shortridge

You've got to give more specifics. This query is so vague it resides in the Castle of Obscurity on the Hill of Cloudiness in the Kingdom of Huuuuhhh? What are you really getting at? I've only seen the standard ceremonies, callouts, AOLs and a weird sunrise Brotherhood recommitment event at a conclave, part ceremony, part can't-hear-what-the-guy-is-saying-because-he's-not-projecting-well thing.

I'm hungry now.

Beavah, First, the primary concern of many people in these threads has not been the protection of those falsely accused, but the institution of the BSA. Your priorities are a bit murky. Second, the repressed-memory situation you blast could lead to a lawsuit even in the absence of the BSA's perversion files. Third, assuming the BSA properly documented its internal investigations and retained the full files that were core to its youth protection efforts of yesteryear, the records should actually help defend the innocent. Fourth, you do understand that the release of these files will in no way affect any statute of limitations, correct? So your bringing that up is a complete straw-man argument. I'll say it again: If the BSA did nothing wrong, it has nothing to fear by the release of these records.

The important point is that the duty of care was different than it is now. Beavah, It's my understanding that those laws and standards vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction - that there's no national law - and thus Montana may have had a different standard in 1963 than Virginia did. Lawsuits of the sort we're discussing are generally filed at the state level, as well. So it would be up to the state courts to apply that state's standard at the time the alleged offense occurred. Presumably a judge would not allow a suit to proceed that would apply a 2012 Virginia standard to a 1950s Montana decision. So what's the problem? I'm really puzzled by this cowering fear of lawsuits.

I would make it no longer than 10 minutes, with plenty of songs and action. Any longer and they'll be fidgety and distracted.

I was one of those Scouts who always overpacked for summer camp, mainly in the clothes category. Then I realized taking two aquatics MBs meant I could just wear my swimsuit and walk around as it dried, swapping out only my shirts and socks. Worked for me!

OK, so we have a baseline of how things were done back in the day. The next logical question is, why should those officials and leaders and institutions of yesteryear NOT be held accountable for how they mistreated victims, assuming the cases fall within the statute of limitations? Child abuse was no less horrible then than it is now. The old-time SEs had the same obligation to protect then as now. So why shouldn't the same standards be applied?(This message has been edited by Shortridge)

I've never seen this. Sew it onto a common unit neckerchief if it's really important to your CO.

The Boy Scout requirements amount to signing a pledge, understanding your family's computer rules, watching three relevant videos, teaching Internet safety to fellow Scouts and understanding your unit's electronics use rules. It will take about an hour if you include the teaching. It's a snoozer. Oh - and there's a really sneaky requirement in there to like the BSA's Facebook page in order to artificially inflate the BSA's social media standing. Slick, Irving, real slick. I think the whole thing is stupid. Parents who don't have an understanding with their kids about proper computer use aren't going to enforce something that the BSA made their kid to just to get a patch.(This message has been edited by shortridge)

So in the discussion of the perversion files, I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around a point made by several people. One of the arguments against releasing the files, or concerns about releasing them, is that cases from the past will be judged improperly against contemporary standards and practices, and thus the BSA will come up lacking. Can folks here with longer memories than mine explain how a 1960, 1970 or 1980 case of child abuse would have been investigated or handled differently from an identical case in 2010? Is it like race relations - there has been such a sea change in attitudes that what looked like enlightenment in the 1960s appears almost racist today?

Are defamation lawsuits routinely filed when people report suspicions of abuse to teachers, social workers, religious leaders, coaches or other non-law enforcement representatives? Of course not. And where in BSA literature is the statement that reports to the SE are considered private? I couldn't find any mention of an expectation of confidentiality. If the vague threat of a potential future hypothetical lawsuit stops someone from reporting what they in good faith believe is child abuse, or stops a senior Scouting employee from making a decision to suspend someone's membership while an investigation is under way, then they lack the fundamental courage to be in Scouting. This should not stop anyone from doing the right thing. If the BSA did everything right and kept proper documentation of its decisions, it should have nothing to hide. If, on the other hand, records were shoddy or shredded at some point in the past, or if poor judgment was used, it should take responsibility for that, as well. And if its officials were indeed culpable in allowing abusers to continue terrorizing children, as was apparently the case in the Catholic Church, they should be held accountable in a court of law. If the files reveal that this was an institutional practice or policy, the institution should be held accountable as well.

Not every summer camp, Basement.

