Sentinel947

2 hours ago, yknot said:

I know scouters like to compare BSA to the school environment but there are some very significant differences. There are cameras everywhere today in the academic setting.  No child is ever really "alone" with a teacher, coach or bus driver, because there are cameras in hallways, in classrooms, at sports facilities both inside and at the field houses, in offices, and on buses. It's a very different situation.

 

There were no cameras in my High School classrooms or teachers offices. (2012 graduate) I remember having to make up assignments after school where I was totally alone with the just the teacher, and during my study hall period I'd go down to the band room to practice, and it'd just be me and the band teacher there. Maybe that's changed in the last 8 years, but I'm skeptical. Abuse does happen in Schools. There's no point pretending that it doesn't. That doesn't let the BSA off the hook. 

Yes, child abuse does happen at School or on Scout outings, but when I've read the stories of some of the abuse in the Church, schools or in the BSA, I've been amazed at the level of access predators have been able to have to their victims outside of the environment where they met their victims. Not sure what the solutions are to preventing that, but that is likely why the BSA YPT rules are so expansive and try to dictate what interactions BSA volunteers and youth have outside of Scouting events. 

15 hours ago, John-in-KC said:

Sorry, I disagree. I rejected the call to be a youth again.  I earned the right to be an adult, with sweat, tears, and blood.  Innocent as I was at 14?  I think not.  That’s why I was so ticked off at “Win All You Can.”  I’d seen friends go to very bad places because of that mentality in the real world. When a 20 year old tried to tell us to be kids again, we told him to shove it where the sun doesn’t shine. Clearly, he had not had his “oh, shit” moment in life yet. 

Operate on the basis we are adults, please. 
 

 

That might be your experience with it, but rather than reject it, plenty of participants are unaware that the program is trying to make them role-play as Scouts. They come out of Wood Badge and think Adults are supposed to be acting they way their patrols and Troop Guides did in wood badge, when those are "youth" roles. 

I don't disagree with you, I don't think the role-playing aspects of Wood Badge have much value. But that doesn't change that people graduate from the program and don't recognize what they experienced. 

20 hours ago, John-in-KC said:

My personal thought is the SPL and SM need to work together in private a couple times a month. SM spouse and one of SPLs parents should be there for the adult safety issues, but the relationship between these two is what drives the entire PLC process. 
 

in addition, the PLC at Wood Badge needs to be dumped. It has NO decision making ability, It’s a tasking meeting. A real PLC makes decisions. 

Yes. This is one of many imperfect lost- in- translation aspects in Wood Badge. There are Wood Badge graduates who fail to realize as participants they are living a youth role, and so is most of the staff. NYLT's a little stronger in the way that it's more obvious who's in the staff is a Youth POR vs an Adult role. But NYLT's PLC's suffer from the same issues as Wood Badge. It'd be better to have a scripted mock PLC to demonstrate, and then stop calling the daily progress/tasking meetings "PLCs."

36 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

This seems backwards; so he's already decided the project he wants to do and is just looking for an organization to do it for?

How about the other way around: he contacts local organizations to see if there are needs that they have?

I've worked with a lot of Life Scouts. I've seen it go either way: 1. The Scout has an idea, and pitches it to the beneficiary. This mostly looks like the Scout contacting the beneficiary representative and pitching the idea. 2. The Scout picks a beneficiary, the beneficiary representative and the Scout decide on a project of need. I'd say most of my Scouts (including me) went the second way, but I did have a few that went the first route. End result is the same.

The advantage for picking the beneficiary first is they might have a budget assigned for the project, where if a Scout springs an idea on them, they would probably accept, but probably don't have it in budget. But if a Scout is really passionate about doing a particular project, it might make sense to have the idea, and then find the organization that needs it. 

7 minutes ago, mrjohns2 said:

On what do you base your argument? 

I have to disagree. It may not be the biggest (thus most popular), but I do think it is the best. 

Best will always be subjective. There a bunch of very worthy activities for youth to involve themselves in, and a variety of very worthy volunteer organizations for adults to provide service to. 

I firmly believe in the Scouting program, and I back that belief with time, talent and treasure. It's the best activity I was involved with as youth, but best is going to depend on each youth and their unique interests and needs. 

On 12/10/2020 at 9:06 PM, RememberSchiff said:

??? Seems backwards, the renter specifies the terms of renting his/her facility.

In a negotiation it depends who has leverage. My current rental arrangement reflects my leverage vs my landlord. 

In the case of the boy scouts and renting, the facility owner holds most of the cards, and all the cards that matter.

