise funds in the troop meetings and run a fund-raising desk as kids arrive to the meetings. It's my opinion. I'd still have the opinion as I watched him continue to raise funds. My opinion would be if the scout wants to try to re-coup his parents money that is up to him and his parents. The only exception in my opinion is if the scout entered into continuing the eagle project with the knowledge and in-advance communication that he'd continue to do fund-raising during and after-the-fact. I'm not trying to say the scout and parents should be burned in the situation. But it doesn't seem right to raise funds or effective to raise funds for a completed, signed-off project. Many places do this. Churches. Non-profits. They get enough to do the project and then continue to raise funds to pay it off. Personally, why did the scoutmaster sign off on a project that was incomplete. Fundraising is part of the project. Was the project complete or not. ***** I would not be absolute hard-line on this. But my opinion is my opinion.

I must admit that I object. "Issues and Politics" tends to be for noise and things generally outside scouting. I don't think this belongs in that group. BSA youth protection gives procedures and practical examples without teaching what to look for or the nature of abuse. The topic is about improving the already good BSA youth protection training by adding content that helps communicate the nature of abuse. I'm really not trying to be political. It's a real hole in BSA youth protection training. A ready example is a fairly recent scoutmaster who now and then would give scouts back rubs. Parents and other leaders thought it was weird but no one triggered the alarm for years. Yet, this is a sign of grooming a victim. In addition to teaching about certain types of touch being used to break down barriers and groom victims, the Catholic training taught about abuse is the real reluctance of people to report. It's an identified pattern in abuse. The reluctance is driven by denial and not wanting to raise a false accusation against friends, relatives and generally people who have volunteered and are perceived as exceptionally good people. Much of the Virtus training I received was about getting over the real and natural reluctance to report. I must admit .. I remember interviews of the parents of scouts in that troop and most of them said at one point that they always wondered over the years. I must admit that I got really upset that no one invested enough to learn more. Especially as it was 2010, not 1980 or 1990. BSA training is good in policies, practices and situational role play. But BSA training lacks when raising awareness about who abuses (close friends, relatives, the good guys) and does not invest enough about getting over the barrier to report. The reluctance to reporting is a barrier that is real. it is a short coming in BSA youth protection training that needs addressing. BSA YPT is good. I just hope it takes the next step and improves further.

moosetracker ... I don't remember the details of "A Time To Tell" enough other than to remember thinking I don't want my kids to see it and I definitely don't want other parents pointing fingers at me making kids see it. As for making other adult leaders see it, I'd have to watch it. I think most would not sit through yet another youth protection training. Catholic church training needs to better enumerate practices to remove opportunity for abuse. BSA training needs to better teach what to watch out for and what to be concerned about ... AND to teach some of the statistics about it and maybe a few of the interviews by past abusers that the Catholic church training has. Those videos are very helpful.

I've never minded drop and run parents. I've always been able to find enough that can stay to help ... if needed. Plus, the opposite is what I always fear: too many parents or idle parents that distract or interfere with the program. When we've needed drivers, we've always been able to get help. To be honest, give me two or three good adult leaders for a weekend. The rest are for transport and don't even need to stay. Any more than two or three distracts from how the program is supposed to work. The big issue I really fear are the parents won do NOT drop and run because often they are coddling their kids instead of letting their kids integrate into the troop. "Where's Timmy?" "Oh, he's at his dad's car. His dad picked him up McDonalds for lunch."

I never meant to start a discussion of who abuses or orientation or other. I just meant that my Virtus training was more educational about the nature of abuse and BSA was more focused on policies and procedures. It seemed that both programs could benefit from the other. The Virtus training needs some focus on practices to remove opportunity. BSA training needs more inclusion about the nature of abuse and who abuses. ... without getting into orientation arguments.

Perhaps you walked by a mirror. Make a point, not an insult.

