fred8033

9 hours ago, MYCVAStory said:

I found the materials on line that listed the individual cases and included the documents and I did read a fair number to get an idea of how serious the suit was and yes, it was serious but none of the cases I saw included any professionals as abusers (I certainly expect there were some, just not the ones I read) but mainly volunteer adults and in some cases adults that were not even registered but affiliated through the chartered partner or as a relative of a youth member. I would change my mind if you can direct me to the documentation that shows that BSA employees were the abusers in significant numbers.

An organization is responsible for its volunteers and operations.  Period.  The law makes this clear.  Go watch the Netflix Documentary and pay close attention to its former legal counsel who says essentially "The problem wasn't the BSA, it was a few bad apples in it."  The lack of logic would be funny if it wasn't so sad.  Oh, and those few bad apples, one was a EMPLOYED by the BSA and raped me.

The bottom line is that I don't deny that victims should have had their day in court. Frankly, most of them could probably have gotten a much better settlement if they had sued their local councils individually. I believe there was one case settled for 5 million dollars, perhaps adjusted later to a lower amount but the point is, you are correct that individual judgements were quite substantial. 

"My day in court?"  Hardly.  The bankruptcy is PREVENTING my day in court.  It PREVENTS discovery into knowing the names of colleagues of yours in the 1970's who may have known about or enabled my abuser.  The bankruptcy denies the sort of restorative justice that allows me to confront them.  And right now, it also prevents me from proceeding with my suit against my abuser because any award I receive may diminish my award from the Trust.  So, the bankruptcy is shielding him too.  My day in court?  No, but I'm a lucky one compared to those of my brothers who the SOLs prevent any sort of suit from proceeding.  For them their Council would be shielded and there is NO "day in court."

The problem for me is I know literally dozens of individuals whose lives were vastly improved because of Scouting and the BSA because of this suit will now fail to reach 10's and even 100's of thousands of youth that could benefit from the values/teachings and trainings along with the positive mentors in Scouting. I ran an inner city program for over 6 years that served hundreds of Scouts and Cubs and that program no longer exists. The council no longer has the resources to even properly support its traditional unit programs let alone staff and support the Scoutreach program. There was no good outcome in this for anyone but the lawyers and law firms that brought the suit. 

Wow, "dozens" who were positively impacted.  Tell that to the 82,000.  That said, the vast majority of Survivors I've spoken to, and even the TCC for the ost part in its comments, have said "We don't care about the future of Scouting AS LONG AS KIDS ARE SAFE."  Now, you claim that kids won't be positively impacted because of the bankruptcy?  That's complete bull$hit.  Survivors voted down the first plan and accepted a second one because for one reason the Youth Protection measures were significantly strengthened.  THAT will improve lives.  Units went out of business?  That is NOT the fault of the bankruptcy, it's the fault of mismanagement by the Council, District, National and ultimately the local market for which Scouting was not attractive.  How dare you blame current issues with the abuse that happened to many of us decades ago.  As well, read the words of the new BSA CEO who claims membership will double.  Seems to me that bankruptcy REORGANIZATION will help and not hurt.  As far as no good outcome, it isn't over yet and Survivors will judge that when we see our actual awards and come to grips with what that means.  So don't tell me what my outcome will be.  That's for me to decide.  Have law firms made money off of this?  Sure, and I will pay my attorney a third of what I see, gladly.  You get what you pay for and when billions are at stake you pay a lot.

I'm sorry that you were a part of this dark chapter. I hope you find healing. God Bless

While I appreciate the sentiment, I again urge you to do a VERY deep dive into this forum and others.  The legal analysis and discussion of the FACTS of this bankruptcy are a real education.  THAT is the best way to help Survivors.  First and foremost, understand how we got here, what we've been through, and respect that some of us want to see the Scouts continue, some want them to go away, and some don't care, but we ALL want kids to be safe and for Society to learn from what happened to us so it doesn't happen again.

