Twocubdad

Maybe it's the heat.

You can toggle rant on and off with ctrl-shift-F9 or manually type rant /rant and the beginning and end of the post. Don't take the responses personally. After you've been around awhile you will learn there are limitations to the medium which the old timers take as a given. One is that we always have limited information and usually one side of the story. In the case of your initial post, you only gave us a line and a half of information with some fairly fishy circumstances. I think most of us would consider this a BIG DEAL and have a difficult time understanding the parents apparently blew it off. The delay is part of the reason folks are suspicious of the parents' motives. As I wrote before, you are in a bit of a he-said/she-said. Now a month later, what evidence do you have? What were the circumstances of the parent finding the material? What was the boy doing with the magazine? Do you have the magazine? Are we talking Smutt or National Geographic? Without the actual magazine, there is a whole lot of question as to what is and isn't pornographic. If it had been brought to you immediately much of that would have been self-evident. Now you only have the parents' word to go on to make a very serious allegation against someone's son. What do you do if the boys' parents take the attitude "my little darling would never do that!"? Now on top of all that there is history between the two families, you're suddenly in a situation which could tear a unit apart. At this point, I'm not sure what I would do. It would depend a whole lot on the confidence I have in the information the parents provided (and not to beat the point to death, but the delay would cause give me pause. I would probably go to the boy's parents, lay out what info I had and leave it with them. Unless you can answer all the above issues, I don't think you have the evidence for pack to impose sanctions against the boy. And as for holding mutiple positions within the pack, don't sweat it. For a time I was DL for two dens and committee chairman, mainly because I wanted to. But that was only for a short time until I could recruit someone to take the second den. But I remained a DL and CC or CM my whole time I was with the pack. It happens.

I am disturbed by the idea here and in a couple other threads that we should be keeping this sort of thing from the parents. We are not physicians, priests or therapists. We have and OBLIGATION to inform the parents. It is a basic principle of Scouting that in matters of faith, discipline and sexuality we are to differ to the parents or in extinuating circumstances to a minister, physician or school counselor.

This makes me a bit suspicious too. But I'm wondering about the person who told you about it and why it was brought to your attention only last night? My first inclination would be to say, "gee whiz, you should have told me about this immediately. You've really put me in a bad position by waiting so long." Reason being, of course, that the delay turns this into somewhat of a he-said/she-said. I don't know what all the politics and issues are, but the situation would sure be easier if the person hauled the kid to you and said, "Billy! Show Mr. Wildcat what you brough with you!" Had that happened, or had you found the material yourself, your best course is to let the parents deal with it. But I wouldn't just turn it over to the parents and walk away. I'd have a conference with the Scout and the parents on the spot. While I would want to communicate the innappropriateness and seriousness of the matter, I would also want to get a feel for the parent's response. Frankly, I'd like to see a little consternation on their part to know thay are taking the situation seriously. The precise direction I would take would depend on the content and context.

Re: "Final Verdict" After seven pages of posts do you really think that is a concensus of those posting? Perhaps you should re-read the thread, this time including the posts written by others. First let me preface this by saying I do consider both content and context. Was it Jeff Foxworthy who said the difference between naked and nekkid is naked means no clothes, nekkid means no clothes and you're up to something. No clothes is one thing, but the stuff where folks are up to something will get you in trouble. To me there is a difference between the plain ol' girley magazines (bare tops and bottoms and legs crossed) and the explicit, graphic stuff in which the folks in the photos are up to something. I would describe the latter as pornographic. That's going to get you sent home (across the street or across the country) and probably a suspension to boot. The girley stuff may or may not get you in trouble with the troop, depending on the age of the Scout, the content of the material and what you are doing with it (like showing it to younger Scouts). In any event it will get taken away and turned over to the parents. The parents may take xl's approach and think it's no big deal. Or they may go off on him. That is their choice. It is my responsibility to make them aware of their son's behavior. I'm not going to be put into a position where I appear to have given tacit approval to the behavior by ignoring it.

One suggestion is to pay a little extra and get the cooking gear (cook kit/pots and pans and chef's kit/utensils) through BSA. They are sized for patrol cooking and have a good mix of sizes I've not found in other kits. Ultimately, it was cheaper and easier to pay a little extra for the BSA stuff than it was to try to assemble things. Another School of Hard Knocks lesson is to get enough of everything two have two complete sets for each patrol. Don't try to double up. Mark everything using stencils, colored tape or an electric engraving tool as needed. This helps keep the patrols separate and not constantly going back and forth between patrol sited borrowing stuff, or worse yet, setting up on top of each other so they can share gear. Make each patrol responsible for their own gear. The QMs should be doing regular inventories and the patrol responsible for replacing anything missing or damaged.

