bearess

Thanks so much for the feedback.  He’s at summer camp now.  Before he left, his SM told him he wanted them to sit down together and look at his advancement.  He’ll be home for a week, then the next week he’s doing a week long canoe trip with his Troop.  I think I’ll ask his SM to remind him that a lot of stuff is closed off if you aren’t first class at 14.  I suspect that will motivate him to remember to advance!

Thanks for the advice.  I think you’re right, give it time, and then a reminder.  The older boys/PLs are the ones who sign off on advancement/skills (with the exception of Scout masters conference and, I assume, BOR).  I think that he just doesn’t think to ask about it.

Anyway, he’s off to summer camp today, where he’s doing a first class adventure program.  So......we shall see!

Well, you did appear to say you reported it.  In response to a post asking if you reported it, you replied “Yes, I did, and proud that I did”.  Also, if your son can’t swim or do strenuous activity, he must have had to have alternative badge requirements for Eagle (First Class requires swimming, as well as the cycling/swimming/hiking merit badge requirements).  It seems like you would have been working closely with the committee to get all of that done.  

Did he complete all the required Eagle merit badges or did he complete alternative badges for some?  Specifically, did your son earn hiking, swimming, cycling, or personal fitness?

Mich, I’m also sorry this is causing you such stress.  However, you’ve become very aggressive in response to fairly reasonable questions— "name calling  and unscoutlike" (edit - RS) for example.  I have to say that the more you post, the more I believe that the reason for the bad blood between your son and the troop may be related to your manner of handling conflict.  I don’t want to get into the holes that remain in your story— I’m pretty smart too 😉 and I can figure out the gist of it at this point.  Best of luck to your son as he moves through college.

1 minute ago, SSF said:

The OP is seeking guidance. Pretty sure she's not looking for pettiness or your judgment

It’s very hard to give guidance to the OP because they are so unclear.  The entire story has more questions than answers.

Almost eighteen year old earns Eagle.  Ok, got it.  EBOR is delayed well past the thirty day mark.  Was that approved by national?  Is this kid really an Eagle?  Kid is at home, but doesn’t reach out about a COH till summer.  Why?  Troop has held other Eagle COH in this time.  Did the kid attend?  Why wasn’t his included with the others?  Scoutmaster says council has denied the COH.  That’s not councils role.  Was the SM lying?  Did the kid misunderstand?  Something else?  Mom/Dad alleges discrimination.  Why?  On what basis?  Nobody seems to have considered Mom/Dad hosting the COH.  Again, why?  Finally, Mom/Dad can’t find the address for POTUS online?  Or a sample COH script?  

Also, the weirdness of threatening legal action over what amounts to a party.  I’m a teacher.  For each student in my home room, we do birthday breakfast on their birthday.  I pick up a coffee cake and juice, the kid wears a birthday hat.  If I chose not to do that for one kid— sure, that’s mean.  But it’s not illegal, and, assuming I didn’t target the kid because they are a member of a protected class, it’s not going to impact my job.  OP seems to believe a troop run COH is his son’s right, and, well, it isn’t.  It’s something nice the troop chooses to do.  That’s the biggest question for me— the entire thread from OP seems entitled and helpless.  Are those traits carrying over to Scouts?  How had that affected perception of the kid?  How has that influenced the kid’s actions?  What’s the source of the bad blood that led to the situation?

My son crossed over to Boy Scouts last November.  He finally got his Scout rank in May.  He’s not made any advancement progress since— I just looked at his handbook and he has three things on Tenderfoot signed off.  He’s active in his Troop— they have about one camping weekend a month, which he attends.  He’s going to camp, and the next week going on a week long camping trip, including three days/two nights of canoeing.  He enjoys Scouts.  I think he’s done most of the Tenderfoot (and some second class) requirements, but he’s completely unmotivated to get them signed off on.  He’s also, for some reason, very unwilling to do a Scoutmaster conference.  It took him 2-3 months to ask for one for Scout.  His scoutmaster is perfectly nice, unintimidating, and I think my son likes him.  But for some reason the idea of a conference is a no go!

So, to sum it up, son has been active in Boy Scouts for nearly a year.  He’s gotten Scout rank, and no merit badges, mainly due to his lack of follow through.  I don’t really care— he obviously doesn’t!  Is there a reason I should care?  Would you push him to do advance a bit more?  He’s a very mellow kid, and if I told him to step it up, he would.

