Lisabob

What makes it hard for many adults is that adults are usually much more efficient than the boys, and many adults have the well-intended-but-misguided desire to spare the boys from having to learn lessons the hard way. What makes it harder, still, is that many adults are inexperienced outdoor people who become anxious about the potential dangers of outdoor activities that typically form the core of boy scouting. And so out of an abundance of caution (I just want to make sure he's safe!), they interfere. And really, that's how society tells people they ought to behave as parents of elementary-school-aged children, so this is not surprising.

You, Scoutfish, are a bit unusual. Still, what's your threshold for standing by while seeing things get totally botched, take 5 times as long as they ought to, and produce a higher level of frustration than your son is accustomed to? Because when that happens (not "if"), even many former Cub Leaders have to fight the strong tendency to step in and "fix" it for their scout/son.

Having an outsider on the BOR isn't the worst idea I've ever heard, particularly for higher ranks.

What I believe people here are saying (and where I agree) is that the UC probably ought to avoid sitting on boards for the unit he or she serves, because it could create uncomfortable conflicts of interest. What would happen if the UC is the lone dissenting voice on the board? What if the UC learns, while on the board, that the troop is doing some very strange things? Will the UC be in a position to take off his or her "UC hat" and put on a "board hat" or vice versa? Would the SM and CC feel it was "ok" for you to bring up some issue that you discovered while serving on a BOR for them? Is it worth the potential conflicts that could result, if this became a more regular practice?

SP, you know your units better than any of us could, so you'll make these decisions on your own. And I only see people recommending careful thought - not outright prohibition.

As some may know, my son switched troops close to 2 years ago now, from a troop that was very adult-led with weak patrol method, to a troop that has much stronger patrol method. The boys in the patrols do things together outside of weekly troop meetings. They have independent patrol meetings. They really have bonded. All of their patrols have names and yells, some have flags.

As I mentioned in the other patrol yell thread, the patrol he joined when he switched troops is called the duct tapes. Their yell is "We stick together!" which has been shown to be true. They have a flag, yes, made with duct tape.

In his previous troop, the NSPs had flags, which were made under adult supervision at a troop meeting (adults would bring supplies, flag would get done). I think they had yells for the purposes of the Tenderfoot requirements. I don't ever, in 5 years, recall hearing those yells, though, except when I would ask a boy at a Tenderfoot BOR (and sometimes they didn't know what it was).

So here's my conclusion: In a troop with a weak patrol method, this stuff will only occur because the adults or the rank requirements say it has to. It won't have much meaning to the boys in the patrols. Seeing this, some adults and boys will question why we still have these outdated relics of requirements, anyway.

In a troop with stronger patrol method and where the older boy patrols have already adopted these things as identity symbols, new patrols will want to do the same, and the yell/flag/name will become another part of their bonding story.

Or maybe my son's current troop and patrol are just really special. I know he thinks they are!

Son's patrol is the duct tapes. Their yell: We stick together!

Although I agree with the general consensus that this is not a good position for a UC to fill, the fact of the matter is that it is probably too late in the game for that advice.

So, to SP's actual question:

I would ask the boy about his experiences in the troop. What has he liked/what things has he seen or experienced that he thinks the troop can do better with? What role does he see himself playing, in helping to make the troop as good as it can be (possibly, but not necessarily addressing those weaknesses he pointed out in the initial question)?

What does he know now, as a Life candidate, that he didn't know as a Star candidate? (Always fun to see what they say to that one!)

Since he's presumably working toward Eagle, I might ask him what he admires about other youth leaders in the troop, or what he has figured out works for him as a youth leader? Flip that on its head - what has he tried or seen that he now realizes does NOT work in a leadership role?

What leadership positions has he held? What did he do? Which ones did he like or dislike, and why? Which ones seemed hard or easy for him? Are there any he'd like to do again, or would avoid like the plague in the future?

