Lisabob

The committee shouldn't have agreed to give your son voting rights in the first place, nor should they have asked (let alone allowed) his fiance to be the CC for the pack. This has nothing to do with the individuals involved - I'm sure your son & fiance are lovely, responsible, fantastic people. It was irresponsible of the other (over21) adults to expect this, though, given BSA's rather clear rules. It is also an issue of questionable character, that some of these other leaders figured they'd just put up a ghost name for CC and let your son's fiance actually run the show. And finally, I question whether your son, or his fiance, will have the authority to actually call shots here, if chosen. Others will discount them because of their age, their "unofficial" status, and the way that they would be chosen. This is a set-up and it violates many of the points of the scout oath & law. On to the current situation. If I understand right, both your son & husband have thrown their hats into the ring. The voting issue comes up only because it is assumed that your husband will win, without the younger folks' votes. Your husband finds that unacceptable (is that all right?) Your husband needs to make clear to the COR that he will not accept the nomination under current conditions, and either the COR finds a way to fix it, or they find someone else to do the job. If your son actually wants to be the SM and you think that's a good choice, then perhaps the COR (or you) could recommend holding off on choosing the SM until September, at which point there will be no disputes about your son's qualification. Good luck. Frankly, this sounds like one where I'd want to wash my hands and say "goodbye" to a lot of the folks involved.

"I think the fact that noone else is bothered by it is also shameful.." See now, this is where I think things are probably going a little far. First, I don't actually see people here saying they aren't bothered. (I certainly wasn't saying that.) Second, I don't think it helps to insinuate this. That's the kind of comment that escalates the situation to no end, and is a primary reason why I don't think you will gain the outcome you seek, by addressing this individual again. Please don't misunderstand me: I agree with you, it is rude and wrong to park in a handicap spot for mere convenience. The CM seems to be rather insensitive on this issue. He should know better. He is not setting the example we all might like him to set. He should also have responded better to your original request. However, he didn't. While I don't disagree with what you hope to achieve, I don't think you'll succeed with the method you propose, and I wonder whether you are willing to pull your boy from the pack over this (or how he would feel about that). There are a lot of lessons children learn from watching their parents & other adults. One here is certainly that people should be more respectful of those with disabilities. Another is that people don't always see eye to eye, even on important issues. A third is that all of us have some failings, some more than others, and simply putting on a scout shirt doesn't make us perfect individuals. Please take this in the spirit it is meant (you did ask for opinions and I am trying to be both honest and courteous in my response - I hope that is how you are reading this.) Please also accept my heartfelt sympathies for your family's loss, and my enduring gratitude for all who serve our country, including the families that make their service possible.

This is in no way intended to be insensitive, and I'm not saying I necessarily believe this. I do understand your concern and the reason you are especially sensitive to this matter. But you know, jaywalking is illegal. Speeding is illegal. In my state, smoking (which I don't) outside, within 25 feet of a public building entrance, is illegal. Parking at a meter without paying is illegal. A nearby town has a nuisance ordinance that makes being annoying illegal (seriously!). How many people do some or all of these things? (I admit that I've been known to speed, if only because people who don't in this car-crazy state get all sorts of rude treatment on the roads. It is a good thing I don't live in that nearby town, as my son tells me I can be annoying at times.) While that doesn't make it right, the fact is that people tend to see things in shades of grey. You might see different shades of grey than they do, and you may be 110% right, too, but reality is seldom as cut-and-dried as it seems.

When I started volunteering and got to know our DE, I was very plesaed with his availability, commitment, and hard work. That guy worked 60-80 hours a week doing practically everything and anything that needed doing in order to help units stay afloat and ensure decent district programs. Basically, anything that volunteers did not/would not do, or follow through on, fell on his shoulders. He was at everything from webelos-scout transition planning to cub day camp to training to boy scouting events to who knows how many evening meetings. He was the first to arrive and last to leave, always. Volunteers came and went, but Frank was the key to it all. I was really sorry when he retired. Our next DE, fresh out of college with no scouting experience, also worked really hard. She was less skilled and also less well connected, but she had a lot of energy, I'll grant her that. For the less than $25k they paid her, the council & district got every penny's worth. She went back to school and then moved on to a job where she could afford to stop eating mac & cheese 4 nights a week. I haven't yet met our current DE. I assume he's doing his job since he hasn't been fired. We have a few others - district & field directors - with whom I do not see eye to eye. It isn't that they're lazy (they aren't), but that they are overly aggressive in ways I find distasteful. They're playing the numbers and targets game, while I'm more interested in program and quality. But I see what they do and don't begrudge them their paychecks. As for UCs - there actually is training out there (I've been through it) and it can be pretty good training, too. But UCs are volunteers, like you and me. Some go to training, some don't. Some take their role to heart, some don't. Some are gifted communicators, problem-solvers, and mediators, some really are not. A few seem to view their UC roles as doing a favor to somebody by agreeing to put their name on the dotted line, but never intending to really do the job. Don't know why they bother, or why we continue to act like that's ok.

basement, thank you for being there to provide a scouting program to these kids.

