fred8033

Public schools ... 15,000 in one year. 2018. https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2020/10/15/sexual-assault-k-12-schools/ Interesting ... we have the data because there is a governmental organization collecting the data. Go figure. https://ocrdata.ed.gov/ Sports sexual abuse https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6204631/ I'm trying to find the link to the numbers and the details. NPR had a great article earlier this year about coaches and sexual abuse. ... Including coaches IN THE LAST DECADE minimizing penetration incidents as boys will be boys and not wanting to ruin a kid's future AND NOT REPORTING.

Just wrong. Wrong.

Yeah. Umm ... Can you provide a parallel example from other youth serving organizations? So BSA is hiding? ... show me youth serving organizations that are posting those numbers on their home page? Big Brothers and Big Sister has been used as an example. Send me their page doing this as an example. Or Newart, NY YMCA page showing the numbers. ??? ... or ... ??? This is not about YPT. This is about punishment and shaming and humiliation. This is an attempt to kill a program. Perhaps Ford dealership should list number of highway deaths and injuries. Heck, they made the Pinto. They negligently killed thousands and hid the facts. They should be humiliated further for it.

TCC / victims or BSA? What a horrible mean inference. Don't do that. It's just mean, inaccurate and wrong. You said parents will know. That's not true. 99.999% percent of parents won't look just like I've yet to meet a parishioner that knows. This will stay in the reporting channels. Worse, the emphasis on oversight will change and diminish over time. As less people pay attention to the numbers reporting, less effort will be put in to collecting and managing. TCC statements sound like self-hype to misdirect away from the negligent revictimization of promising huge settlements. I'm glad TCC will also work on legislation. That is what should happen. It's how society improves. This whole category screams for broad national oversight and expansion. I've seen that with DOD programs too. At one point, they all required a specific quality vender quality program as part of contracting. Now, then magically it was gone.

"inform parents" ... does not follow. I've been a member for my whole life without seeing any of the reported numbers ... even in the last few years. The reported numbers are reported to channels; not members. ... Are you saying the Catholic church numbers are sent directly to each member? Or are you saying BSA should do more than the Catholic church ? "protect children" ... does not follow. Catholic church statistics were not that different than any other faith denomination. Now they have good vulnerable person protections unlike before. Now they have mandatory reporting ... except with knowledge acquired from confession. . The protections occur via the rules (which are good). I doubt the number roll-up will do any good. Worse, I really believe the single-focus reporting program will eventually fall by the wayside and worse leaves many other channels unhandled. . Yes, the legal case is about punishing BSA. But applying the rules to BSA only is just further punishment without a single protection improvement. Further punishment for incidents from years ago ignoring many of the current improvements. If TCC lawyers wants to protect children, TCC should focus on legislation for all youth organizations. But yes ... we could add reporting. Fine. I believe in numbers and quality control programs. I've been the advocate for many. I've seen many (lean, TQM, SPC, six sigma etc). The sad point is they tend to build excitement and then die a quiet death. I've seen quality programs adopted by individual organizations and every one falls by the wayside eventually. That's really why I don't like the analysis being BSA specific or Catholic church specific too. We need industry like oversight for all organizations that do youth programs similar to FAA for flight, FDA for medical, NHTSA for roads, etc. Expecting an individual organization to fund and run it's own reporting program is a bad decision.

Well at least I take comfort in your confidence and affection for the Catholic church. I do appreciate that.

