fred8033

The cheap, quick and reliable background check is a very recent concept ... 2003 ??? Before that, it was fairly labor intensive and costly. And yes, it would have been very hard for an organization to know if it was the same person again.

Your right. It can't be avoided. It's shameful and disgusting, but it can't be avoided. People want to blame someone for larger failures and the actions of a specific person. ... My actual view is it's about deep pockets and lawyers going after dollars to fund their lifestyles.

I think that's a great example ... So the CO employees gave your troop a key to go into their private building where they had direct ownership and insured it recognizing their liability for problems that happened there (fire, physicals injury, etc) ... but took no responsibility to keep you safe? Even in the 1970s, if someone fell on my sidewalk because of ice, I'd be liable. It's a direct connection. So law enforcement was called too. Did anything result? Was the person charged with a crime? I suspect your experience was probably more successful than what others experienced in the 1

It's the same argument we see all the time Defund the police because of police abuse. We improve oversight and promote cameras. End football because of the number of players that die or are crippled for life. Okay we get helmets, protection pads and concussion protocols. Stop selling ibuprofen OTC because it can be used to make meth and meth destroys thousands of lives We recognize the good that things do and at the same time work to improve putting structures in place to mitigate the problems.

Don't discredit a valid argument. The immediate actions were crimes. The extending liability to the larger organization may or may not have have been established cased law. Extending treating "volunteers" as legal agents of the larger organization is something relatively new too. More definitely, mandatory reporting laws did not exist back then. When incidents happened, in almost every case I saw there were discussions on how it should be handled. Many, many times involving the parents. Often other volunteer leaders too. If the parents knew ... why did they not call the police !

I agree. This is not theory. You were failed by church, schools, law enforcement, family, society, medical profession, etc. This stuff wasn't unknown. It's not about a theoretical failure. If you apply a measure of distance (interaction with the people), who's actually to blame. The "volunteer" SM committed the offense. He's the direct responsible person. The other "volunteer" leaders in the unit are the 2nd level. The church that sponsored your unit is then the next level. You physically met there. Their "employees" probably had a closer connection. Parents who suspected a

And society has someone to blame for what is pretty much a society wide issue. It's about blame and labeling a group while pretending everyone else is better. Shame. It's a modern day bigotry and hatred.

That is a mix of truth. When you add "monthly", then yes. Remove monthly and keep un-related adults, remote locations, without cameras, without public supervision, overnights and now BSA is common with most youth serving organizations. Each organization has it's risk in different areas. Camps - Almost every youth servicing organization encourages one or more camps per year (YMCA, 4-H, girl camps, etc). Private times - most organizations have similar quantities of opportunities.

Same behaviors exist in many organizations. Sports. Church youth groups. And in 4-H. Maybe 4-H is truly special. I'm not a 4-H expert. But then again, you can find incidents as you indicated earlier. https://www.deseret.com/2007/7/4/20028174/4-h-leader-in-tooele-is-charged-with-child-sex-abuse https://www.cbsnews.com/news/abuse-charged-at-4-h-summer-camp/ I am creeped out with several 4-H YP postings that emphasize volunteers are not mandatory reporters ... in their area. States are inconsistent with rules. I'm just surprised 4-H did not say all 4-H volunteers will a

Yeah. That was standard of care back in the 1970s and probably even sometime into the 1980s. People sitting loose in the back of trucks. Station wagons with kids sitting in back (without the rear chairs). No requirement for seat belts.

Can you provide reference to CDC recommendation?

Yeah. I'd be surprised if 4H is statistically different than BSA. Lots of youth. Lots of private opportunities. If 4H is perceived to be significantly different, I'd want to ask why? More women leaders than men? (real difference) ... Not tracking such information (data management) ... Left it to the public community to track / handle (not a real difference) Right now I'm leaning to say 4-H did it better by not handling it and just letting it go to an outside organization. The major part of this situation is BSA is tracking the ineligible volunteers. It could be viewed as ad

Sadly, the IV files represented a best effort and a huge legal liability. So the legal risk almost dictates not maintaining those files. That happens in other industries too. Best current example are corporations that force relatively short email retention periods as standard policy that is hard to circumvent. I don't agree on BSA losing it's soul. The numbers are huge, but so is youth membership. I suspect BSAs numbers are parallel to other youth serving organizations.

I do think the age 40s age transition is changing, but I recognize the stigma is still there. What I meant more was ... if I remember reading your story ... there were other leaders that suspected problems ... there were other parents that were concerned but protected their own kids ... from what I've learned from multiple organizations ... this is common. There is an inertia to not raise a flag that needs to be overcome. It did not happen. That's extremely sad and continued the damage. .... I think of the Weinstein cases ... dozens of people could have reported, but then put their ow

Interesting point. I think I've heard about that once before, but I don't remember all the details.