bigbeard

Boy, what a tough question. Easy to define in macro, impossible to pin down on the real world level. I would be very surprised if there is anyone, anywhere, at any time in Scouting who leads a lifestyle that someone, somewhere could not point to a facet of and take exception to it. Human failing and weakness is recognized as inevitable, and virtue the successful struggle against it.

Organized religion has a mechanism for drawing the line while hoping for virtue; it's called forgiveness.

Organized Scouting has a mechanism for drawing the line while hoping for virtue, too. It's called two deep leadership. At the Troop level, 2DL, under the guise of protecting the boys from us and protecting us from the boys, is also protecting Scouting from the moral failings we are afraid could be present in any one of us. All you can do is set the best example you can, be vigilant and drive to beat the fall.

Our Troop always travels in Class A to and from hiking/camping activities, with a Troop Class B required thereafter. We also have sweatshirts in the same Class B style for mild weather. In winter, when outerwear covers all,I encourage the boys to wear their Scout hats in the woods when the usually-mild Mid Atlantic weather permits, providing easy recognition.

When pressed for a rational explanation for uniforms in public, I explain that it is the 2nd best way to let people know we are Scouts. When asked, inevitably, what the best way is, I say that our actions/conduct will speak much louder than our words, or our clothing, ever could. A little pompuous, maybe, but a good thought.

In the Dumpster, Part II

Hard as it may be to believe, I must confess that my situation is even more confused than it was last week.

At our Committee meeting, the two offenders and two witnesses came as promised, and individualy gave their versions of events. These were the four boys who, based on the statements of the other Scouts and the written statement of one of the offenders, had direct knowledge of just what went on. The "victim", with his parents present, gave a sincere, perhaps somewhat coached version that matched with other statements from the Troop. I believed him. The other four Scouts lied. They lied about their part in things, lied about what they saw, named participants who were INSIDE THE BUILDING AT THE TIME!! There were a few honest facts from my one "truthful" Scout, but even he twisted his earlier words to minimize his role. I told each boy that his story was very different from the others, discussed the Scout Oath and Law charge to be trustworthy and honest, and asked if there was anything they wanted to add or change. The were no takers.

With all the boys out of the room, I told the Chairman that we needed to get all the boys in the same room and go over things again. At this point, the victim and his parents had to leave; the Chairman told them he would be in touch.

For the next 15 minutes, the Committee and I battled over the next step. They felt that there was no point in digging any deeper, that it really didn't matter exactly what happened, and that my remarks to the Troop on the night of the incident and the Committee's investigation was enough. Their recommendation for action was for each of the boys to write a letter of apology to the victim for what they did, or, if blameless, for what they failed to stop, plus another talking-to that night. I stressed the point that the boys had lied to the adult leaders of the Troop to avoid the consequences of their actions. They had blamed innocent Scouts for their poor judgement, including the witnesses called there that night for the honest facts. I argued that the proceedure was completely unacceptable to me. If the Committee took the easy way out, what kind of leaders does that make us? How could we sanction lies to cover-up personal responsibility? What about honesty and character building? I also advocated additional pennance by way of KP chores on our January camping trip, along with specific letters of apology to the victim, not "it wasn't me but, hey, sorry it happened" notes. (The parents wishes did not figure into my thoughts. They are going to do what they were going to do - so be it. (I think maybe they are going to lighten up a bit. I hope so.)

At the vote, I was overruled. After the Committee Chair explained what was required of them, I told the boys that they had been born with something that could never be taken away, only given away - their integrity. I explained what that meant, and charged each of them to consider just what the true cost of what they said was.

That's where things stand. I'm sure I've left out details that are important, but the gist of the story is there. Am I making a mountain out of a molehill? My bottom line is:

I've got darn good boys in our Troop, and I want to do the best I can for them. There is a lesson here I feel they need to learn.

After reading Rooster7's post, I feel I owe the victim more justice than he has received. Too many Scouts heard him yelling for them to Stop.

I am blessed with concerned, active parents who I feel have made a mistake. Do I fall on my sword over this, or am I taking the drama too far?

I'll take any suggestions I can get. Thjis Scoutmaster business isn't easy. Thanks.

