SeattlePioneer

Just Google Cub Scout Clip Art.

> Lawyers are "the embodiment of all evil." But lawyers and the news media often work together to publicize the worst interpretation of facts. Scouting has been repeatedly been plucked for cash and been held up to ridicule in the media for the actions of criminals. And all too often youth have been injured through acts of negligence or omission by BSA, councils or volunteers. Those facts are telling us the job we did in the past wasn't adequate, and we have new rules that aim to do a better job. But we need to follow those rules, not look for excuses to ignore them. > Yes, our fellow citizens typically wont want to be too tough on Scout leaders in ambiguous or dubious situations. But when a pattern of facts is finally clarified into provable harm to youth, they will be glad to hang councils and BSA. And allow youth to come to harm by failing to take the most effective action possible.

> If you report an incident to the police, then THEY are responsible for the follow up. If they do a poor job or there aren't sufficient facts to procede, you and BSA have taken the most effective action possible. The current YPT rules require: 1. Call the cops first to report an incident. 2. Call the council and report an incident to the Scout Executive. The news media and plaintiff's lawyers make this the necessary policy whether we like it or not. The days of BSA relying on it's own methods and practices to protect youth are past. Whether the cops do a better job isn't really the issue.

In the "Scouts With Porn On Camputs" thread, a discussion is continuing as to whether Scouters should follow the YPT rules as written or to use their own judgment in following the rules, which involves reporting incidents to the police. I think the episodes described in the article make a good case to start by reporting incidents to the police to investigate. They are the authorities --- we are not. Scouting doesn't need more of these kinds of incidents and episodes. If that's hard on Scouts and Scouters who do questionable things and have to explain their actions, so be it.

I'll add that there are plenty of lousy reason for discrimination, too. But "discrimination" itself is a rather content free issue. It tells you very little about what may be happening. This is illustrated by the extreme political campaign being waged against Chick Fill A and BSA over homosexuality and the lack of interest in discrimination against girls by BSA and boys in GSUSA.

Packsaddle, Please don't put your words in my mouth. Just propose taking away from African Americans the race discrimination they benefit from in affirmative action programs and you will see a motivated constituency for race discrimination. "To govern is to choose" is a common axiom of politics. One could restate it as "To govern is to discriminate." To be opposed to "discrimination" is to be foolish. One has to look at the content of what is being done to determine if "discrimination" is wise or foolish, just or unjust.

As an added bonus pretty much every handbook will be obsolete so there will be a big market for buying new books and a small market6 for recycling old books. Someday it would be interesting to know the extent to which churning the program is driven by an interest in selling new stuff.

Hello nldscout, The fact is there are often plenty of good reasons for "discrimination." One need only look at the effects of desegregating major league baseball, which led rather directly to the destruction of black professional baseball. African Americans were hot to get access to traditionally white colleges and universities, but when that happened, they were equally unwilling to give up the "traditionally black colleges and universities" they controlled and valued. That's still true today. As soon as equal employment became the law, the cry went up for race based quotas in employment, college and university admissions and government contracting. Efforts to end those kinds of discrimination have been angrily opposed by those who benefit from such programs. Few people are opposed to ALL discrimination. Most people have agendas of discrimination they support, and others that they oppose.

> It is USUALLY a pain in the neck to deal with people who don't follow the program as planned. It causes compromises in program and a variety of organizational problems. Frankly, it's rude, although something Scouting often tolerates. If you make your own arrangements to come late, you take pot luck would be my attitude. Your ad hoc arrangements didn't work? That's unfortunate, but they were your arrangements. I don't think much of the other family foisting additional people on the outing either. Scout Troops and outings aren't doormats.

Good story, SSScout. I've seen it many times. Some times children just need some more time to grow up a bit and learn some self control. I'm no Xpert on pathological conditions. If a Scout can't behave, they can't stay in the program --- that day, anyway. They can try again the next time. I always try to keep in mind that I was one of THOSE kids!

Personally, I'd be putting together a program designed for the needs of your new Scouts and New Scout patrol. That might include practicing some of the Boy Scout requirements plus learning hiking skills such as equipment to take, clothing and rain gear, map and compass skills, and perhaps stopping at an athletic field along the way to run through the physical fitness skill requirements to either start, practice or finish the thirty day improvement trial. If someone can find a "canned" program of the kind you are asking about, I'd certainly look it over, but with an eye towards customizing it rather than copying it.