Ask him about outdoor stuff too. What recent campouts has he enjoyed/why? Does he plan to go to summer camp? (If he likes camp, then: has he ever thought about working at camp?) Is he in OA? What does he think about it? What does his OA chapter/lodge do, other than ordeal & brotherhood weekends?

What merit badges has he earned since he became Star rank? Did he enjoy them? Did he earn any outside of summer camp? What badges would he like to earn?

I wouldn't ask many questions that seem abstract or tricky (tell me what x part of the scout law or oath means to you...). Many boys at this age are simply very concrete thinkers. Either they won't be good at answering abstract questions, or they'll give you some made-up answer they think you want to hear - which is almost always obvious, and empty of meaning. Either way, a waste of time. Ask questions about the boy's real experiences and you'll learn far more about what and how he thinks.

Is this committee member a new volunteer for your troop? Are they a parent of a new scout? Sure sounds like it. This might present a chance to gently educate that new person on the ways that your troop operates differently from their former experience with a cub pack or other elementary-school aged setting.

Of those boys who attended, do any of your youngest scouts succeed and get the ice cream or is it only the older boys who had the skill to do it?

The way you describe it - all the kids are watching the slide show/some are also having ice cream - really wouldn't bother me, particularly if the deck isn't totally stacked against the younger guys. And that this is troop tradition seems awesome, something for other boys to look forward to in the future if they missed it this year. So sure, take the question to your PLC and then, supposing that your PLC is happy with the current arrangement, let it stand. Maybe quietly communicate with your CC to arrange that proverbial "friendly cup of coffee" with the upset committee member, but otherwise, move on.

"Cruel" might be overkill, but it is kind of a waste of time for those boys who didn't find all the markers to attend that troop meeting so that they could sit there and watch somebody else eat ice cream.

Even so, the committee member could find a better way to express this sentiment. First, by not dealing with it as it is happening (too late, likely to cause a big scene no matter what your response had been). Second, by phrasing it as a friendly conversation instead of a toe-to-toe match up with one winner and one loser.

Had I been that committee member and been concerned, I might have sought you out some other time and said something like this: Hey, about that ice cream. What a great reward. But I notice that kids who didn't attend that campout or didn't find all the markers tend to skip the next troop meeting, too. And a few parents have mentioned that it is a little irritating to drive their kids all the way here for the meeting, when their kids are only observers at the meeting - especially near the end of the school year when everybody's evenings are so jam-packed with other events. I wonder if it could serve the same purpose and avoid these other hassles, if you did the ice cream at the last campfire night on the campout, instead? What do you think?

Thanks, all. I always appreciate hearing (reading) others' experiences. I'm involved in a number of other groups besides the BSA that rely on volunteer labor, and it is interesting (though I guess, not surprising) to me to see how similar the challenges are of placing volunteers into roles that suit them and that meet the group's needs. Often, this is complicated by the short vs. long term needs of the group, or the fact that the group, itself, may not really have a clear idea of what they need (or they have conflicting ideas).

A lot of what I do in other groups is basically volunteer placement, and I learned a lot about how NOT to do it from my experiences as a BSA volunteer. Ah, well.

bokris, sounds like you have a plan. All in all, I agree that the simplest way of doing things is to recharter with waiver (if needed) and then just have the boys join you when they cross over. And you have some back-up plans if that doesn't come through.

Good scouting to you!

One difference between Life Saving MB and, say, basketry MB: A scout could be merely barely adequate at making a basket and it would not really have that much impact on anyone or anything, except on the scout's own skills (and perhaps, on the recipient of the scout's baskets).

On the other hand, a merely barely adequate Life Saver is, quite possibly, not a Life Saver at all. In fact not only might he be unable to save others, but he might endanger his own life in the process because he's not quite as capable as he thinks he is. Honestly, I don't want any kid, but especially my own kid, to get a marginal pass on this merit badge.