I had a long discussion with a volunteer who's helping me with a non-scouting family shelter program at a Catholic church. We were discussing the required youth protection training. The end-result of the discussion was that we'd like to see both the BSA and Catholic church training programs improved. Catholic church training is called Virtus. http://www.virtus.org. The training (when I took it years ago) is very much centered on recognizing abusers and situations used by abusers. Grooming (conditioning the victim for the abuse). Indicators such as certain types of touching (hair, shoulder massages, etc). This is way over simplified, but the point was recognizing abuse and calling it out. IMHO, BSA youth protection is very much about removing the opportunities for abuse through policies and procedures. And sometimes knowing when and who to contact about abuse. The trouble is the BSA training doesn't teach you about the nature of abuse and indicators that it's happening. I know some of the old video CDs had some of that, but even those were very limited compared to the Catholic Virtus training. On the flip side, the Catholic training doesn't establish strong policies and procedures such as no one-on-one contact. For the Catholic family shelter program that we are running, this is a rule I'm establishing. I also talk about the nature of the youth, the environment and male volunteers. (Sorry .. there is a double standard ... my attennea go up if I see a male volunteer too focused on picking up kids) Also, asking that people do not hesitate to call out situations that could be opportunities for abuse. For example, if you are going to walk thru the sleeping area, have two volunteers walk together thru the area, not one. SO MY QUESTIONS ---- Do others think BSA youth protection should be improved by teaching more about the nature of abuse and nature of the abusers? ---- Any news about potential updates to BSA youth protection? As far as I'm concerned, neither BSA or Catholic youth protection training were complete in and by themselves. I've really benefited by having taken both ... multiple times.

Well said and I agree. I do wish Lockheed could just let the kids keep attending merit badge and activity pin sessions. It's a zero budget line entry for them. They provide space without routing $$ for support. Plus, it's probably a huge internal positive for their employees and employee moral. I also fully agree with the statement that those who scream tolerance are the most intolerant people. That's my experience too. The memory that's most ingrained in my head is similar. Several members of a theater I was part of would go out to dinner. We each paid our bill and left a tip. It was those who screamed for the democrat party that would use the excess tip that many of us left to reduce their own tip to zero. Got to the point that we would pay separate because those complaining about the 1% would not pay their own fair share. My same experience with tolerance too. Also reminds me of a relative of mine. Huge democratic party supports and the first to pull out the calculator to figure out the 10% tip to the penny. And they are the same ones to yell about bigotry and social injustice.

Cribbage board

Ya know there are times I'd just let something be. This is between the scout and his parents. My limit would be that the scout is done and should not use scout or troop meetings for fundraising or troop resources. But if the scout wants to ask neighbors or others for help paying for the project, that's up to him.

I should mention that I've seen many kids who state they are atheists and they are in scouting. It's normal for a teenage kid to explore all facets of their lives. And, it's not in our place to get in their way. It only becomes an issue when people want to change the organization because of their personal beliefs. Then, it moves from the individual exploration to a conflict with the organization. At that point, no one wins.

Ya know ... I'm okay with that. If parents want to form scout groups under secular organizations, that's fine. It is just unrealistic to expect churches to sponsor youth groups that don't support their teachings. Personally, I would be fine camping next to another unit that is sponsored by an atheist group. But I would not want my sons joining that scout unit as scouting as far as I've been involved has very very much had a strong reverent aspect. For me and my family, scouting without reverent is like eating a hamburger without the meat. It's not scouting. The funny thing though is we have many kids out our scouting group that it just doesn't matter. They do fine and they are very welcome. But if you want to pick a fight and protest what the church teaches you won't be welcome. It's sort of obvious.

Thank you. As for Duck Dynasty, I think it is slightly different in that the Duck Dynasty guys are on A&E as entertainers and does not reflect the A&E politics. Those shows are a view into the lives of specific people and we learn and are entertained by watching those shows. Same as TCL is not promoting bigamy when it broadcasts the Sister Wives show. Same as Discovery channel is not promoting the Amish with Amish Mafia and they are not taking a pro-gun position with the show Sons of Guns. Same as History channel does not promote using pawn shops when it shows Pawn Stars. Same as TV channels not promoting trashy lives when they broadcast Jerry Springer.

I don't understand anyone's surprise or Merlyn LeRoy's sadistic enjoyment for bringing this to our attention. Publicly traded companies have policies that reflect the law. Their donations need to reflect those policies too. If anything, I'm surprised the donations continued as long as they have continued. This should be no surprise and Merlyn should take no enjoyment from it. Scouting is a good program that helps kids. Today's political battle between adults damages those the program and the kids we serve. Everyone should be sad all around.