We met weekly, although one meeting night a month was the pack meeting. That's been withing the past four years.

I was having a Star Scoutmaster's Conference with one of my really good Scouts who is currently serving as a Troop Guide for one of the new Scout patrols. I asked him how he thought the guys were coming together as a patrol. He said "fine" except that one boy doesn't like one of the other boys because he is "mean" to him. I asked what if he had seen any indication of it and what he thought about it. He said he hadn't seen any bullying going on, but that the "mean" kid was just loud and rowdy, but in a good way. "So do you think the second kid is mean or you thing the first kid is just a wuss?" My troop guide cracked up laughing. "THAT'S exactly the problem," he said. So we starting talking about how that revalation changed the way he led the patrol. Identifying the problem is always the first step.

Don't let the screen door hit them in the butt. Like the dad I'm dealing with that I described in another thread, you may have to come to a parting of the ways with some of the parents. I hope you have the support of most parents and the troop committee. Call a parents meeting. Put together a really solid presentation explaining the methods of Scouting and the philosophy behind the Scout-led program. Explain that this is the program. If they are still uncomfortable, perhaps they should consider another troop or program. I'd rather run a great program for five boys that a baby sitting service for 50.

I'm missing a point here. I don't understand the significance of the brother's rank. If the brother is First Class, does that mean the brother is then authorized to sign off the little brother's requirements? Don't get caught up in the legalities and policies. Kids are pretty savvy about what the rules are and how to walk up to the line without crossing it. That this kid figured out proving his brother is First Class may gets him off the hook is proof of that. The way to win that game is not to play. You know the kid is trying to pull something, so call him on it. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.... You're running a Scout troop, not a law firm. A couple years ago I had a group of kids who were very good at negotiating their way around the rules. They counted on the adults following the rules to the letter and, more importantly, using an adult burden of proof to determine who did what. They figured out that if no on talked and we didn't have hard evidence of what happened, no one got in trouble. I played that game for about six months. I finally wised up and stopped playing. We booted one kid from the troop. We suggested another reconsider if Scouting was for him (he transfered out). A third kid we gave a short suspension. Once the Scouts saw we would enforce the spirit and not get wrapped around the axle with the letter of the law, we saw a big change in behavior.

So what you are saying, Gern, is that despite the fact that this technique has been around since the dawn of civilization, it's inclusion in WB21 somehow nullifies it's usefulness? The difference between EDGE and show/teach/do is the last "E" -- enable -- which is essentially a reminder for the teacher to get out of the way and let the students run with the skill. I'm surprised that's not something you guys support. Or does the fact that it is from the WB course automatically taint it?

"But how do you get the helicopter parents to stay home?" Not sure. I'll let you know how it works out. We're in the midst of a fire-fight with one new dad who insists that troop campouts are his time to spend time with his son. I spent much of the last campout shoo-ing him away from his son's patrol site or his son away from the dad's tent. The guy seems nice enough and it's not like he's spending all day powdering his son's behind. He just wants to play. It isn't as if he is a divorced father or travels all the time, but he just wants to hang with his son. But he's creating all sorts of problems for his son's Troop Guide and is constantly "fixing" things for the patrol. Several times on the last campout I tried to redirect him and have had a couple general, philosophical conversations. We've suggested he take SM/ASM training so he understands A friend of his, one of our ASMs who "gets it" had a more direct talk with him, but that didn't go too well. His mantra is "no one is going to tell me I can't spend time with my son." True, no one will. But we may get to the point that he is told he either stops interferring with the troop program or not be allowed to attend. The troop committee is supportive and wants a policy that says only registered, trained adult leaders are allowed on campouts. That's a bit ham-handed and creates more problem situations than it solves. I favor dealing with this dad directly. (And before anyone writes in to complain, I know G2SS says all aspects of Scouting are open to OBSERVATION by all parents and leaders. He can observe but not interfer. If push comes to shove, a parent may be told to stay home. If that isn't acceptable, they have the option to remove their son from the activity or unit. I certainly hope this doesn't come to that.) On the other hand, summer camp is working out well for us this year. We have a full complement of six good, solid, experienced leaders attending the whole week, so we simply put out the word we don't need any help. We need drivers up and back, so if anyone really insists on coming up, come up Friday night and help drive us home Saturday. (I'm hoping they can't do too much damage in only 14 hours on site.) Last year was a disaster. I had only one other full-week adult and a revolving door of what my SPL called "the Cub Scout Leaders." (Don't you love watching the light bulbs come on over the boys' heads!?!) About Wednesday or Thursday of camp last year I wrote a two-page memo on expectations for adults at summer camp and saved it to a "Summer Camp 09" file. I distributed it sometime in March. Perhaps that helped put a damper on some of the new parents wanting to attend this year and encouraged the experienced guys to step up. (PM me if you want a copy.) I also added to my new parent orientation a very strong message that they weren't doing their boys any favors by hanging out at summer camp. Something that occurs to me it that it seems like after a few months the parents with whom I'm having these conflicts begin to understand the program and the subleties of making the Scouts responsible for themselves but creating a safety net under them. I get the feeling the helicopter attitude is being pushed by the other, uninvolved parent who never attends troop functions and makes no effort to understand the program or the methods. Sometimes the involved parent simply needs some cover to back out of the way. "But honey, all the adults slots are full. They don't need me at camp this year!"

