NeilLup

Sixstones, you probably did exactly the right thing. If your purpose is to serve youth, then staying and fighting is probably counterproductive.

I might also comment that on rare occasions, I have seen a spat or power play within a church congregation played out by means of a Cub Scout pack (for some reason, it is a Pack, almost never a Troop.) But in a case like this, it is probably best to leave the matter to the District or Council, DE, SE or volunteer Commissioners.

Hello Andrew,

Your question is a good and interesting one and, I believe, not explicitly covered in BSA literature.

To some extent, it depends on circumstances. Is the boy 12 or is he 16.5? Has he been earning merit badges, just not the right ones or has he not been earning anything? Has he been in a leadership position or not? Has he been active with the Troop, attending meetings and campouts or has he been absent? Has he been very active in other Scouting activities (like the OA) or has he been active in school activities (captain of the football team)?

The purpose of the BOR for non-advancing Scouts is, I believe, much the same as for advancing Scouts. It is to judge the Troop's program, the support given by leaders, etc. Is there something about the Troop's program which has resulted in the boy not advancing?

If you have not already done so, I would start of with a "Scoutmaster's Conference" for the non-advancing Scout. Find out the reason. See what you can do as SM to get him advancing. Then, if you are unsuccessful, I believe it is reasonable after 1-1.5 years to hold a BOR for a Star Scout to address his not becoming a Life Scout.

But advancement is only one method of Scouting, not an aim. If he is a good Scout and is benefitting from the program, please don't make him feel unwelcome if he chooses not to advance. We had a lodge chief of the OA in our council who turned 18 as a Star Scout. Great guy and a great Scout. He just chose to concentrate on elements of Scouting other than advancement.

Hello Bob White,

I know that you can't "fail" an SM Conference.

YOU know that you can't "fail" an SM Conference.

But the Scouts don't know that.

And their parents don't necessarily know that.

My suggestion related to avoidance of anything which could cause dinner table gossip, back room chatter, etc.

Caesar's wife and all that.

Hello Acco,

If your son really wants an SM conference from you, so that he too meets with the SM, you might oblige him. However, you could explain that you wish, to remove any possible taint of conflict interest, favoritism, etc., you wish him to have a SECOND SM conference with one of the Asst SMs. He gets what he wants and you get what you want.

"If a fisherman bait his hook with the kind of food that he likes, he will not catch many, certainly not the shy, game kind of fish. He therefore baits his hook with the kind of food that the fish like."

BP, Aids to Scoutmastership

I do not believe that anyone is suggesting compromising the values of the Scout Oath and Law. However, I do believe that each generation and indeed each individual can and must interpret and personally accept the Oath and Law for their own lives and their own times.

Probably the most striking example for me comes from the time of Vietnam. Some people interpreted "Duty to Country" to mean going to Vietnam, fighting and sometimes dying for their country. Others interpreted "Duty to Country" to mean opposing the war and doing everything possible to end US involvement risking, in some cases, prison and estrangement from one's family and friends and one's society. The same words -- Duty to Country. Good dedicated Scouts and Scouters. Arriving at exactly opposite conclusions.

We are chartered to provide training in citizenship, character and fitness for the next generations of youth and citizens. If we are unable or unwilling to "bait the hook" for them so that they accept and believe in Scouting and its values as we do then I believe that we are failing in our mission and our purpose. We will have become an adult camping society and we probably should go out of business.

This may be neither easy nor comfortable for those of us who have stacked on a number of birthdays However, if our youth stand up and promise to be "Helpful", "Friendly", "Courteous", "Cheerful" and especially "Brave", can we expect any less of ourselves.

Hello DSteele,

The presentation which I recently heard was at a Regional Wood Badge Course Director's Development Conference. It related to the characteristics and needs of various generations. It specifically addressed the "Baby Boomers" and the way they viewed the world and suggested to them the different way that younger leaders were comfortable. It spoke about what needed to be done to make Wood Badge and Scouting more appropriate and more inviting for those younger leaders and to encourage them to become long time Scouting leaders and Wood Badgers and to complete their Wood Badge tickets.