Here's another view. It's just a rank. A youth award. It's not a license to practice anything. Like some many things in life, you get out what you put in. If the scout got Eagle without the work, then the scout will always know the award is mostly hollow for them. An example is that a huge majority of adults have high school diplomas. Yet, many adults have difficulting reading or writing. I'm a good example in many of my posts. Once the diploma is awarded, it's done. We never take away high school diplomas. Some kids are really proud of their high school career. Others are not because they did not earn anything. On a practical side, why would a council want to ever take back such a rank? It doesn't serve a purpose. The youth is done. Gone. Maybe for severe felons. Scouting is a youth serving organization. Revoking would create damage and hate. Scouting would be subverting it's own goals by re-opening such cases. Let the past be the past. Focus on doing right by your current scouts. On a personal side, we're not gate keepers trying to protect the Eagle rank. Rank are our tools as an incentive for scouts to achieve. If parents subvert our tools, then it's sad. BUT, it's not our job fix past ills. We just don't participate or support the bad practice. BUT, once the harm is done, then our next role is thinking about how we can next help that youth. What can we do? EXAMPLE: Suppose a scout family subverted the life rank. Now the scout wants to achieve Eagle. I'd treat the past rank as done and gone. It's been awarded. I'd focus more on the current rank and seeing that the scout fulfills those requirements. That's my tool to help the scout grow. The SM (or his chosen/assigned delegate) does not need to sign off unearned requirements. ... But the SM needs to do right by the scout too. ... For example ... call out the scout early when the scout is not fulfilling expecations. POR. Project. Behavior. etc.

Don't mix issues. Indian lore is a cultural appropriation issue. The bankruptcy YPT topic is about sexual abuse. Crimes. It's a logical falacy to use the anger of cultural appropriation to further incriminate past sexual abuse or current YPT practices. Indian lore ... IMHO, BSA/OA needs to stop using indian lore. Some Native Americans are bothered by it. Others not. But, it's a controversy and offensive to some. Now is the time of change. Washington Redskins changed it's name, but the 2020 Super Bowl winners are still the KC Chiefs. These changes will continue for decades. Time for BSA to make it's change. OA Shirtless / loin cloths ... I've not seen a shirtless OA member for 15 years. Every ceremony I have seen has always had pants or shorts under the loin cloth. If a shirtless OA ceremony did happen, I would not treat as a YPT any more than shirtless scouts at the beach. Yes, it would be tacky and out of place and time. But not strictly a YPT violation. On the flip side, if no shorts were under the loin cloth, yeah I'd immediately file a report. I'd feel like I need to file a police report and let them tell me how it should be handled. I'd absolutely let the SE know. ... BUT ... Do we need to file a YPT report every time a camp staff teen takes off his shirt in the rain or on a hot day when working? It's happened more than once where a cocky 19 year old camp staffer shows rain won't stop them and walks outside in a torrential down pour. GTSS appropriate attire ... I've always read that more directly for physical safety and grossly inappropriate violations. I've never thought of applying it to shirtless scouts.

It's just a snide mean incindeary post. We have mandatory reporting. IT's THE LAW !!!!! It's 100% absolutely emphasized everywhere. YPT emphasized everywhere. We're out of society's YPT dark ages where parents, police, teachers, doctors and everyone did not believe what was happening. Even saying hiding in the past is a misrepresentation and just #### ####. But what ever. @CynicalScouter ... I appreciate your legal analysis, but your just mean and twisting in so many other posts with ugly misrepresentations of the past. If these postings represent the future, we're all screwed. I'm not just talking BSA. Society either needs to choose to work together or it's going to burn down. Mean, ugly, deluded postings by so many here. I'm embarrased by all of it. Perhaps the bankruptcy is not broken. It's just a reflection of a broken society.

Arguments are flip flopping on volunteer or paid. When convenient one or the other is used. Isn't the whole case based on paid professional handling IVF records? So is the failure by paid professionals or loosely associated volunteers? The crimes were clearly by both (paid --> camp staff; volunteer --> unit leaders). Too many people equate paid with process and oversight. Sometimes paid is just cost without value. Perhaps paid is needed, but not necessarily if an effective culture and process is established. Equating today's problems against todays practices and yesterday's problems against yesterday's practices. Mixing failures from a different era against current practices. Mixing lots of mixing and inferring issues. From what I've seen, compliance is extremely consistent. Assigning a committee member explicitly with the role of a compliance officer is an okay idea. Personally, I thought it was always at least explicitly my job as the CC and the COR. But then again, having a MC assigned that role too would be ok. I just don't like the idea of councils reporting YP numbers as it's problematic, but fine. I just don't think it will be a big help. The country has mandatory reporting of incidents to police, etc. We need mandatory roll-up. An organization receiving a report needs to record the notification in a national database for roll-up and analysis. ... Yea, not just BSA. But this is where kids will really be helped.