Holding his family and Troop in the light.

38 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Sometimes there are situations where a specified parent's time is SUPERVISED (emphasis) and they are not to be alone with the child. Judge was shocked when I as a teenager requested supervised visitation for my father. To all outside appearances, he was a nice normal person and not the physically and mentally abusive individual my siblings and I knew. My request was granted, and thankfully he never tried to force me to visit.

We have one Scout whose mom can only have him in a supervised situation. Not going into details, but it was over 10 years before she was finally able to see him, and it was at the grandparents house.

I’m so sorry you went through that, and I’m glad your father didn’t try to force visits on you.

Absolutely, there are times when supervised visitation is warranted.  But nothing in the OP indicates that- it sounds like the Mom gets visitation without supervision starting Friday.  The whole situation described sounds off— she was watching a movie with the counselors??— but if it is just the request of one parent that the other parent not be allowed, well, that’s not feasible.  I agree that counselors aren’t the ones he should be talking to, and they should know to direct him to a higher up.  At the same time, as an adult, the counselors all look about seventeen to me!  It’s hard for me to imagine why you would only talk to a kid (counselor) about what is clearly a sensitive topic requiring some discretion.

I haven’t seen your court order.  As a divorced parent and a teacher, I think it’s a rare court order that specifies that one parent can’t be present at activities on another parent’s time.  For example, we have parents chaperone field trips, attend sports events, come to p,Amys, field days, etc when it may or may not be their custodial time.  That’s when your ex did here.  Does your order specify that she can’t attned extracurricular events?  If not, you are overstepping your legal rights.

Your requests that your son’s mother can’t attend are just that, requests.  She’s not exercising her visitation by coming to spend a day at summer camp.  It seems like you are putting the camp staff in a strange ethical and legal position.

This thread has drifted a bit, but in terms of people/girls not knowing that girls can join Cub Scouts now— I wonder how much of that will change as the school year begins and recruitment starts.  Honestly, I’m a Den Leader, and I wasn’t really sure when girls could join— I certainly knew our Pack would be forming girl dens, I knew a few people who had been asked to run those dens, but it’s  very rare for us to have new kids join mid-school year.  Girls were no exception.  Maybe the Pack should have done a few girls recruiting events, but they didn’t.  This fall, I’m sure girls will be included in our general recruiting.  I would assume that a lot more parents of girls will know that Cub Scouts is open to girls then.

I also think advertising is a good idea.  At least around here, recruiting mainly consists of sending home a flyer for a recruitment night, maybe a few flyers on public bulletin boards.  It’s not the most effective tool out there.  

For your son, I’d look for hiking boots in the 50-60 dollar range.  My son is the same age, and I got him a pair of Merrell’s on sale for $40.

They were already mentioned,  but we love Darn Tough Socks.    https://darntough.com/.  They are completely made in the USA, and are the best socks.  

How much hiking will your son do at camp?  I know my son will do two hikes, a five miler and then a mountain climb.  How much hiking does your family do?  That would influence how much I spent on boots.

Well, realistically, you’re right— there was no reason for them to look in my trunk,  etc.  But, I signed a contract knowing alcohol on school grounds was a reason to fire a teacher on the spot.  If, somehow, it had been found, firing me would hav been fair.  And— I bet if you’d been in my position you’d have moved your car ASAP too!

I don’t knnow the precise wording of the district weapons policies where I worked.  I believe, in all cases, they were worded but not followed as zero tolerance.  I want to be clear that this happened a tiny minority of times— maybe three times in fifteen years?  And, during that time, I saw many, many more students suspended for bringing weapons to school.  

