Bob White

Jay, do you believe the ACLU is involved in this case in some way? The BSA is not the prosecution or the defendant in this case. They are merely the employer. If you stole a car would your employer be looking for a lawyer? This is a case of an individual who broke the law, not the BSA. (and I did not insist Jay I merely asked you a queation. Others tried to answer for you but I was trying to figure out what you thought the BSA would need lawyers for in this matter.)(This message has been edited by Bob White)

You need to stay focused scoutndad. Advancement is not based on the value of the parents to the troop. The advancement procedures for Webelos state that only the Webelos den leader signs the advancemnt, the ACM willingness is irrelevant. This is not about whether the scout subscribes to his mothers lack of faith. This is simply about completing the requirements for the advancement. The scout must do his best to complete the requirement as it is written in the handbook. If the parent chooses to not allow him to do that then those are the parents wishes. You should not interfere but you should not pass him either. The mothers behavious will end this boy's scouting, not yours. The scout and the parents need to make a decision. If they want to continue in scouting they will need to accept the obligations of scouting. Give the parents the facts and let them make their own decision. You are not saying that you will remove him from the pack, simply that he has not completed the requirements for advancement. BW

What also needs to be understood is the BSA's stand on "Duty to God". It is the BSA's position that duty to God is not an ideal but an obligation of every member. Regardless of what the youth's personal beliefs are, if he cannot give evidence that he has met the advancement requirements regarding duty to God obligations he will not be allowed to advance.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

Now if I'm correct in memory of Cub advancement -- it is the parents that sign off the requirements and the den leaders responsibility is to record them and make sure the awards are reported to the pack advancement chair. That is only true of Tiger through Bear. In Webelos the Den Leader signs all advancements. BW

Why do some people take on others people's guilt as their own? This is nothing that the BSA did. This is not a behaviour the BSA supports or teaches. This is not something we did as unit leaders. Why should you want to hide. This is an individual that broke a law who has a well known employer. Do we as leaders lack that much committment to what we do that we hide from the public because an individual did the wrong thing and was stopped. Let's have a little backbone here. Condemn the crime and the criminal, not the employer or the program. Is it any wonder that COs bend to the slightest outside pressure if their own leaders run and hide when they hear bad news. Trustworthy, Loyal, Cheerful, Brave! Let's see a little scouting character here. BW (This message has been edited by Bob White)

The BSA has not been charged with anything, there have been no accusations that they knew of his activity. The thought that the BSa will need to defend itself for some reason is pure speculation. My question for jay remains, what lawyers?

Which lawyers are you refering to?

Very sad for everyone, the children victimized by pornography, the man's family, the scouting program. I pray that no members of the unit he served turn out to be victims as well.

I would simply explain that as the den leader it is your responsibility to approve the advancement and that the remaining requirements need to be completed for the scout to advance. I would also recommend a calm heart to heart with both parents and explain the potential roadblocks that await the boy in Boy Scouting unless he is able to explain his perfomance in his duty to God, and how he as a scout is reverent. BW

Please explain how he completed 8b, and either 8d or 8e? BW

You said they have completed the needed requirements. How did this scout complete requirements 7 and 8? If he hasn't, then you cannot advancement him. The parents aslo need to be made aware of the difficulty the scout will have advancing in Boy Scouts, or even registering. If the parents choose to remove him from scouting that would be unfortunate, but they are the parents, and have that authority. They have obviously lead him on a philosophical path that puts him in direct conflict with the values of the BSA program. I would be honest with them and say that the BSA requires he complete these requirements in order to advance. BW

I am perfectly comfortable allowing the other readers to look at the thread and see who actually said what, and who has represented the other's quotes accurately.

Nowhere was Proud Eagle or I sarcastic. Proud eagle agreed with dana and offered options as did I. I also asked him to clarify commenbts that were not specific. I am familiar with the program and have lead the training for Venturing leaders as well. I do not find the leaders handbook difficult to navigate. It is well marked and easy to read. Unlike some other handbooks its size is easily managable by dividing the book by sections into separate notebooks. Do you know what Dana means by "Sea Scouts should consider a pamphlet for ships that do not follow the traditional ship program." Baden? The most common reason that I have seen for crews failing is that they were started for the wrong reason with the wrong goals. Not because of the size or readability of the manual. If a unit that is having problems with older scouts staying in because of a weak program, expect to put them in a different uniform or none at all under the same poor leadership and their problems will be solved, find out fairly quickly how wrong they were. Scouts will leave a boring program no matter if it is called a troop or a crew. BW