Mods....I recognize that my tone is a bit aggressive but it's done respectfully to drive home a point or two and lend emotion to where it belongs.

82,000 is a paperwork number and still an unproven number.  That is the number of claims submitted, but was a surprise number by everyone from all sides.   We will never really know the real number

Since 1960s, BSA has had tens of millions of youth members.  I would not be surprised if 100 million plus.  So, is it a high level or not.  And then compare it to number of youth benefiting from scouting.  

If we argue on emotions, any single injury is bad.  Period. 

If we argue on numbers, then there is a real question if BSA better or worse than other organizations.  

10 hours ago, Ojoman said:

Meaning no disrespect to survivors... if any youths were abused by council staff then they ought to receive a significant settlement from that council. The vast majority of cases were volunteers that violated the trust of  parents, chartered partners and the youth. Those are the ones that ought to be in jail and pay compensation. 1.4 billion divided by 82k comes out to around $1,700 per person on average. That is inadequate for anyone that was sexually abused. Having said that, the vast majority of scouts were not abused and had a positive experience in the program. To force councils to deplete their cash reserves and sell off properties and increase fees to pay damages for abuses committed by pedophiles that lied to get access to kids is not right. I can understand anyone that was abused being angry and frustrated and wanting justice. Personally, the one case I came in contact with in my 30 years as a professional the guy ended up in jail where he belonged. That, at least, put the blame where it belonged. 

@Oboman ...  Your response is the common sense and very basic.  I have no issues with what you wrote.  You also missed many really good supporting arguments such as BSA did way more to keep out abusers (i.e. ineligible volunteer files) than many organizations including schools and other youth programs.  And, that the volunteer files documented case after case being handled correctly.  ... The problem is the legal interpretation.  Common sense is not legal in court. 

This case was 100% about deep pockets.  Some people will absolutely get rich from this.  Some lives will be changed.  ....  It just won't be the victims.  

16 hours ago, Armymutt said:

...  One of my biggest issues is their fundraising policy.  ...

Don't use fundraising as a decision factor.  It's noise; annoying yes, but still noise.  Key factors are fun and involvement and a healthy environment.  

27 minutes ago, nolesrule said:

No, the joining requirements for Scouts BSA changed on April 18, 2022, and are as follows:

At least 10 years old, currently in the fifth grade and register on or after March 1
or

At least 10 years old and have earned the Arrow of Light Award
or

At least 11 years old (but not yet 18)

 

Gotta love BSA ...   Says different here.  I assume it is out of date.  
https://www.scouting.org/programs/scouts-bsa/faqs/#:~:text=Youth can join a Scout,not yet 18 years old.

Also gotta love legalistic wording that is clear as mud.  ... "after March 1" ... So a kid could register April 1st of 4th grade, then when they enter 5th grade they can move to a troop ?  I doubt it's the intention, but it's the wording.  It might have been better to say completed 5th grade or in the last three months of fifth grade.  

Your scout's experience comes first.  Period.  ...  I am sad that my kids are grown.  The truth is the time passes too quick.  Their scouting careers are very, very short. 

Get your kid into a great scouting experience now.  AND, it is 100% okay to switch packs and then just sit back and enjoy scouting from the shadows.  Volunteer now and then as you can, but let others take the lead as you watch your kid grow.  

These numbers are painful to me. 

A few decades ago, Cub Scouts existed as a place for kids who want to be like their big brothers in troops; a waiting ground until they could do the big boy activities.  Now, it's the main membership.  I really question it's value.  I really do.  ...  The massive drop off in Cub numbers before joining troops makes me think others question the value too.  ... Plus, I think there are other stronger little kid programs out there that are easier to do.  

Scouting shines in troops and getting older kids in the outdoors camping, facing challenges, and having adventures.  I really, really, really question scouting's value when the emphasis is as a younger kids program.  It just does not shine the same way.  