Now the thing that seems to stick in the craw is the notion that he's not being allowed to retest. OK. Maybe he (or you, or both) are hearing this right and the MB counselor is being kind of hard-nosed about it. On the other hand, maybe he (or you, or both) are hearing this a little differently than intended. I know this happens with my son sometimes - he's a black & white thinker who sometimes believes he's being told things in finite terms, when in fact that's not what's being said at all.

Maybe the intent is: "You aren't ready to retest right now. Work on your strength/stroke/skill X some more and let's see in a few months." That's not "you can't do this ever again." That's "you can try this again, but not right now."

At any rate, as a parent, I would not be making a fuss. First, it takes ownership of the experience away from your son. Second, it sends a message (unintended, I'm sure) to your son that you think he can't handle this. Third, it diminishes the accomplishment, when he does earn it, possibly both in your son's own eyes ("did I really earn this?") and in the eyes of his peers ("Johnny only got that because his parent complained"). Fourth, no MB Counselor is going to want to work with your son - or you - if they think you're going to do that sort of thing.

If somebody walked in to your unit off the street and said "I'll do whatever you need me to do" (and they really could do it well, assuming no issues that would bar them from volunteering for you or make them otherwise undesirable), what would you hand them?

What makes that position hard to fill?

bokris, I believe the threshold (5) is in the paperwork for starting a new unit. It might also be in the charter agreement, I don't recall. But as Beavah said, it can be waived.

Another thing I've seen happen is that boys were crossed over early - when they turned 11, rather than at the traditional crossover date (which is sometimes a few/several months later, depending on the boy's birthday). The arrangement I'm familiar with, the boys were officially recorded as earning AoL and crossing over to the Troop on their birthday, but unofficially they stayed with their Webelos den through the time when the crossover normally would have occurred. That gave the troop the #s on paper for recharter while not robbing the boys of their last hurrah as cubs (assuming they were still engaged and enthused by cubs).

Good luck, and thanks for breathing new life into that troop. Looking forward to hearing more about your journey over the next couple of years.

Whoever told you to get a big calendar and start tracking dates, deadlines, and requirements for a brand new scout, is crazy.

First, what parent seriously has that kind of time!?

Second, whose experience is this, the parent's or the scout's? Supposing we all agree that it is the scout's, then why would the parent need or want to make the schedule? Or why would the scout adhere to a schedule made up by somebody else?

Nope, that's a lesson in frustration (and micro management) just waiting to happen. And of course anybody who has ever had or been a teenager knows how well teens tend to react to being micro managed.

Don't worry if your scout gets some of it wrong, forgets things, has to re-do some things, etc. He'll learn from that process. (Now there are some limits. For example, my son is working on a merit badge where the MBC lives an hour's drive away. I wouldn't be too thrilled about the uses of my time, or my gas money, if my son were to have me drive him all the way there only to leave 5 minutes later because he wasn't prepared. He might find me significantly less willing to drive him without some evidence of preparation, the next time. But he'd learn from that, too. A scout is thrifty and that includes with other people's time, money, and patience.)

Hey all,

Thanks for feedback. yep, I understand the notion of a 2-week turnaround so that the kids don't submit the app on the same day they want to do the fundraiser or something like that. In my son's case, YES, the guy who signed for council does have the authority to approve this. So the 2 week period sure seems unnecessary in such a case.

Doesn't impact my guy - I just was struck with the goofiness of it, once the signatures are in place. And it sounds like others pretty much agree.

Eamonn - I think being a "mutt" qualifies you as an American!

One of my sets of great-great grandparents immigrated to the US from Poland in the 1870s. I'm four generations after that. I speak some Polish. Some words and phrases are still in common usage in our family. I studied Polish in college for a while, same reason. I was tickled to discover that my elderly great-aunts still remembered enough Polish from their childhoods to correct my grammar and carry on lively conversation. We still make and eat Polish foods at holidays & observe certain Polish traditions. There are still Polish neighborhoods in my hometown where you can conduct much of your daily business (shopping, going to church, social organizations, etc.) entirely in Polish.

