yknot

I've been hearing rumors that the Elks were also dropping chartering scouts but saw nothing to substantiate it. There was a post today on one of the cub scout sites today however with a letter. Anyone else see it or have any involvement with Elks?

That's how I'm feeling. So it sounds in essence that we relied on LCs and SEs to vet claim forms? I guess I'm wondering was it in their interest to be diligent in that process, or not? I started thinking about this when people on this thread or another started saying that their council has no or few claims as if they are now completely in the clear. Is the list that definitive a document? If claims can be ruled out as being invalid or low level due to missing information, can other claimslater be ruled in if it's later found the proper information was on the form but overlooked? All I know is I don't think any CO or LC should feel "safe" just because so far they haven't been linked to a claim. Seems like there are still some i's and t's to dot and cross to me...

Coincidentally I was driving my son and his friend home from school today. My son left scouts this year; his friend stayed and is about to Eagle. His older brother made Eagle last year and is now out. My son liked to camp, hike, hang with friends, and do outdoors stuff. He was not at all interested in meetings and merit badges. His friend is the same, but his family has made both him and his brother stay in. They, like most of the parents in the unit, are focused on Eagle to put on college applications, which is why they both need to be done with it by sophomore year. He's not having fun and can't wait to be done. I think the Eagle Scout rank has been both a blessing and a curse for scouts.

For starters for me, I'd just like to know what happened to data that was entered in the wrong place. Was it corrected before the list was published? Were any claims sent back to the claimant for clarification in such cases? I'm assuming nothing was rejected but I would like to know how many claims would appear more complete if at least a minimal effort was made to correctly capture stray information.

I'm not exactly clear on the process but I would assume that no one should use this list to rule their CO, Council, or unit in or out for a claim just yet. I think it was noted earlier that in many cases information regarding unit numbers or Council or CO names or locations was sometimes included but listed in the wrong section of the form and so was not captured for this list. I have not heard that any kind of vetting of the claims has been done although maybe someone here knows more than me. Regardless, a certain degree of forensics on these claims could very possibly identify additional COs or Councils as the process unfolds.

I had my head bashed in by an older scout and the only thing I remember is the where. Not when. Not who. Not why. I just remember having my head slammed into a brick wall and waking up on the ground. I didn't tell my parents. I didn't tell teachers. The only person who knew it happened other than the scouts who did it was a friend who was in the school yard with me when it happened and I don't remember who they were. Memory is very individual and situation specific. I had another incident of attempted sexual abuse in broad daylight in a ditch walking home from school. The mud is all I remember.

I've worked in media. You cannot publish a photo of a minor in many cases without a written parental photo release. Protecting youth extends beyond protecting their corporeal presence, it includes protecting their imagery as well. For most situations it has nothing to do with compensation, it's about protecting the privacy of a minor. The only way of working around that is to go back and get a photo release after the fact. If someone from BSA is feeding you information counter to that they are wrong. If it's a private photo on a private facebook page or a fair use photo taken in a public setting, that's one thing, but if you post it on Troop X or Pack Y site or you took it in a private setting, you'd better have a photo release.

I hope that is not a real practice because it would be yet another way that youth protection in the organization is being subverted.

It depends on who is taking the picture, where, and why. If you are taking photos of your friends' kids and post on your own facebook page, there is little someone can do. If, however, you take a picture of your friends' kids and then put it on an organization site, like a troop or pack site, that's a different matter. It also matters whether the photo was taken in public -- such as at a Main Street parade -- or in private, such as a privately owned scout camp or someone's backyard.

Would it be, or is it just forestalling the inevitable? I've seen little in the plan that constitutes any kind of a real restructuring of the organization. The only strategies for future success are lasered in on yet more marketing and reliance on membership increases. There is a lack any kind of independent, outside or even introspective review of how scouting is going to survive beyond the 2020s. The CO and volunteer issues are huge. Would it be better for the survivors for BSA to fail and take their chances with LCs and COs? Or, if BSA goes through Ch. 11 only to wind up in Ch. 7 a few years from now, where would those remaining assets go? To the Trust? Would that be an additional potential beneft to survivors? Or would any remaining assets go to a whole new list of creditors? I would think that would be the ultimate tragedy for survivors if they get a pittance now, and then get cut out yet once again if/when BSA goes Ch. 7 at a future date.

I can't add much to this other than to say make sure you read A Walk in the Woods if you haven't already.

That is a whole unclear area that was a subject of at least one contentious thread a year or so ago. Mandatory reporting varies by state. It would seem the BSA policy ought to be report to police first, BSA second, but in some places it was BSA first. Hopefully new YP guidelines will clarify that if it still needs clarifying but more importantly publicize it. It's not clear, or at least it wasn't the last time I went through YPT.