10 minutes ago, JoeBob said:

May I ask why?  This would eliminate 1/3 of the ASMs that I've enjoyed working with.  Most trades (carpenters, plumbers, welders, electricians, etc.) farmers and enlisted military don't have or need a BA/BS.   Many of these individuals are self-employed, which allows them to schedule their time for volunteering.

My 6 years of college were a lot of fun, but influenced about 1% of anything I did as a scouter.

This is just part of the JD (job description) for a DE. I don't think @Cburkhardt was suggesting it become the standard for Scouting volunteers.

The DE role has some huge challenges. From a job design perspective, it's asking people to have a variety of valuable skillsets for a low rate of pay. That's a poor business practice. The BSA will always struggle to attract people with the right background for such a multifacted role, and once it starts to develop staff to have the necessary sales, fundraising and people management skills needed to be a DE, they can leave the BSA for sales, fundraising or HR jobs that are more lucrative than being a DE. 

Many American companies are starting to eliminate degree requirements where it makes sense. Certainly if ASM was a job, I'd see little reason to require a degree for it. 

13 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

What have I done?

You're fufilling your destiny @InquisitiveScouter! Become my apprentice, and learn to use the dark side of the force! 

@ThenNow Thank you for sharing your thoughts and experience with us. 

36 minutes ago, HICO_Eagle said:

That is precisely WHY they need help forming that brain early as teens and the coddling needs to stop.  I would argue the skill set needed for a 15 year old to succeed in 1865, 1929, or 1941 was greater and more complex than today.  We've been dumbing everything down for the last 30 years.  Teens today don't even try to remember simple things, thinking they can just Google it if they need info.  Youth in the past needed to know a wide variety of details and tasks (examples:  how to handle and care for animals, grow crops, make their own clothes and footgear, fix a broken wagon wheel, etc.).

I would note that 35 years ago, I could rent a car at the age of 18 or 19 simply by showing a valid driver's license and credit card.  Why has the age pushed out to 25?  IMO, it's because the 18-24 year olds have become increasingly less mature.

Getting back to the OP, he mentioned how Scouting dealt with its second crisis by bringing back Greenbar Bill.  We talk about this in the Patrol Method channel but it's worth repeating:  proper use of the patrol method with its emphasis on giving the Scouts responsibility for their own program and actions helps them develop into mature adults.  Doing things FOR them, extending the childhood, just delays that maturation (sometimes permanently).

One of the benefits of growing up in a troop that at times was the size of a single patrol (seriously, by the time you appointed SPL, ASPL, 2 PLs, 2 APLs, we had 2 or 3 Scouts left to populate the patrols) and part-time SMs was that the core group of 5 or 6 Scouts did virtually everything except the items needing an adult signature or driver.  We had to or we wouldn't have had any activities.  Out of that core group, I think 4 (maybe 5) of us made Eagle.

Technology has made things significantly easier for people in general, not just Children. The life skills required to be an ADULT today is not as demanding as it was in the 1940's. If you have money, you can pay somebody to do most things for you.

Where I will disagree is that children are academically and socially under WAY more pressure than they were in decades past. I was studying things in High School my parents didn't take until they went to college, and I was definitely not as academically bright as they are. The competition for jobs and college acceptance is way more intense than it was historically. Where you could walk into a company, dressed nicely with a resume and get a job offer doing some sort of menial labor, that would at least pay enough to cover your basic needs... might have even had a pension! 

4 hours ago, David CO said:

The sexual abuse scandals.  First we had the scandal in the Catholic Church.  Then we have the scandal in the boy scouts.  Put them together and it is quite a mess.  Our pastor would never approve of us having young adults in the unit.  It could be a deal breaker.  

Extending the age limit might increase membership in some units, but it might cause others to drop their charters entirely.  

Do you have some sort of data that suggests that young adults are more likely to be sexual predators than older men? The articles I've seen on abuse in Scouting and the Catholic church doesn't seem to show that's a consistent trend. 

42 minutes ago, gpurlee said:

Jameson76 - In our community in 1976, there were six very active Scouting units. Five years later, all but one had ended. The new Scouting program was a disaster for the Boy Scouting program overall and helped to bring the Golden Age of Scouting to a close.  There were elements that worked well in our troop such as the Leadership Corps and the skill awards but honestly, we just continued a very strong and active outdoor program. Trips to the National Jamboree, Washington DC and Chicago helped.  And we saw significant growth from a combination of transfers and new Scouts.  

My dad and uncles Troop was like your troop. They accepted the new requirements, but otherwise just kept doing their usual outdoor program. 

59 minutes ago, David CO said:

I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting that we abolish public education.  I'm not worried about that happening.  I am a little concerned that distance education may become seen by many public school districts as a practical alternative to face-to-face learning.