Paid does not mean trained or effective or answerable. Volunteer does not mean untrained or ineffective or not answerable. Paid is a financial exchange. Oversight is a responsibility. You can infer a strong link, but it is not an absolute.

Does it have to be a paid professional? This case is about liability of actions by volunteers. Can BSA establish a volunteer system with real effective oversight that breaks unit boundaries? In addition to background check and registration, volunteer can't participate until interviewed in person. Volunteer gets suspended / removed if X number of monthly status meetings. Could start this at the SM/CM/CC level. Feedback ratings on different risk factors that trigger further evaluation. BSA is too adult heavy to get each and every adult that minimally participates, but major improvements could be done with even hitting the SM/CM/CC level; maybe also the ASM level.

I never went to say BSA should not pay. I agree that BSA needs to pay. The crimes were done under their watch. I disagree with the demonizing as I really don't think that happened as a clandestine effort to hide the truth. CSA is so ugly and inconceivable that everyone was in denial about the reality of the abuse and the potential evil acts of our own neighbors and friends. ... I just don't believe people associated CSA with a common safety initiative.

I like the idea. One year, I had six or seven background checks because of jobs and different volunteer organizations. I didn't care really about the checks as much as all the paperwork I had to fill out. Useful comment about Big Brothers & Sisters.

@CynicalScouter ... Be angry and vote things down if you want. The understanding of CSA has drastically evolved continually in the last 50 years ... including by BSA. Asserting "Conceal" is anger and not analytic. I doubt any youth serving organization in the 1980s or religious or school or government had safety programs that include CSA protections. People did not conceive to link CSA and a safety program. That was a sign of the times. The two were not associated. You asserted Menninger testified that no one told him CSA was a problem in scouting. ... Another view is that a trained degreed psychologist did not think to associate CSA with a safety issue. Today, that's obvious to everyone. Back then, a well respected, nationally known, trained degreed psychologist that established a treatment center named after himself did recognize it as an issue then. That was CSA in the 1980s. 1980s - Child abuse as part of battered child syndrome, satanic cults / stranger danger / parent-child / recovered memory testimony, etc ... all potentially real, but drastically misunderstood. A great example are the massive year+ trials on non-existant abuse incidents based on recovered memories. San Diego McMartin trial for satanic ritual sexual abuse. North Carolina Little Rascals day care. 1980s - Mandatory reporting was mostly trained professionals. Doctors. Nurses. Social workers. Families of victims wanted the cases to be handled, but quietly and did not want it front page in the newspapers. 1980s - Analytical databases did not exist. Info like this were paper copies in file cabinets. Companies like BSA still using mimeograph paper for copies. Excel did not exist. Email did not exist. The personal computer was just beginning. Secretaries existed and had typewriters on their desks. People mailed letters with paper to the IVF files because that was all there was. 1980s - BSA membership was 4 million youth. Safety issues that were visible and discussed were the physical incidents. Lightening. Burns. Drownings. No one discussed CSA and no one wanted to be associated with the assertion. People did not want to accuse or trust those making the accustations. BSA's knowledge were files trying to block bad volunteers. With 4 million youth and probably a million adults. Yes, BSA is going to pay heavy and people are upset. At some point, this is taken in context that society as a whole really did not handle this well at all. Too many groups that want to label one person or one organization as the bad guy. That's the nature of things. I really, really believe this promotes yet another mis-understanding of CSA.

It's not a lie. It's a reflection of the times.