Eamonn is very correct in saying that the commisioner service is a thing of the past, most councils, as others have stated, do not even have a real functioning commisioner group, most are retired scouters who still want to stay involved. In case it slipped your attention I was one of those others, in fact I was the first to say it in the opening post to the thread Bob, I disagree with you very strongly when you state that scouting can afford to lose those CO's that do not meet your standards. That's good because I never said that. You said "The last thing we need is for a bunch of uniformed,under trained and overworked UC's going to the heads of the Rotary, School officials, or church pastors and boards telling them what do in what could be perceived as a threatening manner. This approach would lose scouting many CO's." I pointed out that what you wrote was never the plan I suggested, (in fact no one has suggested anything of the sort other than you) and that we are already losing COs under our current system of commissioning. And I pointed out that we could keep more COs by re-educating them in their charter responsibilities. My suggestion is that National offer some real incentives to CO's that do a great job such as reduced registration fees, more recognition of the CO, IH, and COR who excel, discounts at the scout store and on advancement badges are just a few real enticements to get the CO's to do a better job. Really? You believe you can grow the program by reducing income? Good luck with that plan. Please start it in a new thread where it can be given its due attention. This would be much far more effective than changing a commisioner service that is rapidly declining in number every year. Oh, it would have an effect on scouting of that I have no doubt. BW

Eamonn I agree that the commissioner service is grossly understaffed I attribute that primarily to the what the commissioning program has been used for since the 60s. It is a largely thankless job. The units that need commissioners do not want commissioners, and will not accept commissioning help. That is because we seek to change the people who are causing the problem rather than to educate the people who are supposed to select them and manage them. If we had the CR and CCs selecting people who had the tools to do the job, wanted to do the job, and who would be willing to learn and follow the program we would reap several benefits. -More ownership by the COs -Better unit/CO relationships -more trained leaders -more units following the BSA program because of more trained leaders - greater retention of youth because we would have better programs And we would have commissioners with a purpose and specific, measurable, achievable, relevant goals that would have a positive impact on the movement. I agree that it cannot survive in its present form. That is why I found what was shared to be so concerning. I heard very little that was new, just a slight repackaging of the old. Now we wait and see what is finally released. BW

None is needed although it would be advisable for you to have passed the requirements to show you have an understanding of the skills. Guessing that is the case, you just need to cover the material as it is taught in the handbook. There are teaching methods that could be helpful to you so that it is not just a sit and listen lesson. Has your Scout leader shared any teaching tips with you? BW (This message has been edited by Bob White)

Dana, Since the Venturing Leaders Manual is in the form of a loose leaf pages drilled for three ring binders, if you find the manual to big why not just separate the sections you mentioned and put them in their own binder? As far as difficult to understan... perhaps you could quote a passage that you find confusing, just as an example. Sea Scouts should consider a pamphlet for ships that do not follow the traditional ship program. I haven't the faintest idea what that means or why you would want a manual that isn't related to the actual program.Perhaps you could be more specific. BW

No, he may remain in the pack until the den crosses over or he may transfer to a troop. A boy cannot dual register in Cub Scouts and any other scouting program. BW

This discussion has already taken place in a previous thread. There is no BSA policy restricting the local Scout Executive from approving a wine and cheese fundraiser at his or her discretion, providing no youth are present and the activity does not take place on property owned by or operated by the BSA, I refer you to the Guide to Safe Scouting section IV The Boy Scouts of America prohibits the use of alcoholic beverages and controlled substances at encampments or activities on property owned and/or operated by the Boy Scouts of America, or at any activity involving participation of youth members. You are not required to like the idea for it to be approved by the BSA or by the SE. It simply needs to fall within the policies of the BSA and be approved by the local council's SE. BW