Among the topics discussed were the reasons that some of the changes were made from the previous generation of Wood Badge (Leadership Development Wood Badge) to the current 21st Century Wood Badge and how many of those changes are specifically designed to appeal to and be relevant to leaders now in their 20s, 30s and early 40s. It was said that it is not surprising that many of the changes are uncomfortable for older individuals as it was not designed for them.

As an example, it was said that because of the introduction of TV in the early 50s, as a general rule, individuals now about age 50 and up are most comfortably communicated with in a verbal fashion while individuals younger than 50 are much more comfortable with pictorial communication. There are, of course, exceptions.

The BSA is well aware of generations and generational transitions. The degree of comfort with those transitions varies from person to person. The effort is certainly being made in the part of many BSA leaders to facilitate that generational transition. It will be interesting to see, over the next several years, what is done and how successful it is.

It is also interesting to note that at the highest level of the BSA (the National Executive Board), the baby boomer generation is not that heavily represented. That group is still very substantially populated by the WWII "greatest" generation.

Hello dsteele,

Actually, my memory of the generations and of the presentation is a little different from yours.

It is the WWII (depression) generation that is motivated by money.

The Baby Boomers are motivated by fun, by process and by paying personal attention to them.

The Gen Xers are more "What's in it for me.

The following site:

http://www.bcpl.net/~etowner/anacron2.html

says this about Key and the Tune:

Key and the Tune

As early as 1806 Francis Scott Key adapted the tune to an earlier poem he wrote entitled "When the Warrior Returns" in honor of an American naval victory over the Barbary pirates. Hence, there is no doubt that Key was well acquainted with the tune, when in, September 1814, he saw the flag over Fort McHenry "by the dawn's early light." Soon after the battle, the poem and tune were published, a reminder of the American victory.

Of course, that isn't saying it is accurate, but the site seems to have gone into matters in pretty great detail(This message has been edited by NeilLup)

The US National Anthem uses the meter and tune of an English drinking song "To Anacreon in Heaven." Also, it is in 3/4 time, which is waltz time rather than marching time.

As far as the OA song, I suspect that Urner Goodman and Carroll Edson were throwing things together as fast as they could. Likely, they were just putting something together for their summer camp in Philadelphia. They never said "Let's plan a national honor society for Scouts which will go nationwide." There were many such organizations at the time and only years later was the OA chosen as the national one. I also understand that the ceremonies are similar to Masonic ceremonies of the time. I understand that Goodman and Edson were both Masons.

Likely Francis Scott Key and Goodman and Edson just picked something with which they were familiar and used it. The selection for national usage came much later.

I believe the tune is from a Russian national anthem. You will hear it toward the end of Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture.

Scholarship

When I first joined in our brand new Troop, our SPL was a transfer Second Class Scout and everybody else was new. One could not earn Merit Badges until one was a Second Class Scout and then some merit badges were restricted until you had completed the corresponding First Class requirements.

Someone noticed the Scholarship Merit Badge. At that time, your teacher was the counselor, so right after I passed Second Class Scout, I did the requirements and passed it pretty quickly.

To continue evmori's thought:

BOR: "Where do you learn your knots?"

Sammy "I never did."

BOR: "Gee, knots are a requirement. Who passed you on knots?"

Sammy: "I'm not sure."

BOR: "Let's take a look at your book. I see that your Patrol Leader signed that. Do you remember where he signed that?"

Sammy: "No, I don't remember."

BOR: "Well since that is a requirement, would you mind if we talk with your Patrol Leader about when and how you passed it. Maybe you would like to practice up and review knots with your patrol leader. Let's look at the other requirements. Are there any other requirements where you are uncomfortable."

etc.etc.etc.

I'm not so naive to think that this is easy. But it IS possible for the BOR to monitor and guide the advancement process without retesting. The SCOUT HIMSELF can always defer advancement. The trick is to get the Scout (and his parents) to agree with deferral.

Hello Rooster,

So that there isn't just frustration, it may be worth writing for a moment about what the proper channels are.