I always envisioned Scouting as an affordable version of Outward Bound.  "Outward Bound USA is the leading provider of outdoor education programs that allow young people to explore their personal potential, since 1962. From expeditions in some of the most remote locations in the U.S. to programs in local schools and neighborhoods, young people nationwide are cultivating a passion for learning, and discovering greater success in school, work and life."  https://outwardbound.org/

Scouting has a major branding issue and has lost it's focus.  It's not about membership or lost values.  It's about the value of the program. 

As scouting exists now, I really question the future of scouting. 

Sadly, society really has a real need for a program like scouting "WAS".   Every day, I see young men that are lost and lacking confidence.  I see youth that would benefit from outdoor challenges; to know they are capable on their own. 

15 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:

... main challenges are ... 

Can't ignore the challenge of two years of lawsuit infomercials.

25 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:

... I was (and still am) only involved with the troop.  That is where Scouting happens, in the units.  So many key district and council volunteers are so far removed from actual Scouts out on actual outings, they have lost their focus.  A good thunderstorm or cold night can lead to a lot of maturity growth real quickly.

Such an interesting point.  So so so so few scouters stay helping cub scouts.  Most love to help troops.  IMHO, this is a reflection of how much extra work cub scouts is and how much more meaningful troop scouting is.

18 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:

The focus on Cubs has been a short term gain (questionable at best) for long term pain.  Kids / families are burning out and leaving, also many families think Scouts will be similar and are not ready for the independence and autonomy of Scouts,  They seem to expect programming for an 11 years old their kid can easily move into, as opposed to programming for 14 - 15 year old that their kid(s) can aspire to.

I think this is a good summary.  BSA membership had a short-term boost by opening to younger and younger scouts.  BUT, it's now killing the membership numbers in later years.  Worse, it's changed the experience and also the perception of the experience such that many now question the value of scouting. 

My apologies as I've said it over and over again.  For my four sons, if I had to do it over again, I would have started my boys in scouts at 3rd grade when they could start being more independent with other youth their age.  Heck, I'd be okay if they had their first scouting experience in a troop and missed cub scouts.  The big big big big scouting benefits happen in the later scouting years.

5 minutes ago, SSScout said:

.... ... ... 

Great answer.  My gut says it's a quietly observe problem.  

All answers start here.   BSA Guide To Safe Scouting.
https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/34416.pdf
* Key point ... Page three ... "All aspects of the Scouting program are open to observation by parents and leaders. "

His solution does not completely jive with G2SS as all activities are to be open.  But it is also not explicitly against G2SS as he has the required number of registered adults.  

My real question is why?  Ask.  Why.  Get to know the scoutmaster.  Offer a coffee or cookie.  Then broach the question.  I suspect there is a different issue he's trying to solve.  Obsessive parents?  Too many parents?  Parents inserting themselves.  

My own history as an adult leader showed that adults inserting themselves into the youth program was one of the absolute biggest problems in scouting.  It kills the program. 
 

1 hour ago, AltadenaCraig said:

I won't disagree that 5.5 has been too long of an expansion; however, the alternative allows youngsters to be captured by alternative programs (Y-guides, AYSO soccer, etc.), which all have programs for small-fry.  Without a BSA small-fry program, a youngster's life would already be full with alternatives before a BSA program ever gets a chance at him/her.

Let the perception be that y-guides and soccer be the little kids program. 

Scouts should start when we trust them to start a fire and use a knife.  

1 hour ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

...  Only difference was Cub Scouts was 3 years as Tigers did not come out until 1982.

Going back to three years would be a huge improvement.  Expanding cub scouts to be same size as boy scouts has been a killer for retention, perception, etc, etc, etc.   The current 5.5 years way too much.

23 hours ago, DannyG said:

... AOL is meant to be the culmination of the Cub Scout program. ...

Just starting my comment off yours.  My apologies, I'm not targeting you.  Just sharing my thoughts.