Understood Eagle92. I'm just saying in a continuous unit, the cub leaders would know the boy scout leaders very well and would have built a long relationship. Experienced leaders who were in cub scouts or venturing could have provided feedback and mentoring to the boy scout leaders because it's one unit. The current unit split between cub, boy scout and venturing is so so dangerous. Usually, it's the cub scout units that flounder under in-experience and the cub scouters who succeeded are in boy scouts now waiting for the next cub scouts to come up. I'm tempted to stay in Cub Scouting even after my sons advances so that I can provide the mentoring. But I'm not sure that would work long term as I would start to be viewed as an outsider. That "outsider" view is a wall for communication, sharing and mentoring. It really really is. In fact, most of my scouting learning has been at roundtable in the big sessions. The breakouts are fairly useless. But I learned so much as a Cub Leader listening to the Boy Scout discussions. Then as a Boy Scout leader I was able to guide many Cub Scout leaders. You can never completely avoid bad leaders. But a different structure would help mentor and guide the less experienced. And it would help provided fixes to dis-functional leaders.

Sounds like it is time to split. There are some fundamental principles that people value. Scouting without reverence or God is not scouting. Heck, the vast vast majority of charter orgs are churches. There's a reason churches sponsor scouts and not sporting groups as much. Time to split. BSA has it right. Reverence without dictating the specific faith components. To remove reverence would be the death of scouting.

It's always the new adults that bring a cot or air mattress. They fear the idea of sleeping on the ground with something thin under you. I usually share early and I am almost always rejected when I let them know they will be cold unless they put a closed cel padl or something as an insulating layer between their cot and their sleeping bag. They always listen on the 2nd night. I've noticed that trend for about the last six years. People can't believe that the cot will actually make it harder to stay warm.

Eagle92 - Agreed. But in a continuous unit, the leaders have a chance to feed knowledge and experience to each other, to learn and grow together.

My experience is that being a scout leader is a lot less about rules and much more about people skills, communication and coordination. Great idea to communicate expectations and talk about it. You don't really need to specify any extra rules. Just discuss what it means to be SPL. Then if the scout can't live up to the expectation, talk with him about it and work thru the situation. That's where the people skill comes in.

Gotta admit this is one of the reasons I hate the concept of choosing troops. The poster made the right choice to switch to a better troop. I'd rather spend my years building relationships and understandings with other adults and getting to know how each other work. Instead, we have a program where charter orgs have units that are split and left to struggle on their own. Usually, it's the opposite of this situation. Usually, it's a struggling pack and a troop that has firmly entrenched practices and a good program. In this case, we have a healthy pack and a struggling troop. I'd rather see it as a continuous scouting unit with scouts in cubs, webelos, boy scouts and venturing. One unit. One committee. One charter org. One set of adults that know each other.

OA is like most things. It is what you make it. The good view is that it's an alternative. When scouts are looking for something more, they can latch onto OA as a path to continue to grow inside of scouting. And it is more boy led. And more structured (from how I've seen scouts drill for ceremonies, etc). And a great way to grow skills and confidence. The bad view is that OA exists to serve and promote OA. Of the scouts that I know that are active in OA, and it's few relative to those who received the sash, those scouts are on election teams and ceremony teams. That's all they know of OA. Activities to promote and support OA. The lock-ins and banquets seem to celebrate OA success in OA. In our council, few scouts help on OA service weekends. Few scouts help in NOAC which should be an absolutely great event. NOAC is simply a cost factor. Parents have a hard time forking over hundreds to have their kid be a laborer. \ My apologies if my views are skewed. I'm not saying it's correct. It's just my view.

Harsh ... depends on who's reading it and what frame of mind they are in. Generally though, emails are always read much harsher than intended. Always. There are some remarks in the email that are passive aggressive. Nothing that bad, but .... My advice would be to never send email in those situations, neither the scout or the mother. Instead, give the person a call. Email is great for facts and communication. But very bad for expressing disappointment or feelings. - Your conversation with the scout could have waited until the next time you saw him. Nothing was conveyed for coordination other than you telling him what you would do because of his failings or potential failings. That would have been a good short friendly conversation and probably would have built your relationship with him. - Call the mother directly and now to communicate verbally. Apologize. From what I read, you have a scout who was enthused enough to run for SPL. Now, it is questionable if they would stay in scouting. Fix it with good friendly conversation and apologies if necessary.