1) The less formal route is to write to the appropriate National Committee. Document your concerns and thoughts and mail them to the appropriate Committee.

I know of two cases where a single letter from a unit level scouter caused a change in national literature or in advancement requirements.

In the case here, it is a bit tougher since you are asking Health and Safety to change a policy which they have carefully considered. However, it certainly possible that a well written letter documenting ths history of Scouting and suggesting possible compromise positions would produce a result.

2) A more formal approach -- arrange for a formal submission of a resolution for action by the National Meeting. Such a resolution must be submitted by a voting member of the National Council. These are principally your Council President, Council Commissioner or one of the voting representatives elected by your council. The resolution is then read before the entire National Meeting and then likely referred to the appropriate Committee. However, due to the formal submission, consideration is probably taken a bit more seriously.

Either way, you are taking action rather than just talking about it.

Hello asm206,

I don't know if you have ever looked at or studied game theory. The most common "games" -- the ones which we commonly hear about in pro sports, etc. -- are zero sum games. That means when one party wins, the other party loses.

But not all games are zero sum games. There are other types of game. There are games where everybody can "win". Marathons are games where everybody can be a "winner." And there are games where almost everybody can lose. In pro golf, for example, in a tournament, there is one "winner" and almost everybody else is a "loser."

And this is one of my major problems with the way that many current leaders view Scouting. They want to make it a zero sum game. In Boy Scouting, the elements commonly are Eagle or Not Eagle -- winner or loser.

And the essence of Scouting is that it is not a zero sum game when done right. Every body can have their citizenship, character and fitness improved. Everybody can advance, can lead, can camp.

So to me, Victory in Scouting occurs when the aims are met, the methods are all used. If the test of a good Scoutmaster is the easy chair, then Victory occurs when the SM can sit in the easy chair and watch superb Scouting occur.

Victory -- and everybody wins.

Beaver,

When your beads are presented and the two other gentlemen are present may I suggest that you be sure that your District Executive or other appropriate District Representative are present and are briefed on their history. It borders on criminal when we, as an organization, lose touch with people like this who contributed in the past. They might wish to have some further involvement or possibly some financial gift and should have the opportunity to be invited.

I had the opportunity a couple of days ago to talk with a member of the National Health and Safety Committee who is one of the custodians of the G2SS. I asked about the ban on laser tag and other things.

He said that any activity which

intends to do harm to another human being

mimics doing harm to another human being

imitates or simulates doing harm to another human being

is forbidden.

They believe that either really doing, pretending to do or imitating doing harm to another human is not appropriate for Scouting.

To add to the comments of Saltheart, a recent article in my college's alumni magazine said that the average applicant to the college listed EIGHT activities during high school. Scouts would be considered one. Being an Eagle Scout might be considered two. So if a boy spent a great deal of his time on Scouting and didn't have a lot of activities, he would be far behind other boys and girls who were applying in this area.

Note that this was the average applicant, not the average accepted applicant. So the average accepted applicant had more. The admissions director said that today's youth were extremely skilled at multi-tasking and at getting all these things done.

So I'll bet the boy is burn't out. Not just with Scouting, but with all the activities he has to do. And in his mandatory multi-tasking (probably parentally directed), he (or his parent(s)) concluded that he had gotten the gold stars for Scouting, no more gold stars there to be earned so on to other things.

With sincere respect, I understand the frustration you feel, particularly with the mother, but I am not sure the proper action was to deny the boy the prerogative to come on the campouts. Presumably, you do those campouts because they, too further the aims and methods of Scouting. I believe that there was no suggestion of improper behavior or improper actions by him, just less activity after getting the Eagle than you would expect and hope for. Do you really think that you can better influence this boy more by refusing to let him come than by allowing him the chance to have some continuing affiliation with the Troop. Now, you have drawn a line in the sand and made it clear that if he does want to come back, he has to do so with his tail between his legs and head down.

Also, with sincere respect, you have said that he isn't trustworthy, isn't loyal, etc. He has said that he is burn't out. His mother seconded that. You may believe that his level of effort didn't burn him out, but in your actions, you are stating that you believe he isn't telling the truth.