It's just an award and really not that special of an award.  Any kid that stays in and is mostly active earns AOL.  Also, parents do most of the work.  Any cooperative kid generally earns AOL.

I fear emphasizing AOL as a culmination or "highest award" perverts perception.  It makes people question the meat of the rest of the program if AOL is emphasized like that.  The real learning of scouting comes from the individuals doing activities independently as they mature.  Example - sleeping in a tent they setup during a thunderstorm.   Cubs started as a way for younger siblings to be in scouting while their older brothers did really cool things.  IMHO, we should get back to that.  Cubs is fun and family and some skills building.  ...  AOL?  Fine, but it's just not that big of a deal.  (Don't tell my kids I said that).

1 hour ago, Tron said:

Is there some formula for condensing or dividing councils?

I just don't understand the need for small councils anymore.  Most training and registration is online.  The key now is economies of scale to reduce cost and offer more opportunities.  

33 minutes ago, Tron said:

Holy cow that is now a geographically huge council with a lot of population. 

Yep, but low scout numbers.  4300 scouts.  That should be considered a small size council that could be merged yet again one or two more times.  

Requiring 2+ registered leaders for each den meeting escalates den mtg plans to "PACK" level planning. 

Pack reserves one bigger den meeting space and a common time.   Then dens share.  If not two dens, then have a pack committee member, CC or CM attend too.  

In the old days, we could reserve a school cafeteria for a very cheap rate (a $50 budget item per month for the year).  OR a local church.  OR an outdoor space that is just "used" without reservation.

25 minutes ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

At least right now, my husband definitely needs to hear more about how his scout will be safe in scouting. He's still cracking cynical CSA jokes. He's openly hoping that our cub scout doesn't cross over. 

Families aren't necessarily all in or all out.

I hear open snide jokes about BSA and CSA from those involved in football and hockey and other activities.  ... I just don't get it ... As long as I've been alive, the worst crimes ... and I do mean crimes ... have been committed by those in those sports against others in the sport or against others in the schools.  Worse, there is every bit as much abuse from adult leaders in those groups as have been in scouts.  ... BSA needs to get better handle on the perception.

@LostParent ... Wishing you the best.  Scouting can be frustrating.  Try to focus on the positive and the good experiences.  The times goes really quick.

32 minutes ago, LostParent said:

This is where part of the issue is, anyone can communicate what the intention is, but there is no backstop that is seen to backup what we are told.

All the involved leaders are volunteers.  Often doing the best they can. 

We as parents easily get stressed or incensed as our kids and our cash is involved.  ...  We'd hope finances from the fundraiser and how they are used would be clearly reported and shared.  Often though, it's at the time and energy of those involved.  At times, I was just happy when the treasurer made the deposits in a timely manor.  ... Or reimbursed people in the same week.  ... Be careful what you wish for.  You might end up as the fundraiser coordinator or treasurer. 

BUT ... your request is not unreasonable.  I'd want the same info.  I'm just saying the leaders are volunteers and might be doing the best they can.

32 minutes ago, LostParent said:

This to me is not as straight forward as I believe it should be. They seem closely tied only at the financials - that is what I seek to confirm or disprove. One charter. One Committee that works for both Units. Two chairs one for the Girls one for the Boys (which is odd to me like having two CEO’s?). Co-Ed only happens at large (district<?>) events (Webelos woods, Polar Bear) monthly campouts and events always happen separately often not even at the same properties. The girl troop appears at first glance to only be a leech to the boy troop I do believe it to be scouting related and not theft; however, it seems to not allow a proper exercise in earning your own keep.

"Paperwork" wise, each unit (pack, troop, etc) always has it's own committee chair, committee, scoutmaster, and leaders.  The Charter org has ONE charter org rep above the units to coordinate scouting in the charter org. 