I've read through this once and my initial reaction is that there are some good elements to it and I like some of the additional oversight and transparency. Some of the specifics I'm interested in I assume would be addressed later as part of the general statements about reviewing procedures and policies with other best practices and experts. At this point, we also kind of don't know where we've been without access to data (other than the claims and anecdotal reports) so it hard to be sure we are targeting the right things. Certainly the addition of SWG individuals to the process will be extraordinarily helpful going forward. There is a missing piece here unless I've skipped over it and that's consquences. It isn't clear how YP will be integrated with operations. It can't be just a committee or department that, however buffed up, is still to the side. I want to know what will happen when there are incidents - what will an incident trigger? Hopefully, a mandatory review process that could ultimately lead to revocation of charters for units or even councils if necessary. One of the things that has driven abuse in BSA in my opinion has been the overwhelming focus on membership at all costs. If membership is still allowed to smudge youth safety in any way, we are still in the same place with just more bells and whistles. We need to make sure YP has teeth. I particularly like the provisions increasing the data flow to parents in individual troops. Parents should be able to get a "report card" on the unit they are placing their children in . I would hope that report would also be available for the district and council as well.

At this point, I don't think you should be lashing out at me. You would have to be a cult member not to question this drumbeat of poor decision making and lack of oversight. You can be bright and lack common sense. You can be hard working, but be working at the wrong things. You can be both honorable and incompetent. I can no longer buy into the idea that hundreds of people in National leadership have been completely vicitimized and outwitted over the years by chartering organizations and insurance companies and wiley predators and uncooperative parents and police officers and pesky donors with agendas and now... Some dastardly file clerk at a calendar company who hid an agreement? I think a lot of people who truly loved scouting once want better.

They were commissioned early and used on the cover of Boys' Life first to help promote the calendar. They are linked. It's possible BSA didn't know, but the incompetency of that would be beyond belief.

Brown & Bigelow published the boy scout calendar and were the ones who hired Rockwell to paint them. It's interesting that in some places, some paintings appear with a copyright line to Brown & Bigelow. It's possible that people that gifted them were unaware that some of them had encumbrances.

Chainsaws will be next.

Whatever survivors want is what I support. As long as the YPT piece is also addressed.

Yes as in G2SS. I'm curious though how many COs allow even adults to do so. Ours doesn't. Chainsaws yes; wood chippers no. We do it at council camp properties simply because they have no idea but it's not allowed on any of their church properties or campgrounds where we do service projects. It's a huge liability risk.

The other thing I would suggest based on your other posts is for everyone involved in the unit to get the latest version of Guide to Safe Scouting and review it. It is available online. I think this is the latest version: https://www.scouting.org/health-and-safety/gss/toc/ A lot of the turmoil with Chartering Orgs is over liability issues. Make sure everything you are doing follows current BSA policy. A lot of things have changed, even in the past few years. You mentioned that you allow older scouts to chip wood using a wood chipper for a fundraiser, which is not allowed by BSA. Those kinds of things might be a red flag for any potential new CO, like the smaller Lutheran Church you are hoping will take you on. Just make sure you are not shooting yourselves in the foot somehow. Good luck.

This was recently reported. Not an SE, a DE, but it's still in the same dark category. https://www.newsweek.com/boy-scouts-executive-arrested-sexual-battery-molestation-charges-police-1669814 Earlier I had read through some of the abuse cases both in the media and in some of the letters. I had to stop because it was just too awful but these people did do the unimaginable. I think that's again yet another unique weakness in scouting. It attracts some of the most honorable people who can't even envision such things are possible . But that sadly only seemed to make it easier for the worst kinds of people to operate in the organization and prey on kids.

Stay safe and prayers for the wellbeing of you, your family, community, and the parts of our country affected by this storm.

I'm not so sure about COs. Some, yes, but a lot of the historical church sponsors include plenty of failing congregations. What do you need assets for if you're about three warm bodies away from shutting the doors? Many churches and church councils have assets like parsonages, rental properties, and campgrounds of their own. As far as other COs, there are a number of Elks lodges by me, for example, that have picnic groves and recreational facilities. Not really essential to their operations and many rarely used in these different times. There are possibly more assets than are obvious.

You can do that. I've never had a problem with them getting so hot they burned through layers though. You don't put them in the fire but near it. You can stick them in an oversized oven mitt for more padding. Before central heating, this was common.

You don't warm them in the fire you put them on the edge. Pizza stones work great too.