Some others of my relatives immigrated to the US from Germany. My grandparents actually changed the pronunciation of their names in the middle of the 20th C to avoid seeming "too German." Their parents did not teach them to speak German but they certainly cooked German foods and observed German holiday traditions. They went to adult German school later in life to re-learn the language. My dad, me, and my son, have all studied German. Why? Because our heritage caused us to be interested and we didn't want to lose that link. (Also, I love the logical grammatical structure of German.)

My son decided in Middle School that he wanted to learn Hindi. Why? Because that is part of his heritage. So he found himself a summer program at a University and spent two summers immersed in a Hindi program. Then he found a Hindu temple near our home and joined their youth group to work on his language and cultural understanding.

You want to tell me, again, about how older generations of immigrants were so different? Because that is not my experience.

I'd like other perspectives on this because it seems silly to me.

Scoutson is working toward Eagle. He got his project preapproval stuff done and moved to completing the fundraising app. The project beneficiary signed it right away. The SM signed it right away. The required council rep happens to also be affiliated with son's troop and signed it right away.

And then, the fundraiser form states that he must wait for 2 weeks before even contacting the business where he intends to do his fundraiser or the stores from which he hopes to secure donations of materials.

He has all the signatures and is otherwise ready to go - what is the point of waiting 2 weeks and cooling his heels? Is this simply a lesson in bureaucracy?

To be clear:

A CO can control the membership in its pack or troop as it wishes. That means it can reject an adult application for leadership, remove an adult that has been a leader, and revoke a youth's membership in that particular unit.

What a CO cannot do, is remove a person (youth or adult) from the BSA as a whole.

What you are now describing sounds to me like your CO decided to cut ties with your family. The CO has the right to do that, however ill-advised it may be (or not be - I don't know the circumstances). The CO cannot keep you from joining a different scout unit chartered by some other group operating down the street, across town, three counties over, etc. The BSA as a national organization, could do that.

A good refrain to that kind of assertion is "can you show me where that policy is written? I'd like to see it."

In this case, I suspect he's making it up. Still, it might be worth having a broader discussion about the event and whether there is still a consensus on whether it is something you as a group want to do. The group's opinions might have shifted over time and maybe more people are uncomfortable with it now, than before.

(Maybe a better alternative is the whipped creme pie in the face - cheaper, less wasteful. Just don't use non-dairy whip creme, it smells really bad for the "recipient.")

In instances that I am aware of, the applicant is notified of the fact that they were rejected and why, in writing, by the Council (generally by the Scout Executive). That provides an avenue for appeal. Sometimes, this works. For example, I am aware of a case where the applicant's identity was confused with someone who had committed numerous violent felonies. Once it was shown that these were not the same person, the rejection was rescinded.

Also in the instances I am aware of, the unit committee chair is informed in writing that the applicant was rejected, but not why.

I also think that there are some grey areas. An applicant might have a "questionable" red flag on their record where the Council might want to advise the unit that there are issues and let the unit (CO and CC) decide whether to accept the applicant, based on that knowledge. In one such case I am familiar with, the issues had to do with an applicant who had DUI convictions. The unit opted to accept the applicant but not allow them to drive scouts. There, I imagine it would be difficult for Council to apprise the unit of a potential problem, without telling them what the problem actually is. In this particular example don't recall, exactly, how that communication was handled but I think it was an off-the-record verbal conversation between a DE and the unit's CC, rather than a formal letter.

From what you've written, it sounds like you are dealing with the former situation and not the latter. Is that correct?

DLChris writes: "Homosexuality is not equivalent to slavery."

Yet, apparently, you believe homosexuality *is* equivalent to theft, lying, and murder...

I really hope your comparison was made in a moment of over-the-top rhetoric and not what you truly believe.