"Most CO's, whether we like it or not, do not want to take a very active role in running a scout unit and if you make them legally liable, as Bob suggests, then I feel you run the risk of losing these chartering groups and scout units will be looking for new homes. Not as I suggest, as is, since the charter already makes them legally liable. Charter organizations are already abandoning units because they do not see them as "their units" but merely as units that meet there. "The way it is supposed to work is that the unit leaders meet with the COR on a regular basis to handle any problems," That's not true at all. You will not find that descipition of the CORs responsibility anywhere in the BSA operations or training at any level. " we do not need a lot of UC's running interference," I have not seen anyone suggest they should. they instead should be meeting with the unit leaders supporting them and making sure these leaders are contacting their COR. That is similar to the plan that has been in eefect for about 40 years, and it has never worked. They say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. The last thing we need is for a bunch of uniformed,under trained and overworked UC's going to the heads of the Rotary, School officials, or church pastors and boards telling them what do in what could be perceived as a threatening manner. " Again, no one has ever suggested that. "This approach would lose scouting many CO's. We are losing COs now so what's the difference other than at least the ones who stayed would know and understand they role in Scouting and Scouting's role in their organization. What would be the problem with that? "Bob,another reason your approach is misguided is that it is not, "by the book",why try to recreate the wheel as you are so fond of reminding us. A misunderstanding that comes from not knowing what is actually in the book. What I am proposing is supporting what has been the program since 1916. But because District Executives who were originally charged with this task and no longer have the time or resources to do this one task, that it be reassigned to the commissioner service branch. As we also wear the wreath of service and have some of the same responsibilities and goals. The commissioners are not in a position, nor should they have to be, to be responsible for all district training, it is not their job. And once again no one has said they should be. If leaders do not take the basic training within a year of joining then they could not sign up again as a SM or CM until that requirement is met, Says who, the BSA? No they don't. The plan I suggested? Nope, not there either. but wait if you did that most of the LDS units would have to shut down Says who? That rule does not exist in the BSA. it exists in a few councils but I have yet to see be enforced. Nowhere in the BSa is that authority given to the councils, it is in fact a specific respponsibility of the CO. and National would never allow that to happen. So where does that leave us? Since none of those statements have any validity I guess it leaves us where we started. " Trying to get as many leaders trained as possible and as soon as possible with the system we have in place. The system that we have in place is that the COs are responsible for selecting their leaders and getting them to training. They just haven't been taught that in a long time. So we have informally adopted a system of relying on the character of the individual leader to get themselves to training. That certainly has been successful. Turning the commissioners into scouting gestapos is not the answer, will not work, Thank goodness then that no one has yet to suggest or even imply doing that, other than you. and will result in scouting losing many more UC's. Would it be possible to lose more commissioners seeing as how the majority of councils do not have half enough the number needed to fill the present quotas? Would it matter if we lost some of the ones we have seeing as how many of them do not do there present duties? Let's refocus the commissioners to address or most urgent problems and recruit people with the skills to achieve the task and train them how to do it.

Camp medical officers are trained and certified in the medical field. Most unit leaders are not. Requiring that a trained professional disperse drugs and requiring an un-trained, un-licensed, volunteer to do so are two different things. A parent cannot authorize a volunteer leader to take responsibility for dispersing any drugs. The Adult leader may volunteerly accept the responsibility, just be aware of what that means. You take that responsibility against the recommendation of the BSA, with little or no knowledge of drug reaction, interaction, storage needs, side effects, or legal requirements. You accept full responsibility for any injury caused by the distribution or lack of distribution of each drug, or for any law breached concerning the possession and or distribution of each drug. Which is why the BSA recommends, if the scout is not capable of managing the drugs on his own, that a parent or guardian be present to manage the drugs.

I would suppose that since you are being paid to deliver the product to a destination determined by the customer that you are in essence performing a service for them. The decision still rests with the local scout executive. BW

Jerry Seinfeld says of laundry detergent commercials, "if your clothesd are covered with blood then maybe laundry isn't really your biggest problem!" Your right, without more than one patrol there is no need for an SPL. But if the troop has shrunk to a single patrol, maybe junior leadership structure is not your biggest problem. I would be far more concerned over the quality of the program and the leadership that has brought it to this point. Training, planning, activities, support, all seem far higher priorities than troop offices right now.

Who are you refering to Foto when you say "we"? Unit Leaders? If so, "we" work for "them", them being the IH, CRs, and CCs. and they need waking, which is why I think the commissionssioners need to be caling on "them" rather than on "us". There are too many leaders untrained and too many not following the program. We need to see the parties that sign the charter fulfill their responsibilities to select quality leaders, and follow the BSA programs. Would active COs change scouting? Absolutely, and for the better.

The only way I have ever seen OA elections handled over the years is how Lynda described. This eliminates any "post-election" politics. Cloak of silence? Not unless you consider the secret ballot system we use to elect our government as "cloak of silence". As far as it being a popularity contest...ALL elections are popularity contests! Who here doesn't vote for the candidate they like the best? The best way to avoid problems is to follow the BSA program, policies and procedures. BW(This message has been edited by Bob White)