I think you stated the case from a Scouter's point of view rather well, Ea. Unfortunately, a good number of parents don't buy into it. I do think most parents understand they must trust your our judgement to "take care" of their son, but I don't think they agree with the underlying proposition that we are trying to teach boys to make good decisions on their own and to be responsible for themselves and others. In particular they don't buy into the idea that they way we teach boys to be self-reliant is by asking them to rely upon themselves. I've been in a tussle the last few weeks with a couple parents who feel I should spend the week of summer camp chasing their sons with a pill bottle in one hand and a cup of water in the other. Our troop policy is that Scouts are responsible for taking their own medications. The parents are appalled that the adults won't take personal responsibility to "make sure" all medications are taken on time. One of those warm, fuzzy Scoutmaster moments for me occurred at a troop meeting after a weekend campout. When I walked in one of the new scout moms was giving one of the newer ASMs the what-for because Dear Sweet Thing had gone the entire campout without washing his hands. The poor ASM was staring at his shoes and apologizing left and right when he saw me and recognized his opportunity to bail. I walked up and the mom started in on me wanting to know how we could let Dear Sweet Thing go all weekend, cooking, eating, handling raw hamburger and not wash. All I said was, "What do you want from me? YOU need to teach him to wash his hands!" The debate over the meds is the same thing. The parents need to teach their son to take his pill when he gets up. There are a hundred ways to help him to remember to do that -- tie a string on his finger, write a note on his pillow, stick a post-it on the inside of his foot locker. Of course all that requires effort on the parent's part. They need to take the time to train their son themselves at home. Making the SM responsible is a whole lot easier and has the side benefit of creating someone to blame if the kid doesn't remember. The trained Scouters in the crowd understand that making the Scout responsible doesn't mean we stand by with our arms folded, biting our lip while the Scout curls up into a fetal position gasping for breath. Just because we don't have "pill call" and line everyone up for their daily dose doesn't mean we aren't aware of who has and hasn't taken their meds. Prescriptions are kept in a lock adult's tent, so an adult know who has and has not taken their medications. Even if I'm not the adult with the med box, I still know who takes medications and will occasionally ask a Scout if he is remembering his medications. Meals are the same way. We pay attention to who is eating their meals and who is trading their dinner plates for extra desserts. Walking back to camp I may ask that Scout how he liked his dinner and remind him to eat right and take care of himself. But that doesn't mean I'm going to sit next to him in the dining hall and feed his peas to him. (I died on that hill my first summer camp. Rookie mistake.) Unfortunately, a lot of parents would like us to do just that, because that's what they do at home. Helicopter parents expect us to hover for them when they aren't around to do it themselves.

I've never been a big fan of doo-hickies. Set the expectations early and consistently enforce them. I've always said if you want to be a Cub Scout and get to do all the stuff Cub Scouts get to do, then you have to behave like a Cub Scout. The decision is the Scout's -- either behave like a Scout or go home. And don't tell me you're going to behave, show me. Having the Cubs help write the code of conduct of cool, but -- hopefully obviously -- the trick is that you are guiding the discussion so the code the boys come up with remarkably looks like the one you would have written. The process give the boys a buy in, but also makes reviewing the code an "activity" instead of you just reading it or handing it out.