Edit to add:  I am not a fan of zero tolerance, and I think the rare exceptions to the policy (we’ll call it a ‘low tolerance’ policy) that I’ve seen were very appropriate.  But, I do feel that a kid who brings a knife to school to show to friends— knowing the rules— deserves a severe punishment.  I have no problem with a school suspending that kid.

https://nypost.com/2009/10/14/eagle-scout-suspended-for-keeping-2-inch-knife-in-car/

it sounds like this is the story.  He did admit to it— good for him— but only after he was confronted by the administration.  It sounds like other students knew he kept a knife in his car.  Again, I’m left questioning why he would share that information.  He didn’t just forget it was there, he was bringing it every day and, at least once, sharing/telling other students.  And, again, the argument that “no crime occurred” means nothing.  It wasn’t a crime for me to have a bottle of wine in my trunk.  It wouldn’t be a crime for me to have a pack of cigarettes in my purse.  But both of those things could get me fired from my job, and I would be subject to professional sanctions.

i absolutely think there are times when zero tolerance policies go overboard— the elementary aged boy with the camping utensil is a perfect example.  But a high school or middle school student who appears to be deliberately disobeying the rules— and sharing that with other kids?  My sympathy is limited.

11 minutes ago, TAHAWK said:

 

In Ohio, our Supreme Court has held, one cannot be prosecuted for "carrying a concealed weapon" for having a knife of their person absent a finding that there is probable cause to believe the knife was carried with the intent that it be a weapon.  Obviously, our precious children deserve less in some eyes.

Miles Rankin’s legal troubles stemmed from the zero-tolerance policy in his school. 

 Miles Rankin and his family’s life have been scarred by an indiscriminate group of administrators who found it easier to hide behind a zero-tolerance policy than to exercise sound judgment. 

. Like thousands upon thousands of Scouts before him, Miles was showing off one of the tools he learned to use  

 

First of all, schools can have zero tolerance policies for all kinds of things that are allowed other places—alcohol, tobacco, guns, knives, marijuana, etc.  The point about the Supreme Court ruling on what constitutes a weapon is specious.

The young boy who brought a pocket knife to school isn’t in trouble because of zero tolerance policies.  He’s in trouble because he knew the school rule, brought a knife to school anyway, showed it to his friends, and got caught.  If you deliberately flout the rules, yes, you are punished.  It doesn’t really matter if you think the rules shouldn’t apply to you or that the rules shouldn’t be so harsh in your case.  That seems to be the argument here— that the kid only broke the rule to shows his friends, who didn’t feel threatened, his knife— in other words, he shouldn’t face consequences because........well, I don’t know.  Because he just shouldn’t, apparently.

On 7/6/2018 at 12:40 PM, MattR said:

I agree with CalicoPenn that the rules are for those without common sense. Summer camps used to fire off a cannon with a blank to wake everyone up, until some fool decided to stand right in front of the cannon and the wad killed him. One solution to this, that the BSA implemented, is to ban all cannons. 

Referring to a dead sixteen year old as “some fool” strikes me as terribly unkind, especially considering the fact that you did not have accurate information about the circumstances of his death.

No, you can’t rely on him in that case.

My son has a boy in his patrol like this— he’s nearly twelve and has yet to tent with his patrol.  He sleeps in his dads tent on all campouts (Dad is an ASM).  It is what it is.  The other boys don’t make fun of him, but they don’t seek him out to do anything with either.  Outside of specific, organized events, he’s a nonentity to them.  So, for example, they include him on patrol hikes, but nobody is inviting him to play catch or cards.  It’s the logical result of his isolation from his patrol, frankly.

Also, after nearly fifteen years working in public schools, all of which have “zero tolerance” policies, I have seen administrators bend those policies a handful of times, and I was always in agreement with their choices.  In those cases, they also took responsibility for their choice to bend the policy, knowing that doing so could have professional consequences.  

I suspect that, for every “Eagle Scout with a small survival knife” story, there are dozens of times when administrators deal with incidents with wisdom and careful judgment.  But, the rules are the rules.  Once, when I was teaching, I bought a bottle,of wine and left it in my car overnight.  Mid-morning, the next day, it occurred to me that I had alcohol on school grounds— in the trunk of my car.  I went and moved my car out of the school parking lot at the first opportunity.  Had an administrator found the alcohol in my car, I would have been fired in the spot.  It would have been awful, over an oversight, but it would have been just and fair, as well.

3 hours ago, David CO said:

Do you really not hear the contradictions in your statements?