In my son's former troop where he served as SPL for a year, it was expected that the SPL would attend the monthly committee meetings. The SPL would give a report, answer questions, and raise/relay concerns from the PLC. In theory, this seems like a good idea. And as a longtime committee member, I could see it as helpful for the committee to hear from the boys in this way. On the downside, it is only helpful if the committee is actually interested in the boys' input. If not, then the whole thing becomes a charade, and a waste of everyone's time. Further, once my son became SPL, it was easier for me (as a parent) to recognize the drain on his time. SPLs are typically very busy kids who do a LOT for their troop already; another meeting, and one in which they have little voice, may be seen as a poor use of their time. Just another perspective.

I think I would not say anything further about it. He knows, you know, your son knows, what's right. Sometimes you can't change a person's behavior but you can make your own decisions not to do those same things. And while I am very sympathetic to your concern, I also want to point out that try as we might, we ALL do things that are wrong sometimes. Thank goodness we don't always get called out on them.

Well it seems we are mostly in agreement here, and yet, many of the problems that come to light on this board have, at their roots, dysfunctional family situations of one sort or another. The funny thing to me is, we all talk about this and even agree on occasion that "they need help" but few of us (myself included) are comfortable saying that to the people who we think actually need the help. Obviously, there's tremendous potential to muck things up here. On the other hand, I wonder if there isn't some way of letting families know that it is ok to seek help when things aren't going so well. Might have been that in the past, a school guidance counselor c/would have done this. These days, either the guidance counselors have all been laid off, or they have 1000+ students each and don't have time to even talk to, let alone get to know, the kids assigned to them.

Through scouting, I have come to realize that I'm really good with kids under the age of 12, and pretty good with the ones over the age of 16. The ones in the middle? Not my favorite age group to deal with. Much temptation to throttle. Eng: don't use the Scout Oath & Law as bludgeons. He'll just come to associate scouting with being yelled at/grumped on , and that's not likely to help.

I believe it is American Legion (or VFW) that have a national policy of picking up charters for dropped scout units. Contact them in your area if you can't find another group. Also, call your District Executive and request a sit-down meeting. Put it on the line - your pack is about to lose your charter and if you don't get help, there will be one less unit in the district. Most DEs would give their left kidney to prevent a unit from going under, because they get evaluated (and paid) partly on the basis of membership targets. They need to add a certain number of new units per year, which is a lot harder when existing units disintegrate. Your DE will likely move mountains to help you locate a new charter org.

Call the mom. Did she really say this? Are you sure you're going to take her kid's word for it? Maybe she did, in which case, lesson learned (I hope) for her: kids repeat things at the most inopportune times. Maybe she didn't, in which case, she and her son have an interesting conversation coming up. If she did say it, and she 'fesses up, I'm not really sure what the "fix" could be. She should certainly apologize, but what else? What would make things right, from your perspective (is this even possible)? If she didn't say it, she should have a little heart to heart chat with your son and let him know that she thinks he's great/special/etc., and she should also have her child apologize for saying nasty things. Then the whole den should do something fun together and get everybody back to playing nice.

This should be in a part of the forum titled "working with parents," if only we had such an area. I've been reading threads where dysfunctional families, or parents at their wit's end, seem to be a common theme. Of course some of this is just the normal frustration of raising children. On the other hand, in at least one thread in the cub section, the original poster (and several responses) states bluntly that the parent/grandparent needs parenting skills help. So - in a scouting context, have you ever told a parent that they need to get help to improve their parenting skills? Have you told a parent to seek counseling (either for themselves, or family counseling)? If you have, was this parent also a registered scouter in your unit? How did that work out? Is there a good way to do this? Or is this just beyond the boundaries & responsibilities of a scout leader?

we call it parenting. (sorry, I know that sounds snide. seriously, if every kid totally "got it" and applied it, there would probably be something wrong with them! It is pretty normal for kids to not see the application, or to think in very black & white terms, as in "that's scouts, this isn't." With guidance, love, boundaries, and a lot of patience, they usually come around eventually. Some seem to take longer. Try to resist the urge to throttle them. )

sorry guys - didn't mean to post & run but I'm too dazed by an overflow of badly written term papers to come up with anything coherent right now. (This is an occupational hazard) Will jump back into this discussion sometime soon, I hope.

Done well, district PWDs can be lots of fun (and still competitive, too). Of course many are not done well. But they do tend to be run by the same hardy few folks who volunteer to do lots of things. So one approach is to avoid the district PWD. Another is to offer to help make it better. Both have their place, as far as I'm concerned.

Last night my son cooked birthday dinner for his dad. He cooked something that he learned to make in boy scouts (chinese stir fry). And it was good. Thanks, BSA, for teaching my boy self-confidence & to be able to cook for himself - and for us, too.