He's just trying to close the loop. When I ran day camp, our DE always took the camp registration and ran it against the actual registrations. We always found active cubs who weren't registered anywhere. A few weeks ago, I was at the scout office and our DE asked me to look at a spread sheet he had come up with to reconcile Webelos II registration from last year against troop rosters following recharter this spring. He has about 8 boys from our pack "missing" from the troop. Most were registered in the troop and he would have found them eventually. One had dropped with no intention of continuing. One had moved out of council. In two minutes we had it figured out. There are dozens of places where membership errors occur from between school night, the unit and the council. Unfortunately, ScoutNet is not yet sophistocated enough to be useful in cross-checking rosters. Although units have access to online registration now, you know many aren't going to be as diligent as perhaps you are in making sure the rosters are accurate. For a DE who's job performance in no small part is based on membership numbers, it's a matter of packing his own chute.The few years we missed Quality District, it was always by just a few kids. Like most businesses, DEs have figured out it's easier to keep customers than to find new ones.

Always interesting to hear a historical perspective. But for those operating within the current program here are some thoughts from my experience. One of the things I do is prior to elections spend a little time and talking (teaching?) about the election process. Most elections these guys have ever participated in has no meaning -- student council and other baloney school stuff. They need to be educated. Explain to the Scouts they need to vote for a leader who they will be willing to follow. On a cold, rainy Sunday morning, who will motivate the patrol to get up and start the fire? Who can you count on? Who has the skills to get the job done? Don't vote for someone because it's his turn or he needs the POR for advancement. These guys may be suffering through a "fun guy" PL who can't get anything done, but sometimes they still need to have the dots connected for them. I've dealt with this literally since our very first troop meeting. My oldest son's new Scout patrol elected the popular jock as their first patrol leader. He attended one more troop meeting before dropping out in favor of AAU baseball. My son was APL and the then troop leaders left him in limbo for several months before addressing the leadership situation. It was a very frustrating experience him and the whole patrol. I've used that story a number of times when trying to make the point. Secondly, the Scouts have to have a viable alternative to the cool guy who will only lead them to the dark side. They need to see that the nerdy nose picker really knows his stuff and can deliver a hot breakfast on a cold rainy morning. If the "better leader" is only a better leader in the eyes of the adults, that's probably as good a reason as any to vote for someone else. That means growing good leaders. It's taken about three years, but this past term our regular patrols (well, 3 of 4) finally have solid, mature PLs who are really leading their patrols. All three are former "cool guys" who have finally seen the light. As much as I would like to take all the credit, much of it is that they're more mature and willing to take the responsibility. Instead of immaturely bucking the system, they now are willing to accept that many of the techniques and skills they saw as lame really make their jobs easier, like planning, communicating with their patrol members, delegating jobs to other but following up to make sure it gets done. These guys are now +/- 15. Prior to the last election I sat the group down and flat-out told them it was their time to step up. It was really encouraging to see them step up. All had served as PLs previously, with varying degrees of success.

In 368 BC a survey by an very early Greek research firm found similar results.

Oh, yeah, as to the closing.... The rule is when the colors are presented they should also be retired. Even if no one is around, have your Scouts do a proper flag recovery at the end of the day. Bugle and all. That "we do it right even when no one is looking" is likely the best lesson your Scouts will learn that day.

Pick up a copy of Advancement Committee Policy and Guidelines at the scout shop. That will have the references you need. There was a recent thread (a month or two ago) about the Scoutmaster's role as the gatekeeper to the merit badge program. As the process of earning a merit badge begins with the Scoutmaster issuing and signing a blue card, the SM does have control over how and where the badges are earned. But I believe you will find there is no prohibition against a parent serving as a MB counselor for his or her son. Our troop tries to avoid it for Eagle required MBs but there are some MBs we only have one counselor for, so it's unavoidable. Again, when the Scout asks you for a bluecard, that is your opportunity to steer them toward a counselor other than their parent. As far as timing, I think I understand your question to be can a scout receive merit badge credit for an activity he did before getting the blue card. I would say that would be a call for the counselor to make.

