Taserdoc

I am a District Eagle Coordinator and have been for a long time. This is the process that I use;

1. Eagle Scout Cantidate contacts me to set up an appointment to get his project approved.

2. I meet with him and go over his project details to make sure that it qualifies under BSA guidelines, (several don't, and have to be altered or changed). I also go over how to finalize the project workbook when he has completed his project.

3. Scout completes his project, (without any interference from me or any other District members). If I am curious how a project turned out, nothing says that I can't go check it out at another time, (not during the project).

4. The Scout contacts me and turns in his project workbook and application. I send the application to Council for final approval. When I get it back from Council, I call the Scout and schedule his Eagle Board of Review.

5. As part of the EBOR we discuss his project and the details in depth, as well as look at the pictures he has included.

I feel that there is no need to go out to the project to "observe". I think it has the potential to add too much undue stress not only on the Scout, but also on the situation. It has been my experience that the leadership of the unit has a pretty good idea of what needs to be done without our "help". kind of like how I wouldn't want someone showing up at my job to second guess me.

The Scouts and Unit Leaders all know that if they have any questions, or need help with something, I am just a phone call away.

While it is my responsibility to process the Scout from Project, to actually approving him for the rank of Eagle Scout, It is not part of my responsibility to interfere with the project or process, unless a complaint or concern has been initiated.

Although I do agree with the fact that some Unit Leaders just try to push the Scouts through, fortunately they are in the minority.

Just my $.02

Edited for Puntuation.(This message has been edited by Taserdoc)

Just curious what others have done for their tickets.

1. Use youth trainers to assist in teaching Scout Skills to adults during Leader trainings.

2. Staff 5 Days at Cub Scout Day Camp.

3. Staff 6 days at Powder Horn Course.

4. Discuss Female roles in Scouting with a Co-Ed Crew.

5. Produce a backpacking video for use by our Council, Districts, and Units.

I used to be a Beaver!!!

Actually first off, the responses are based off of the opinion that the scout(s) lied.

The SM handbook, (just to name one source), Clearly states that;

"Emotional abuse occurs when a young person is continually berated and denigraded, severly jeopardizing his self esteem" SM handbook PG. 136.

"The Boy Scouts of America considers child abuse unacceptable and has developed a five point strategy to combat it"

Point five; "swifty remove and report alleged offenders" SM handbook pg. 137.

I do not in any way "misunderstand" the Council's role. I understand that if they recognize bullying as child abuse, and they have proceedures in place to combat and correct it, they are legally bound to do so.

I am not looking for "allies", this is just a hypothetical question. As far as my view being skewed, that is amusing at best. Just seems to me that most of you can't, or are unwilling to give the scouts the benefit of the doubt. Scary stuff.(This message has been edited by taserdoc)

I am stunned, at the least. Given this scenario, most of you automatically side with the SM??? I realize that there is good and bad on all sides, but to automatically assume that the scouts lied??? That it must have been that the Scout took was was said wrong? Used it to get even?

As I said before, in this hypothetical situation, Council never even looked into the complaint. I find it almost disturbing that most of you believe that things can't be, and arent sometimes covered up.

I love and believe in this program, so don't think that I am bashing it. I am curious though how many of you would change your opinions, if it were your own sons.

Automatically blaming the youth, is how so many incidents of abuse are, and have been, covered up.

most of you say that this is too open af a hypothetical. In reality, it contains more than enough information. If complaints are being filed, they should ALL be, at least, thoroughly looked into. BSA policy states that clearly, and also states that the alleged Leader is to be swiftly removed.

These are some very scary replies. Do a Google search for BSA Orange County and see what comes up. Cover ups and worse.

For the record I am a long time scouter, (youth and adult), and love this program, so as I said I am not bashing the program. Just the people who are worried about what they can achieve, and fail to protect our youth.

As I said, what if it was your son?(This message has been edited by TASERDOC)

I would think that this would be a great opportunity for the adult leaders to recognize their own skill set strengths and weaknesses, and maybe improve them as well. There are those who think that their skills are strong, but when put to task, can't deliver as well as they thought. This would help encourage them to keep up on their scout skills, which in turn, would help our scouts.

We all know the saying, "those who can't do, teach. Those who can, do".

I also think it be just plain fun.

I am sorry. I just realized I left this too vague.

The purpose would be to get the adult leaders away from, (not hovering over), the scouts during their events. The "adult" events would occur at the same time, but in an area different then the scout events. At the end, separate awards would be given to the adults for the various events.

Hope this clarifies a bit.

Just curious,

At camporee the Scouts compete against each other doing Scout skills for awards. If there were competions for adult leaders doing Scout skills for awards, how many of you would participate? What do you think the hardest/easiest/most amusing events would be?

This should be interesting...

hypotheticaly, lets say bullying, emotional abuse, and no 1 on 1 contact. hypotheticaly

I understand, and agree with what most are saying but I think everyone is missing one very important part of this;

The Scoutmasters were "cleared" without interviewing any of the Scouts or their parents, (the complaintants), PRIOR to making their decision.

No interview? No "investigation"?

If this is not a cover up, then how is this possible?

All hypothetical Scouts involved were model Scouts with no prior issues.(This message has been edited by TASERDOC)(This message has been edited by TASERDOC)(This message has been edited by TASERDOC)(This message has been edited by TASERDOC)

Please don't take this wrong, and correct me if I am wrong but,

Am I really reading this correctly? The first thing that comes to mind is that someone is "stirring the pot"???

That is a scary response at best. As volunteers in this program, I thought that the safety and welfare of the Scouts was of the upmost importance. Am I wrong?

Do our Scouts now have to worry about reporting issues because they may be viewed as "stirring the Pot"? That is the last thing that I would think.

I am not saying that this is what is going on but, I realize that some people actually believe that all Scouting professionals have the best interest of the Scouts in mind. Remember that they have a career, and pension to worry about. Isn't it possible that at least a few feel their loyalty is to the organizaton. If they don't protect the organization, they stand to lose everything.

I agree that most are good people, but there are a few that are not. Look at the News headlines lately.

I appreciate the responses from everyone, but I would love to hear from Council or District Committee members on this one. I think they have a better idea of how things really work at that level.

Hypotheticaly...

3 scouts, 2 different units, 2 different Scoutmasters, 2 separate incidents.

No contact of Scouts or parents prior to clearing SMs.

SE admits situation handled wrong but won't correct it due to threats of lawsuits from SM.

Multiple adult volunteers feel that SE "covered up" the issues.

Hypotheticaly Speaking again.

Hypothetical question, What would you do if?

A. Multiple Scouts, (different units), Filed Multiple complaints, (with Council), alleging (non-sexual) YPT violations against multiple Scoutmasters, (different units).

B. The Scoutmasters were "cleared" by Council, without Council ever even interviewing any of the Scouts or their parents, (the complaintants), prior to making their decision.

C. As a result, several of the Scouts lost their friends, were kicked out of their units, and were publicaly humiliated.

D. You could prove it.

This was hypothetical remember. Just Curious...(This message has been edited by TASERDOC)

Just curious if this is common or not. In my Council you not only have to pay to take a Council course, you have to pay to staff one as well. My Council charges roughly $100.00 per person to allow you the opportunity to staff events like Wood Badge or Powder Horn.

Any feedback on this would be appreciated.