I fear that you may have greatly increased the chance that he won't return and even that, as an adult, he will have negative feelings about Scouting that an Eagle Scout shouldn't have.

I apologize if this is monday morning quarterbacking. I wasn't there and I do know the frustration you must have felt.

Hello Roadwatchr,

Please let me lay out what I think you said happened.

You gave out the application to the person.

The application was submitted to the local council without your approval or that of the chartered organization.

At that point, the person was rejected for "prior convictions."

From what I know of the BSA process, there is some puzzling business here. Unless there was a CORI check in your council, just being convicted of a crime does not automatically disqualify.

Did the person list these convictions on their adult application? I believe there is a place for those. Was a CORI check done? If so, then it makes some sense. If not, and the matter popped up because of the person being on the BSA's ineligible to register list, that is a very formal thing with opportunity to appeal before one goes on it permanently and much formality before one would go off.

However, what sometimes happens is that the person's name comes back as being on the list, but upon checking, it is a different person on the list. Then, of course, there is no problem.

However, for the council to process the application, there must have been signatures. That suggests that if you didn't sign it, somebody did. Potentially ugly business there.

I would suggest that you run, not walk to your local council Scout Executive (in this case, probably not your District Executive nor one of the support staff) and lay out the facts as you understand them to be. A phone call laying out the facts to the SE is OK too, but I would suggest that you document what you said. I would talk to the SE as soon as you get this message. You will NOT be bothering the SE and, in fact, looking into this kind of thing is one task which is uniquely assigned to the SE. Ask the SE to look into the situation and report back to you what he/she found out.

I don't want to speculate on what the reasons might be for this situation. Many are innocent, some are not.

Until you get the report from the SE, I would suggest that you (as Committee Chairman) and/or your Chartered Organization contact the person and tell them that their participation as Crew Advisor is suspended temporarily until you understand exactly what happened in their registration process. Again, ths situation probably is innocent, but I could give some cases I know about where the situation ended up not being innocent.

Whoa, fellow Bob White,

There's a line in your post which really bothers me.

"The things you need to know are only those things a parent chooses to share."

I know of a case where a parent chose not to share that

1)Their child was on serious medication for ADD/ADHD

2) For the weekend of a Scout campout, the child was being put on "vacation" from the medication

3) The parent chose not to tell this "because then you wouldn't have taken my son."

The Troop was going to a remote camp involving a 10 mile hike in. The boy went bonkers at the remote camp due to the lack of medication combined with long, hard physical exertion and needed to be physically restrained until he could be returned to the base camp and home. The Scout leader had no idea what had happened to the gentle, respectful boy whom he knew from meetings and other campouts.

If a Scout leader is expected to assume parental responsibilities, then that I would suggest that the Scout leader needs to know what the parent knows about acute conditions which might affect mood and behavior and/or emergency treatment. There certainly is no need to know everything about the boy but there is a need to provide reasonable first aid information.

If I'm a volunteer, I have no desire at all to deal with parents playing "I've got a secret" where their son is involved. Or for that matter for themselves.

Privacy is one thing and should be appropriately guarded. But keeping information secret from trip leaders is something else.

By the way, there is an area where I understand that HIPPA can impact with Scouting. Our medical forms should include not just permission to treat but also permission to receive medical information. I heard of a recent case where a Scout was brought into an emergency room with an injury with appropriate permission to treat forms. The ER people went right to work. However, when the SM asked "What is happening?" he was told "We can't tell you. You have permission to treat forms and we are treating him. But you aren't his parent and your forms don't give permission to receive information. So under HIPPA, we can only give information to the parents."

Never a dull moment.

A far more likely problem is that the medical form IS available but the parent didn't list a medical condition or didn't want it known.

On an adult leader training course a long time ago, we had prepared patrols based on geography, diversity, medical conditions, etc. One married couple showed up and the husband demanded that he and his wife be in the same patrol. He said that his wife was essentially blind. When I looked at her medical form and showed him where it said nothing about her vision, he said "You have no need to know that!"

I think that we all know of boys who have ADD or ADHD and may be on meds for it where the boy or parents choose not to list it on the form.