The appropriate bugle call to honor the national flag is To The Color when a full band is unavailable to play the National Anthem. To The Color should be given the same honor as the National Anthem. So yes, it would be appropriate in the situation you described. And tell your bugler to pick up the tempo.

Oh well, another perfectly good discussion down the toilet.....

We discussed a few guidelings, like: -- The Scout and family should have to pay something. Even and 11-year-old can rake leaves or weed flower beds to raise a little money. --Emphasis should be given to first year Scouts, especially making sure they go to summer camp. -- Families must apply for Council camperships first. -- Our first preference should be for allowing the family to make payments. But CA makes a good point that the payment plan should be timed to end prior to the event. The troop doesn't need to go out on a limb unless we intend to pay the fee ourselves anyway. One thought was to ask the family to write a letter stating their need in plain English -- no finacial statments or tax returns, just explain it. Something ManyHats said got me to think that maybe the way to go is to give the parents all the above options and then ask them to craft their own plan and submit it to the troop. (John -- I know the user name from 2002 is deceiving, but I've been "TwoScoutDad" for about four years now. Actually just recently I became "OneEagleDad". Time marches on.)

I tend to agree with Neal that most folks wouldn't ask. But some people just have a sense of entitlement. Ed, I disagree with you. They party, reception and all the other "swirl" around an ECOH may be up to the parents, but my feeling is the actual court of honor is a troop event. I would absolutely take input from the Scout and his family and would likely go along with most anything, but at minimum the troop should reserve has veto power. And the family always has to option of having the medal mailed to them. But my original query is not about who has control of an ECOH, but rather what are the troop's obligations when the Eagle is awarded over the objections of the troop?

If any of your units are in a position to offer financial assistance to individual Scout, what criteria do you use to determine need? In the past our troop has had a policy that no boy will be left out of Scouting due to finances. We have paid camp fees and written off troop dues. We've always had the cash to do so and the Scouts who needed the help were pretty clearly in need. This year we've gone from one to three Scouts asking for help paying for summer camp. Two families seem to have a clear need. But the third is a two-parent/two income family that has us scratching our heads. Of course no one knows what another family's finances are really like. In this economy, we have some otherwise very well off families who are scraping the bottom (mine included). In the past, a seat-of-the-pants approached was okay because we could take care of everyone who asked. Now we are looking at the day where we will have to be a bit more judicious. Advice?

With the forums is somewhat of an early summer lull, let me throw out a a little red meat for the pack in the form of a hypothetical question. We've had a rash of treads recently regarding SMs and troops refusing to approve Eagle apps and the Scouts appealing those decisions. If the troop is over ruled and the Eagle is awarded through the council or national appeals process, what is the obligation of the Scoutmaster and/or unit in presenting the Eagle? I suppose the two extremes are that the troop could take the position that they were wrong, the process worked and cheerily present the award as per the troop's tradition. Or they could say, national approved the Eagle, let them present it. Or something in the middle. In most of these situations I've encountered or heard about emotions are pretty high which I would imagine would carry through to the Court of Honor. I can envision conflicting emotions and principles. I'd be interested to know what happens if the troop takes the latter approach. Does someone from council present the award? Do they just mail it to the Scout? Would you consider the Scout to be one of your troop's Eagles or a kid who had been a Scout there and earned his Eagle elsewhere? Would his name go on your Eagle plaque? Anyone been through this? I'll start by saying that the one appeal we've been through was ultimately resolved in favor to the troop and the Scout did not receive the Eagle. But while going through the appeal, we did talk about what we would do if appeal was found in favor of the Scout. The Scout in question was the grandson of a very prominent family in the church which charters the troop. For members of the church, Eagles are usually presented during Sunday morning services. Just the fact that the troop had denied the Scout his Eagle was a matter of some contention within the congregation. The troop committee chair adamantly refused to even attend the Court of Honor. As SM, having made the decision not to sign the Scouts Eagle application, my feeling was that it would be hypocritical of me to then stand up an present the award in public. My strong preference would be not to participate. However, I decided that if we were asked to make the presentation, I would allow our COR to make the decision based on what he and the minister felt was in the best interest of the church and troop. I would not have done my usual glowing presentation, and would probably have carefully chosen my words to make the presentation "on behalf of the National Council," or something like that. In all honesty, given that the Scout's father had gone out of the way to tell me what a SOB he thought I was (the one time in my life I ever laid eyes on the man), it was unlikely I would have been asked to participate.