Beavah, I'm sincerely not joking. My hope is that identifiying information about specific victims will not be made public. Identifying ages, ranks, specific dates, etc., can all do that. My hope is only the general information will be released. Saying that Mr. Molester was SM of Troop 27 in Anytown and that he was accused of molesting three boys but the SE found the allegations substantiated after interviews should not ID anyone. Yes, you are absolutely right that referring cases to the police is not a sure fire way to catch these offenders. But we have seen over and over, most notably in the priest abuse cases, where no one was notified and the offenses swept under the rug. If police aren't contacted at all, they certainly can't conduct an investigation. I'd rather have them try and come up empty than have a SE or Monsignor effectively decide to shut down an investigation before it begins. Your claim that this will hamper protection efforts is based in so much cattle manure. There is nothing preventing a SE from barring a Scouter contingent upon the conclusion of a criminal investigation or case. If the BSA had nothing to hide, it would have reviewed and released these files itself, edited, of course. The fact that it hasn't speaks volumes about what they contain.(This message has been edited by Shortridge)

There is a very fine line that should be walked regarding unsubstantiated allegations, and I hope no speck of information is released that could identify any victims. But the BSA as an institution should have nothing to fear. Irving and local SEs acted for years with only the best interests of the boys in mind, and made the proper referrals to law enforcement authorities every time. That's what they've said, at least. So these files should only improve the reputation of our youth protection efforts. And if you believe that malarkey, I've got a monkey bridge over the Thames I can sell you real cheap. If these files wouldn't have embarrassed the institutional decisions, they would have been reviewed and summaries released a long time ago.

Wow, Seattle, you figured out the deep dark secret of newspapers ... They are a business, and as such need to sell papers to stay afloat. Your powers of deduction are remarkable! Single-copy sales are a tiny part of a paper's revenue. Unless it's a giant blockbuster story that covers the front page with a screaming headline and photo, the average story about a scandal or controversy does not sell papers. I know the baskets of the media will find this hard to believe, but it's true. They build readers through consistency, reliability, service and information. The challenge to the print press these days stems from access. People are finding it far more convenient to read online than pick up an often-late, -soggy and -misdelivered paper that gets ink on your fingers. I worked for newspapers for 10 years, and now find myself reading it most often on my phone. Bizarre.

When you can't carry at school or on the job, it loses its second-nature status.

Nope, it doesn't carry over. Totin Chip is separate, and you can't earn it in pieces. That said, I doubt anyone's going to stop your son from bringing a knife along in a trip at which he asks to learn about proper woods tools use. It doesn't take long to learn or teach the basics. But it will take plenty of practice to become good.

Sure, why not? It should be encouraged. The goal should be skills, not "classes." Just make it clear to the instructor you've already earned it and are seeking a refresher. Like with all skills, if you don't use 'em, you lose 'em.

Ditto to what emb said. Many, many of my favorite leaders in Scouting have been introverts. My role model for much of my youth, the camp director at my old camp, spoke only rarely, enjoyed quiet conversations and simple speech, and was the least center-of-attention guy I know. He's a great guy and has the respect of thousands despite not being a rah-rah barn-stormer.

Kudu, So who would you pick to fill that role on this side of the pond?

No one's saying he shouldn't be CS, but putting all of the patrol's grub in a single backpack is inviting problems. (Or eggs - basket. Same diff.)

Say we send an embassage to Mike Rowe asking him to be Chief Scout, and he regretfully has to turn us down. Who else? Or who's his successor upon retirement from this still-hypothetical position?

ScoutNut hit it on the head. A lot of times, it's the kid seeking attention, and the parent is simply overwhelmed with the packwide responsibilities. Consider offering gentle help - "Hey, Jim, do you want me to work with Jim Jr. and Ohanadad Jr. on this project while you go do X, Y and Z?" As a DL/CC kid, I got dragged along to everything. I was early and late to den meetings, pack meetings, committee meetings, troop meetings. Luckily I could just bring a book, find a corner and ignore them, but I still ended up with quite a Scouting education through osmosis. (When still a Cub, I knew who our DE was and roughly what he did.)

So a few days after this thread was resurrected, Scouting publishes a blog post attempting to answer the question: http://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2012/06/07/ask-the-expert-interpreting-camping-merit-badge-requirement-9a/ Wonder if the questioner - "Bill, a district-level training chairman" - exists, or if he's on this board?

The rank thing can be nitpicky. If the Scout has taken six months to get from T to 2C, then he should have his T patch on. But the early ranks are so easy for an active Scout that it's not uncommon for a boy to rocket up the ladder with little time in between. For me, 2C was a blur, because I jumped to FC so quickly.