Welcome, and thanks. Your post goes to show that we never can know how much of a difference scouting makes in a boy's life, even for a boy who maybe wasn't involved for all that long, or who didn't do much in the way of advancement. At any rate, it is clear that scouting made an impact on you because otherwise, you probably wouldn't be so involved in scouting today. I hope you continue to find value in your scouting journey, and that you have fun watching your son(s) and other young men grow and change as they make the journey.

One of my favorites! Too bad loony tunes are rarely on TV anymore. AnnLaurelB, it sounds like you are working your way through this whole situation really well. Kudos to you, and I hope you'll keep posting here as your pack grows and changes. It is fun to read about other units' programs, and your enthusiasm is catching (even online).

There are certain advantages to a flat tax and it is definitely easier to administer and figure out. On the other hand, it tends to ignore the fact that relatively poorer people can less afford to spend as high a percentage of income on taxes, and relatively wealthier people can. It isn't just absolute dollars in question here, it is the whole notion of graduated tax systems. Still, given a choice between the current system and a true flat tax, I think I'd prefer the flat tax. The current system has so many loopholes and exceptions for wealthy individuals (don't even start on corporate taxes) that it hardly even resembles the concept of progressive taxes, anymore, particularly at the high end of the income scale.

Perhaps Eamonn is a thug in real life, lurking in the dark alleyways of rural PA with a baseball bat or a tire iron, just waiting to violently take money from others. However, I don't believe we've seen that side of Eamonn on this board. Or maybe I missed that thread. Jet, I admit I'm not as anti-tax as you are so we probably won't agree on some things no matter what. What I really don't understand though, is why it is ok to cut services and benefits for the middle and lower-middle class, while leaving the wealthiest individuals unscathed. Why is it so impossible to close a few tax loopholes on the wealthiest among us? What happened to shared sacrifice, when the sacrifices are falling almost entirely on the poor and middle classes?

Maybe this is just me, but you might also want to avoid labeling the kid as a "terrorist." Yeah I know what you mean by it (I think) but who does it serve to attach such a loaded term to a child? There's a boy who joined our troop a few years ago, who closely resembled the description you've given of this child. A webelos leader and den from a different pack came to visit the troop. Like you, I live in a small town and most of the kids know each other from school & extracurricular activities. The webelos leader saw that kid, and made a snide comment asking how the little piece of s--- was faring. Of course some other kids heard it, too. He really was a difficult kid to be around, but still, that wasn't too helpful. I was glad when that webelos leader opted to join a different troop.

Something else to keep in mind - you've mentioned a couple of times now that you are concerned about losing your two bears next year when they join the webelos den with this kid. Well that's an understandable concern, but there is no reason that you MUST put the webelos I & webelos II dens together. Yes, I know, this boy is your only webelos II kid, but so what. Let the dens stay separate and it will end up better. By the way I agree - it sounds like the boy needs professional help, and so do his guardians. Any child with the medical issues you described would need help, probably regardless of the parenting skills of his caregivers. Maybe you'll be able to frame it as a medical thing, as opposed to a critique of grandma's parenting abilities (which do sound a bit weak, but hey, who wants to be told that). I'm surprised that the kid isn't getting some kind of behavioral counseling through the school - or at least, that the school isn't pushing the idea, too?

You might want to consider having the boy & grandma & you work out a behavior contract together (depends on how able you think the boy & grandma will be to do this - they might both be unable to pull this togehter - boy might be too scattered, and grandma might be too harsh, or flighty. Your portrait of the two of them doesn't make common sense sound like it is present in large quantities) If you think they can handle it, the advantage of having them help write a behavior contract is that they have more ownership of it, and so more likelihood of taking it seriously and trying to stick to it. Regardless - expect a scene the first time he loses his widgets and gets sent home. Make sure grandma doesn't blow her top at him - just keep it matter of fact when that happens, and try again the next week. Unless he does something serious (like hitting somebody) then let each meeting be a stand-alone occurrence. Don't allow last week's bad behavior to color expectations of this week - let him start fresh. Maybe, sooner or later, he'll manage to stay for a whole meeting. Good luck with this.

Pint, some units do essentially just that - they charter to a group called "parents of" or "friends of" the unit. The downside to that is that kids graduate or move on, and sometimes you end up left with a very thin group of parents who not only run everything in the daily working of the unit, but also own/control the unit's funding and big picture decisions as Charter org. Continuity can be a problem (either, not enough of it, or a few hangers on that won't leave and believe they should have a veto over everything the unit ever might do) What happens then, when some of the "parents of" want to use their charter power one way, and some want to use it a different way? Who is really the institutional head, who is supposed to be the ultimate voice of authority? Nobody. So while it happens, it is often rather problematic.

Given the discussion in another thread about schools & scouts right now, I thought some of you might find this NY Times article relevant. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/04/education/04winerip.html?_r=1&hpw In particular, this paragraph: "The federal law permitting extracurricular clubs to use public schools before and after hours was passed in 1984 after lobbying by conservative church groups. Bible study clubs grew fruitful and multiplied, replenishing the Christian faith throughout the land. Then things took a turn to the left. The law required equal access, and gay-straight clubs started popping up. "