Rooster7

Can't thank you enough for youy perspective. The rules are there for anybody to read, and must take precedence. The information gathered is from written statements by the boys present - some saw nothing, others everything. One of the offenders confessed his role in great detail - a truthful Scout, if nothing else. The participants themselves will be telling the full story to the Committee tonight, and the Committee will decide the appropriate action. As SM, I'm going to reccommend the course of action that allows everyone to continue Scouting somewhere - Justice would not be served by removal from the program. Apologies and pennance seem appropriate, rather than banishment.

Thanks for your good advise and fresh perspective.

I am not sure what the parents are trying to achieve in all this. Maybe as you suggested they are trying to use this incident as a hook to hang up baggage they are not dealing with very well. His school problems weigh heavily on them, I'm sure, and maybe they feel this incident might be more than his somewhat fragile self-image can bear. Knee jerk reaction to a threat to their son?

My relations with the both of them have been cordial and cooperative in the past. Recent co-location at Camporees and an outstanding Scouting For Food colaboration have allowed the Pack and Troop to get comfortable with each other. Perhaps that's why the situation is so puzzling.

I have had conversation with both parents (together via speakerphone) to try to work through the situation, about 30 minutes or so. They indicated that they would not permit their son to stay with the Troop under any circumstances, informed me of their intentions regarding informing the District Exec. and staff of the situation, and demanding that I commit to throwing the offenders out of the Troop at once. This took place two days after the incident. They also stated they would do all they could (and they are well connected in the District) to see to it that both boys are banned from Scouting.

Is that possible? No felony was committed here, for Pete's sake, no injuries sustained, no malice demonstrated. Will the Scoutmaster wherever the boy goes understand? Should I get in touch with him and present the other side of the parent's version of events? Or maybe simply rely on his good judgement? I admit I am proud of the direction the Troop has taken in the last two years, and do not want this situation to haunt us wherever the parents decide to take it.

The Committee meeting featuring this event is this week, so I guess we'll just have to see how it goes.

Thanks again.

I am the fairly rookie Scoutmaster (approx. 2 years) of a smallish Troop, and I need some advice. During a recent meeting, two scouts tossed a third into a small trash dumpster at the Church hall where we meet. Based on information gathered, it started out as fun for all hands, but at the end, the happily(!) unhurt victim was upset. All three of the boys have a history in and out of the troop that preceedes my involvement with the troop. The real problem is the parents of the victim. They are very active in the local Cub program (Cubmaster, Den Leader), solid volunteers, good people, with maybe a few skeletons in the closet (but don't we all!). Their son was left behind in school last year, and his relationship with the rest of the Troop is weak. We didn't see him much at all this summer, his participation when he is there is quite low, and he dosen't seem to want to be there. Still, he is a good kid and he belongs to us, and all of the Troop would like him to stay and move ahead. In any event, the incident has inflamed the parents to the point of calling the District, Council, and a number of the friends they have throughout the Scouting community. They are also contemplating legal action. Their intent is to make certain that the boys in question are banned from Scouting/blacklisted from the District/the Troop is branded as NO PLACE any parent should sent their Webelo, and so on. The feeling I get after long discussions with them is that keelhauling might be too soft for this pair of 12/13 year old villians. I should also point out that the incident took place at a time that I was NOT providing adequate supervision - older Scouts only, no adults, and only nearby, not close enough to influence the situation.

My goals are this: (1) to impress upon the "dumpers" that they crossed the line between fun and danger, and discipline them effectively, (2) to stand between them and any unreasonable consequences the victim's parents might bring to bear, and (3), settle this with as much satisfaction as is reasonable for the parents, as they are good people at heart and strong supporters of Scouting.

My ideas on the first point include an appearance at this week's Committee meeting to explain themselves in a formal and somewhat mock judicial setting, a discussion of the Scout Oath and Law, which I feel with be effective with both of these Scouts, formal apologies to the victim and his parents, and Troop justice in the form of positon forfiture, camping KP, and the like. I may not be the most experienced SM, but I'm there every week and do my best for the boys, and I think this is the correct way to handle the whole thing. I have no real idea how to accomplish the second and third of my goals. The parents of the boy have every right to be upset, they are only protecting their son after all, but sending a letter to every Scout- and Cubmaster in the District, naming them, and calling the boys hooligans and the Troop an bunch of animals (an exageration on my part, but a possibility) is too much. I intend to offer my resignation to the Committee chair, (not to the parents, they are not members) for my part in all this and my lapse in supervision, but that still doesn't do anything to protect the two evildooers. If there are any older and wiser heads out there who have a minute for some advice, I would be very, very grateful.