Recognizing people who donate is nice, provided that they're comfortable with being publicly recognized. I've known a few folks who are happy to give but would HATE the public recognition, and I've read more stories here along those same lines. So it depends a bit on the people involved.

But again, I'm not sure that recognition of service should be the same as recognition of financial contribution. For my part, I would prefer to see separate ways of recognizing these. Otherwise, as BadenP complains, the meaning of an award becomes clouded. Imagine earning the Silver Beaver in BadenP's district - if what he writes is true, and there's a strong element of resentment by rank-and-file volunteers who can't afford to donate their way to recognition, then as a recipient you'd probably always be on the defensive about that award. That diminishes the value of the award in the eyes of recipients and the community. Far better to have a recognition that is clearly tied to financial donations, and leave the service recognitions separate.

Since you're talking about FOS donors, wouldn't a West award be appropriate for that?

I hate to say this, but I think that's a possible outcome. In any unit I've been involved with, two or three people would need to know about and approve your application before it even made it to the council level (where the formal background check occurs). Those would be the Charter Organization Representative, the Committee Chair, and probably the Scoutmaster or Cubmaster.

It is possible that the Charter Org Rep would want to take the matter to the institutional head of the charter organization, as well.

So, you put your situation in the hands of three or four individuals. It is to be hoped that they keep the matter to themselves, but as you no doubt understand, there are no guarantees of that. Fewer still, if they say "no" to you.

It is a gamble. How familiar are you, with the folks in charge of the cub pack or boy scout troop in question, and with the charter orgs that sponsor them?

Edited to add: you can still be supportive of your son's experience in scouting, even if you never register as a leader. That might be something to begin with, especially if you do not already have a strong relationship with the current leadership of the Charter org and the scout unit.

(This message has been edited by lisabob)

"So far, you haven't convinced me that he isn't deserving of recognition. It would certainly be unusual to recognize a Cub Scout. I'm looking for additional opinions...."

Seattle, Of COURSE the cub scout deserves recognition. We have youth recognitions a-plenty, use those. Giving him an adult award at an adult ceremony is not the way to recognize the cub scout. The power of recognition comes from being recognized by one's peers and immediate circle or community, not by a bunch of random strangers at some adult award event.

Honestly, a typical 7 year old is going to be bored out of his gourd at some adult award banquet; might even be an incentive for him to sell LESS in the future!

Also: you would set a precedent; will every top seller, every year, be recognized in this manner? If not, why not? What would make this boy different?

From the adult side of things, imagine being an adult receiving this award. How will the adult feel, receiving the same recognition as a 7 year old? Will it diminish or change the experience for the other adult recipients? Would it, over time, lead to the need to create some other category of award that is "for adults" in order to replace this award?

I'm not diminishing the scout's (and parent's) accomplishment, but we need to think about the purpose behind each award. Recognitions only have value in so far as it is reasonably clear what they are symbolic of. If you start to play too much with that symbolism, the award may lose meaning and become an empty gesture, or even an insult to some recipients.(This message has been edited by lisabob)

SP: about the scout and his popcorn sales, eh.

1. The awards you are describing are all ADULT awards so it would be odd to give these awards to youth, who already have their own award program.

2. Was it really the boy who sold the product, or was it his parents who pushed it on colleagues at work? If the former, that's great, but if the latter, I don't see that as being worthy of adult awards. There is nothing wrong with it, but it wasn't the boy's effort. And many boys are also hard-working but not lucky to have parents with jobs where that's an option. So if it is the latter case then I wonder if you are really rewarding what you think you are rewarding (the scout's personal effort).

3. Do you want to make the poor scout sit through an evening of adult awards ceremonies? The poor kid might die of boredom!

Just my thoughts: keep the adult awards and the youth awards separate.

It is not the UC's job to replace the CC. Though I can imagine the desire to do so, sometimes. Still, it is good to have prospects in mind, and maybe to chat with the COR about thins, as Eamonn suggests.