Lie. Hid. Deceived. Incendiary words that I don't buy into. Your words "lack of informing" is not lying, hiding or deceiving. CSA in 1980s and earlier was not viewed as a safe scouting issue. It was just becoming understood as a crime. Just like insurance policies written then did not recognize the massive liability of CSA. People did not think of CSA as a safety issue any more than bank robbery was not considered a safety issue then. This argument will go round and round. Yes, BSA will pay, pay, pay. Thank you for writing that, but it's just mean and spiteful. Most of your posts are more considerate. BSA was at the center of big wrong. There were many aspects to this failure. Now, society is punishing BSA. I just don't want to be the hypocrite in this righteous stoning.

We've been thru this argument many many ways. Past incidents did not happen in an vacuum. Scouting is a community structure happening in schools, churches, police stations with parents and other members of the community. Scouting has DRASTICALLY evolved YPT with continual improvements. Improvements before other organizations. For annual reporting of incidents is problematic for many ways. Perhaps, the key improvement is to change voluntary number rollup into a mandatory reporting for roll-up. A national database / structure already exists. https://www.childwelfare.gov/topics/systemwide/statistics/can/

There is nothing in there that is an actual improvement. It claims credit for existing structures and real improvements already done by BSA. It ignores major recent law changes; such as expanded mandatory reporting. "annual reporting" of confirmed incidents collides with mandatory reporting resulting in incomplete, conflicting and confusing status. It's better to get the real measurements from outside sources receiving the reports. Those are pretty words without real change. It claims credit for real progress over the last 20 years. ... It's hot air. ... Worse, it's treating BSA today like a criminal based on the actions of our grandparents and great-grandparents. If TCC was serious, it would propose specific legislation for all youth organization. I had seen this above earlier, but it's an empty shell for actual change.

Well said. At some point, it doesn't ring entirely fair as your statement throws mud just like coalition thru mud at TCC. What real changes to YPT? If there is a reasonable change, I'm sure BSA will adopt. No one is arguing for weak YPT. YPT has drastically changed and nothing like it was 30/40/50 years ago. This just seems like posturing to justify a different argument. Everyone is trash talking and working to subvert each other. The whole process is a tragic farce.

Is the $137M held in trust / not-spent? OR will it be used as up-front cash to continue funding the legal process? Or, to reimburse cash already invested? I fear one group paid first and when everything falls thru, there is neither money to refund nor any value to the victim. I also fear contingent earnings reimbursed more like expense sheets (aka ... you get 30% after we deduct our business expenses) I suspect it will be somewhere in-between. Held in-trust by the trust, but with a very high overhead spend rate that somehow helps advance the legal cases. This is a high-risk settlement. It can fail for many ways. It seems wrong to up-front cash like this. ... When do incentives become bribes?

Thank you for all the useful info. Very appreciated. I just don't see how this resolves without becoming BSA only and maybe also being forced. Too many people with too many conflicting interests to get a clean vote. And definitely no chance at a timely conclusion.

#1 I don't understand this fundamental. Voting to accept a settlement of BSA liability where those outside any legal SOL claim can heavily influence the vote. This is a court of law; not general advocacy or marketing. If the majority of states are closed states (and it is closed vs open ... not grey #1, grey #2, grey #??), then the votes and retrieved funds should go to those that have legal right. ... I don't understand how funds are distributed to those without legal standing. I don't understand how the court hears arguments for clients without standing. #2 I'm not sure rejecting the plan gets more. Ch7 could result in less as other claims get higher priority. Even without Ch7, there is no guarantee a different settlement would be better. ... if anything, a rejection could let BSA out faster by having the judge find a strict amount BSA can afford and then let BSA out. I'm not sure any path toward a larger, more complex settlement is possible.

Sad but true.

If #2 is not covered (LDS scout leader doing abuse of scout outside of normal scouting events), then would the settlement reimburse victims of scout leaders where the act was outside of a scouting activity? The two should align. Reimbursement and liability protection.