It's a tricky problem. The book of medical forms properly safeguarded is a good approach, but in a real emergency, it can be 10-15 minutes away or more. Similarly, limiting it to adults can be wise, but it is permitted to have a patrol take a patrol hike or even a patrol camp with no adults present. In that case, the boy leader needs to have information. But how do you account for the possibility that the boy leader may be the one hurt?

Probably the wisest course of action is to identify well in advance any really serious medical conditions (like a bee sting or peanut allergy) which can cause acute, rapid problems and make awareness of them a general thing together with how to treat them should it be necessary. This can be explained to parents and to the boy as a safety measure. In the case above, an epi pen may be appropriate. A Boy Scout may be able to handle this and treat himself but is that a reasonable expectation for a Cub Scout? Perhaps a parent may be required to be present. More chronic conditions can be handled with the book of forms, etc.

But it also is wise to have a unit first aider who has reviewed the forms in advance (adult forms too) to identify in his or her own mind people who might have problems to be prepared in a non-intrusive manner. On a recent Wood Badge, among participants and staff, there were eight people with diabetes. So we were prepared.

And then a serious discourse on "A Scout is Courteous" and "A Scout is Kind" and on the obligations which knowing private information like this places on the persons (adults and boys) who have access to the information.

Hello SPLT15,

I think you have gotten some great advice and it is about time for the ball to be in your court. I just wanted to write one thing so that you won't be too disappointed or surprised. You seem to be a pretty savvy, alert guy but you did say that you are 14 and adults can see things differently at times.

This is something that I more commonly discuss in adult leader training, but maybe it is appropriate here.

Many adult leaders in Scouting are parents. Almost all have families, households, etc. Most Boy Scout leaders who have boys in the Troop try extremely hard to be fair with all the boys and to treat everybody equally. But that can be VERY difficult. A parent is first and foremost a parent.

Similarly, someone with a family and a household wants to protect that and not risk it. That is an extremely basic need.

In a town as small as yours, where this woman is as powerful as you describe, taking her on directly or even indirectly could be personally risky for the SM or other adults in the Troop. They may not want to get involved for reasons that are not lazyness or timidity as much as prudence. They might believe that there is real risk to them, their family or their wellbeing. Powerful people can hold grudges and make others pay.

Clearly Scouting and the Troop are extremely important to you and that is wonderful. It is important to them too, but there might be a conflict of priorities.

Be nice to your adult leaders. If you can, be reasonable in your expectations. Work with them. They will do their best.

Hello Misnwyo,

I might suggest one other source for leaders. Have you contacted any of the Boy Scout Troops in your area and asked them, on a one time-one year basis, to supply leaders? Best would be some adult leaders. If not permanent, at least close support for outdoor activities. Another great area of support would be Den Chiefs, as many as 2-3 per Den.

You also could even contact Venturing Crews in the area, if any, for Den Chiefs.

Part of what this would do is introduce more Scouting knowledge into the Dens and so enable inexperienced parents to be effective leaders. It might enable your Dens to be larger and still manageable.

When you tell the Troops in the area that you have 30-35 Webelos Scouts, they should be beating the door down to help you. Hopefully, they will.

With sincere respect for evmori, it is not the place of boys or the PLC to tell parents what they can and cannot do. They can make requests, but decisions about adults need to be made by the SM, the Troop Committee or the Chartered Organization.

There really seems to be a problem between you, SPLT15 and this woman. It is not fair to you to ask you to handle this kind of situation with an adult.

I would suggest that it is inappropriate for an individual who is not a registered leader routinely to participate in camping activities. There are certain youth protection and other procedures and trainings which apply to registered leaders. But, again, it is not your place, SPLT15, to tell an adult and a parent that they cannot go on a campout. That is the job of the SM, the Troop Committee or the Chartered Organization.

I also, quite frankly, am uncomfortable with the PLC having a personal discussion about a parent. I can understand it, but if I were the SM, I would stop the discussion and say "I'll handle the matter." And I would.