If the units are tightly tied, the paperwork could show the same person as COR and CC for all units involved.  It's happened.    It's really up to the volunteer leaders and how they want to structure it and how much they can handle.   I'm not surprised that the boys troop and the girls troop have separate CCs but overlapping committee members.  

To really figure this out and understand more, often the best place to start is a smile, a handshake and friendly cup of coffee.  Build the friendships first.  Ask the questions second.  

The non-profit is the charter organization (if there is a non-profit).  Troops don't incorporate; charter orgs do.  So, "if they are sister troops", then they are probably under the same non-profit.  It's okay for a non-profit to have a fundraiser and then share the results with their specific missions / sub-groups as they see fit.  Scouting dollars almost always stay in scouting (99.99% of the time); but that is not even a hard rule.  

The non-profit "should" have an annual report, but that's for the bigger non-profit organization (church, etc).   Scouting is an arms-length program that works mostly separately.  Finances don't co-mingle with charter org "usually".  In fact, the charter org almost never sees the scouting money.  So, don't expect scouting in the charter org annual reports.  ... BUT ... I'd hope the troop publishes their financial state at least once a year.  Ideally, once a month.  BUT, it's not required.

My question is what was communicated for how the fundraisers would work.  If they are following that, they are good.  If you don't agree, you can advocate for change.   The best way to do that is to get more involved in the unit.  Another way is to stop participating in fundraising.  

My real question is are they closely tied or loosely tied.  One charter org?  One committee?  One committee chair?  Do they camp together often?  Do they have a single or overlapping schedule?  If so, they sharing funds makes sense.  ... on the other hand ... if they are a different committee and different schedule and don't overlap, the funds seem like they should be separate.  

It's really up to the leaders in the unit to setup the expectations and communicate.  

Some bad behavior is push back because it's mainly their parents that want them in scouts.  They might not really want to be there. 

Some bad behavior is perception.  We remember past new scouts being better than they really were.

Don't ignore bad behavior.  It can poison a troop.  Also, don't over react.  It can kill the fun.

@vze3nbyb1 SM & CC not informing committee may have been their attempt to keep sensitive information from becoming gossip and overwhelming a kid already in trouble.  I can respect that.  BUT, the challenge is it sounds like the whole troop knew or were about to find out.  It's really not a good situation.

40 minutes ago, Double Eagle said:

There are Scouts that need Scouting...

This is a phrase that makes me stop.  It's well intentioned and wishing nothing but good for everyone. 

It's also very dangerous and can kill a troop.  You can endanger scouts (teaching drugs or other edge behavior). You drive good kids away.  Your troop gets a bad reputation that scares future families away.

My view is behavior needs to be within scouting boundaries.  No drugs.  No criminal activity.  (etc, etc).  Youth outside that boundary are beyond scouting.  Yes, scouting could help them, but you can't accept responsibility for them and you can't risk the whole troop.  If the youth returns to good boundaries, then the youth can be in the troop.  Until then, the youth needs to move on.

Every situation has nuances.  You know this kid.  Your scouts know the kid.  It's really on those in-the-know.  ... the fact your scouts say the kid needs to move on is a good indication. 

To be honest ... the kid may already have moved on beyond scouting.  The kid may not care about his scouting future. 

On 10/11/2023 at 2:22 PM, FireStone said:

Side comment: I'm still legitimately surprised that the uniform isn't more enthusiastically worn by today's youth who are growing up with video games and digital achievement badges. We offer the IRL version of that, but they don't want to wear it? What the heck!?

My son with "grind" on a video game challenge until he gets it, to earn some digital achievement badge, but I can't get him to "grind" on a merit badge or some 2nd Class first-aid requirements he still needs to do.

Ok, rant over. 😄

Is he having fun in scouting?  If so, celebrate.  If he doesn't get a specific MB or rank, don't sweat it.  It's just a youth activity.  It really doesn't matter.   Focus on your connection with your kid more than forcing his achievements.