No, I don’t think it is contradictory.  “Raising an eyebrow” isn’t the same as being a pariah.  I think, at any time, men who wanted to work with very young children were the exception, not the rule.  You give the example of football, boxing, being coached by the brothers and the priests— I assume you were a bit older when that went on.  Maybe over ten?  It’s not incorrect to say that a man who wants to work with very young kids will be subject to extra scrutiny, and that man would be wise to avoid any hint of scandal.  Again, not the same as being a pariah.  I’d actually posit that young men now are more able to work with that age group, if they wish, than they were forty years ago.

As for older tweens/teens— I think, as a society, we’ve moved away from young people joining service organizations.  This isn’t just me thinking that, this is a fact.  My sons and I were at the parade yesterday— the Shriners, American Legion, Lions, Kiwanis, KoC— they are not young!  It’s the same with women, although it is less public—the PTO, the room mothers, church flower guild— nobody is stepping up.  That’s not about young men being isolated, that’s about generational differences in how we create community.  The result of that is that fewer young men volunteer to coach, to be ASMs, to be SMs.

I think we agree, @DavidCO on the outcome.  I think some of it may have to do with increased awareness of sexual predators, but much of it has to do with generational shifts in community involvement.

I don’t think young unmarried men are treated like pariahs, but I do think it raises an eyebrow when young men want to work with very young children.  It’s very uncommon to meet a young, childless man who wants to work with kids under eight or so.  And I think that, when they do, there is extra attention paid to propriety, etc.  BUT, the men who do want to work with kids that age and love it/are good at it— they get treated like rockstars by the kids and the parents!!  My older son (10) had a father/son pair of hockey coaches this year— Dad played D1 hockey in the early 80s and has been coaching youth hockey since college graduation, so just graduated from college, where he played DII hockey.  The son also led the learn to play program for 4/5 year olds.  The parents ADORED him, as did the kids.  And, I did notice that he was scrupulous about never going in the locker room, etc.  But that didn’t take away from what a great coach he was and how much he was adored.

All that said, I’d be surprised if, say, a 20 year old Eagle volunteered to lead Lions next year, and I’d have my eyes open.  I would not be as surprised if a guy that age volunteered as a ASM.  When something is different/uncommon, you notice.

Yeah— I know the CO chooses the leaders.  But, with the exception of the LDS Church, they aren’t going and finding random people associated with the CO to lead Cub Scout dens— it’s typically parents of the Scouts.

i would find it odd if an unmarried man with no connection to Cub Scouts was leading a Den.  I remember several years ago, my older son had a Little League coach who was the MUCH older brother of one of the players- he was always really quick to explain that it was his brother on the team, and he was co-coaching with his Mom.

2 hours ago, shortridge said:

Lightweight running shoes and Darn Tough socks are an unbeatable combination. I wish BSA would partner with Darn Tough.

Aw, yeah!  Darn Tough is down the road from me!  I think they are too small to partner with BSA or anything like that— but they do give generously to local Troops and Packs!  Great, great company.

I’m really dubious of the idea that this is to accommodate girls.  I think the staff wanted a dance, so they had one.  I just can’t imagine the director sitting around, going “Next year we may have a few girls!  Now, what do ladies like?  Dances!  Scavenger hunts!  Incomplete merit badges!  Oooh, and shopping!  I’ll push the trading post!  They’ll love that!”.  

I’ve done the scavenger hunt thing as a “fun Friday” cross-country practice— kids really like it.  It’s fun, but this just seems ill-planned.  I can think of ways you could mesh the scavenger hunt idea with your traditional end of camp activities if you wanted those a little more structured.  I also think it might be better suited for an hour practice where it’s a fun change, rather than a final day thing.  

10 minutes ago, shortridge said:

You’re confusing the two-deep and no one-on-one rules. See https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2018/01/19/whats-the-difference-between-two-deep-leadership-and-no-one-on-one-contact/

Ugh, you’re right, I am confusing them.  I knew  what I meant though— he can’t be alone with my son (out of view of others) at camp.

i just called the Cubmaster and told him.  It was a bit funny— I’m 40, BF is 61.  The Cubmaster was like, well, actually, this is great news!  I always pictured you as a twenty five year old dating a forty five year old and it just didn’t compute!  This scenario makes much more sense!  Ha.

22 minutes ago, JoeBob said:

Whatever you do, do NOT let the BF become a registered scout leader.  Because then BF could not be at home alone with your son or drive him to meetings.....

Thank heaven he’s in the house to prevent me from being alone with my son!