So I would suggest that you, SPLT15, need, if you can, to place this monkey where it belongs and that's on the back of one or more adults. I would suggest that you ask to talk with the SM, discuss the matter and your concerns quite frankly, and ask your SM to take action to see that the problem does not arise. Suggest to the SM that if he believes the matter isn't for him to handle, you will go with him to the Troop Committee to discuss the problem.

From what you have described, it seems somewhat likely that the SM will say that it's not that serious a problem or will not want to get involved. Express again your concern and note the problems that the woman has caused for you as SPL and, in your opinion and observations, for the Troop. Ask the SM to be available on request at any time to assist you and tell the SM that you would like to take any problems to him.

Then if ANYTHING starts to happen on the campout where she starts to come at you, politely ask the woman to go with you, right away, to the SM. Get him involved. Do that each time. If you see her getting on other Scouts, go to the SM right away. But let an adult be the one that handles the problem.

Also, I might suggest keeping a notebook of incidents. In that way, if there ever is any kind of discussion with the Committee and/or the Chartered Organization, you will have facts.

But, and I know this can be difficult, try extremely hard to be objective and non-emotional. You are really going to be hitting her hot buttons. Her reaction may not be pleasant.

Hello SPL T15,

You did very, very well with a difficult situation. I might only disagree with one item of naming which in no way changes the situation.

To me, a PLC is a rather formal thing. It is scheduled in advance, may have an agenda, has the patrol leaders SPL, etc. there together with the SM, etc. It doesn't happen on the spur of the moment unless the SM or SPL call it rather formally, for example, to handle a disciplinary matter.

What you had on your trip was, if you will, a meeting of the trip leaders. You, as SPL, are certainly entitled to talk to the SM or any of the ASMs at any time that you reasonably choose. This is part of the help and counsel you can expect to get at the boy SPL of a Troop. You can bring a PL into this meeting if you choose. You can and should be able to talk in private with these people to help you do a better job and to decide on the tactical issues of a trip, like when to stop, where to have dinner, disciplinary problems, etc. (Assuming, of course, that youth protection rules are followed.) But this really doesn't, to me, have anything to do about who can or cannot attend a formal PLC. This kind of meeting is much more fluid and there really are no "rules" other than the Scout Oath and Law.

I would hope that if, in a case like this, you (or anyone) would say "May I please talk with Mr. XXXX now." it would be honored. Even in a PLC, I could imagine situations where a PL or the SPL would ask to step out for a moment to talk with the SM or with an ASM, then return. It is that kind of private discussion which common courtesy demands be honored. Then when the discussion is over, the meeting can be expanded if desired. It's a little like the referees in a football game getting together to discuss a play and holding all the players away. Then, when they have decided what they will do, they inform the players and the coaches.

Perhaps by calling it a PLC, your ability to deal with this woman was strengthened and, if so, that's fine. But it sounds to me as if her level of discourtesy was even somewhat greater than originally suggested. Of course, the fact that (as I understand it) it was her husband who was the ASM in the discussion might have made her feel a bit more free to participate.

I think that all of us who were at one time or another children were able to tell what topics our parent or parents cared about and which they did not.

When he came home from work, my Dad would ask me about how math had gone. He didn't ask me about history. He made flash cards for math. He didn't for religion.

So the first way that a parent can influence the Scouting of their children is this simple matter of interest or non-interest. They can ask what happened. They can be a bit conversant with requirements, etc.

Then, there is the matter of support. At the time I earned Second Class Scout, one had to take one 5 mile hike. Our Troop didn't have one planned but the requirements said you could take one with your parent. So I asked my dad if he would go with me. He was happy to. As a result, I earned my Second Class Scout about 4 months before most of the other boys who joined with me.

But then, there is the matter of pushing. In the case above, if my dad had read the requirements and said "I've read the Second Class Scout requirements and I understand that you need only to take a 5 mile hike to be ready for Second Class. I have planned for us to do that at 10AM on Saturday. I expect you to be ready then" it might be pushing.

On another list, I posted some of the things that I look for in identifying a merit badge mill and an Eagle mill. One of them is parents referring to "our merit badges" and "our Eagle."