I'm with pappadaddy. Allowing a disruptive Cub Scout to remain in a program is a leading cause of den failures. If a Cub Scout can't behave in a cooperative manner, better bite the bullet sooner rather than after many families have been driven away.

> Fine. Six months later lurid newspaper stories disclose this Scout has been peddling child pornography through Scouting and you and your council are sued for damages by the families of the children pictured for negligently permitting that to occur. The newspapers correctly note that this kind of behavior was brought to the attention of Scoutmaster josryan, who had been trained to report this kind of incident to police but who failed to do so. The families in the newspaper article are quoted as saying "If only the Scoutmaster had followed the rules my child would never have been exploited in this way, damaging him/her for life."

What I see are a number of people who want to use their "judgement" as a reason to ignore the plain language of BSA Youth protection rules. I'm not using that as a legal term, I'm using it as a layman's term. I would suppose that the BSA rules are designed to protect everyone involved. There is a history in BSA of people ignoring risky situations they observe, and I presume the Youth protection rules are designed to mandate an alert sensitivity to possible problems and reporting them to authorities and to leaders who have the expertise to deal with them. I certainly don't have that training, experience or expertise. As pointed out earlier, of course you still have to use judgement. The Sport Illustrated swimsuit issue turning up in camp is not something I would act upon. Porn videos in camp seems like a pretty clear cut situation that probably requires reporting to the Scout Executive. I feel no need to use my "judgment" to excuse what I suppose is an obvious violation of YPT rules. If that's too hair trigger for your taste, then get the rules changed. Scouting has suffered enough over this issue and BSA, councils and Scouters need to take steps to avoid problems and protect themselves. And I can just imagine you as Plaintiff's Lawyer cross examining some Scouter who used his "judgment" to avoid reporting a problem required by YPT rules. I can imagine you putting the applicable rules in front of that hapless, foolish Scouter and asking if he was trained to follow the rule, and present his signed receipt saying that he's been trained in the rules. If you are trained in a rule and sign a receipt to that effect, you had better follow it or expect to find yourself explaining why you didn't to an aggressive plaintiff's lawyer. BSA has had enough of that. Councils have had enough of that and I have had enough of that. We should be training Scouts that such behavior may get them in big trouble. That is a reasonable thing to do. But if they ignore that, I'm not about to cover up their foolishness. I would suppose that Scout Executives, police and prosecutors have training, experience and expertise in dealing with complaints of this kind. They are better equipped to deal with such issues wisely than I am. So I would follow BSA YPT rules and give them the opportunity to decide what action, if any, is appropriate.

> Congratulations on doing a good job of working with Webelos dens. Too few troops do that. Still I would encourage troops to do recruiting in the community. Spring recruiting among 5th graders who haven't been Cub Scouts is a fruitful place for troops to start. It's the first time boys that age can be recruited into a Boy Scout troop and you have the opportunity to sell summer camp and summer outings.

Here's a tip for the parents: They need to be present for every meeting and outing. The usual rule of thumb is that one disruptive Scout can drive away five families from your program. You can't afford a boy who is acting out.

Sounds like a Boy Scout program that includes girls at age 14. Will Boy Scout advancement be included? Seattle Pioneer

I agree with you completely, TwoCub. The neighboring troop meets the same day the pack and dens customarily meet, and it would be a fine part of the program for Webelos. Dens could still visit other troops, and I would encourage that as well. There is one other troop near by that would be worth visiting a time or two. And Webelos dens could participate in pack meetings and pack activities when it suited their needs and interests.

Is it just me or does it sound kinky that the Scout Executive is collecting all those pictures of youths? Once you turn over the camera, perhaps you should call the cops and file a report about that!

Interesting ideas, Basement. The contrast between the long term program orientation of Scouting and a short term, transient population would make that tough. I'm supposing that this would be treated more or less as a service project by an established Cub Pack?

I imagine that before long units will be issuing pink epaulettes to indicate their gay friendly policies?

That kind of program is usually one undertaken by the council, often with paid staff of one variety or another.

Perhaps. What kind of training did you receive at camp?

Hello Dean, I wish I could agree withe you. But there is nothing in the Youth Protection rules to suggest that they should be read to ignore the very plain, unambiguous language of those rules. Just the opposite, really. Everything I've read from authoritative sources suggests that BSA wants those rules enforced as they are written. If the Council Scout Executive wants to use his/her judgment on what to report, that's fine with me. They probably have a lot more training and perhaps are expected to use discretion. But I don't see it as my job to do that.

Still no reply to the question I posed.