 

I was being facetious. Since commenters on the Wapo article were calling for the BSA to be abolished. If every organization that failed to handle sexual abuse of minors historically was abolished, there would be no youth serving organizations left. 

2 hours ago, SSScout said:

It hits the same fan . . . 

Opinion | After a jaw-dropping abuse scandal, should the Boy Scouts survive? - The Washington Post

"" It is notable that the alleged abuse spans the better part of a century: One claim was filed by an 8-year-old boy; another by a 93-year-old man. Most of the claims arose from cases alleged to have occurred decades ago.""

Due to the commenters on the website suggest we abolish public education too? https://abc7.com/child-sex-abuse-sexual-misconduct-lausd-los-angeles-unified-school-district/5855667/. Hold organizations, leaders and administrators accountable, yes. 

14 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

I put this MB in the same category as the Citizenship ones.  This provides concepts that helps prepare scouts to be effective members of society.  While I'd wouldn't complain if all the Citizenship MBs went away, I also won't complain about this one given our nation's history.

While I an sure that we can find examples where diversity and inclusion do not work as intended, this is one of those areas where we need to stay positive and keep trying.  Our kids will all benefit from living in am increasingly diverse country and will thank is for that at least.

I think diversity and inclusion is important, but I don't think this should be a standalone badge. It should be rolled into a combined citizenship badge. There are now effectively 4 Eagle required badges on the topic of citizenship. Scouts by their nature as young people don't take a whole lot away from classroom style badges. 

26 minutes ago, TMSM said:

Actually diversity and inclusion have been proven to not be effective with many global studies disproving this theory. 

I think the reason is that that these terms are too high level and allow someone to play with the meaning of diversity. Its easy to point to a specific use case where it does or does not work.

 

Can you cite any of those studies? One of the issues with diversity and inclusion is that it means different things in different places. That's a function of societal make up and culture. For the purposes of this forum, and the BSA's badge, I'd imagine we are discussing diversity and inclusion in an American context. 

6 hours ago, BQZip said:

I see ZERO evidence of "supremacy"

Just because you don't get out enough to see it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. 

32 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

I don't know about corporate donors, I know a lot of them left years ago before BSA changed the gay membership policy when the BSA was being painted as a conservative organization. Would they come back?

Most private donors are alumni with strong memories. Would they want to continue giving to an after school program under a different name? 

I personally believe more harm would come from a name change because I don't think Boy Scouts of American is very damaged. I could be wrong, but I've not heard much negative chit chat of the BSA. If this forum is evidence of the population, most folks who speak negatively have a personal vendetta against the organization. And that is a small group with a personal experience in the program. 

Barry

That's my thought too. Changing the name of the program would hurt more than it helps. My experience has been most people view the program either positively or neutrally, unless they have some sort of political disagreement with the former or current membership policies, or they were mistreated or abused by a BSA volunteer or pro. 

If the BSA changes it's name, removes more traditional elements of the program, and becomes an after school camping club or family camping club, this individual donor has other worthy organizations to donate to. I don't think the corporate donors are coming back regardless. 

21 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

NPR now reporting that over 88,500 have filed claims.  Deadline in 1 hour.

Sounds like the next step is a 3rd party will review all of these claims to see which are valid.  

A plaintiff lawyer is warning other youth organizations they better get ready and use the BSA as a warning message.

This is going to get messy. Looking at the Catholic Church, the Scouts, the Schools, I don't think any other youth organizations were doing any better. I can only hope by blind luck they might have done better. 

I mean read this article, then tell me what the BSA would have done to prevent this abuse to Frank Spinelli? https://www.npr.org/2020/11/13/933924470/boy-scouts-of-america-sexual-abuse-victims-seek-justice-in-bankruptcy-court Given how trusting his parents were, I don't think even todays BSA YPT protection would have prevented this, unless Frank told another Scout or leader and they reported it. Some of the abuse probably happened at Scouting events, but the perpetrator had easy access to victims outside of Scouting too. Even if somebody did, reporting a NYPD officer the 1970's? Do you really think it would have been vigorously investigated? 

If parents were this trusting with their kids to adults from other youth organizations, they're all going down. 

It's sad, and deeply ironic, that by coming forth and trying to create a settlement fund to compensate victims, the BSA will actually be destroyed by it. This seems like it'll be a total liquidation of national and council assets. 

1 hour ago, qwazse said:

That’s a definite disadvantage. Our previous SM was just hitting his stride when his job promoted and relocated him. It’s time consuming for the rest of us to train new SMs. I don’t really know how rough it is on the scouts, though.

It depends on the Scouts. My first Scoutmaster handed things over when I was 12. While I remember him fondly, I wasn't super upset that he was stepping down because I hadn't known him very long. On the other hand, during the last Scoutmaster transition, I noticed how much Scouts (and their parents) would still seek out the Scoutmaster or I for things that were really the purview of the New Scoutmaster. It was mostly older Scouts and their parents who had grown comfortable with who they should go to.  

12 minutes ago, qwazse said:

That was roughly the case for our last three. I’m hoping this third one can stick it out a little longer. Getting him onboard has been rough due to scheduling conflicts with training. But, being an Eagle Scout and having already raised two Eagle Scouts kinda helps.

His job is pretty demanding, so he’s not at every meeting and activity. But, that’s not the disadvantage that you’d think. Our ASMs can get occasional practice being “the guy”, and our SPLs have a good sense that it’s on them to keep everyone on task. Basically there’s less room to take everyone for granted.

It's only an issue if the SM does not communicate or delegate. I spent about 3-4 years being "the backup" to two different Scoutmasters. One always made sure I was in the loop and prepared. The other would tell me 30 minutes before a meeting he wouldn't be there. 

My Troop's Scoutmasters have typically served for 5-7 years. I think that's a good amount of time to gain proficiency, provide stability but also turn over often enough to give others an opportunity and the Troop a fresh perspective. 

19 hours ago, BAJ said:

Though I don’t tend to come to a scouting board for the politics, if this is the discussion of the hour, I would submit for balance that there were apparently calls to boycott the Girl Scouts because Alexandria-Ocasio Cortez had been a past member.  Let’s at least appreciate that we have diversity in rage stoking mobs, even just in the niche market of “rage aimed at scouting organizations.” 

https://www.newsweek.com/ocasio-cortez-ridicules-writer-girl-scout-cookie-boycott-1355802

The same people would ban air because their political opponents breath it. 😄

1 hour ago, CynicalScouter said:

Some other new, interesting claimants against BSA. Lots of of National and Council Executives filing claims. "National Council Restoration Plan Claim"

 

C443    10/21/2020    John H. Mosby
C434    10/20/2020    Michael B Surbaugh
C435    10/20/2020    Jason Stein
C424    10/18/2020    Randall Kopsa
C422    10/17/2020    Raymond E Gallison Jr
C423    10/17/2020    Kohl, Dennis J
C418    10/15/2020    John M. Primrose
C17    10/13/2020    Joseph S. Coco
C400    10/13/2020    Joseph S Coco
C192    10/12/2020    Holmes, Ronald W
C191    10/08/2020    Cabeza, John
C391    10/08/2020    Gary Butler
C396    10/07/2020    Estate of Richard J Mathews
C387    10/06/2020    Foster Selman, Jr
C16    10/05/2020    John E Marden Jr
C383    10/05/2020    David L Campbell
C395    10/05/2020    Blackwell, Raymond L
C397    10/05/2020    Moore, Paul R

Why are they filing? 

30 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Once upon a time (March?) I think there was some notion that this would be limited to National and the Councils.

Now, it has become clear that the plaintiffs are not going to stop with National and the Councils, the COs would be, as you imply, utter morons NOT to at least put in the claim (they all either list a price of $0 or simply leave it blank) in order to preserve their rights.

Yup. This liability to the CO's is going to be the real driver behind whether the BSA survives or not. If CO's drop their units in mass to avoid future liability, this will be the end of the BSA in it's current structure. I'm already steeling myself that National and the Council's will lose everything. If they don't I'll be pleasantly surprised. 

20 hours ago, yknot said:

Very sweet essay. Thanks for sharing. We're all in it for our kids but many of us are also in it because someone else was also good to us along the way and we want to share and repay it. Or, we want to leave the world a better place because we have a passion for something  or because we believe in something we think is bigger than ourselves.  Despite our vastly different perspectives and experiences and our adamant beliefs, which sometimes create some very heated discussions, I think we can all share in our grief that scouting is in trouble and none of us really knows how to save it.

Thanks, My early Saturday AM ramblings.

Today I was out at the Council camp doing some service. I ended up running into my Troop, who was out camping there. It's one of the only places they are allowed to camp. They had about 20 Scouts and 10 Webelos out camping with them. The Webelos are working on some of their AOL requirements. Surprising to me, COVID 19 seems to have galvanized the adult leadership of the Troop, and they seem determined to make things work the best they can with COVID 19. The Scouts seemed to be having fun, and were in their patrols, which I was glad to see. 

The Cub parents camping with them had some pretty dire news. Seems like Cub packs in my area are folding up left and right.