yknot

Some version of the ineligible volunteers files have been in existence since 1919. They were referenced in the 1930s. BSA long knew it was a particular target for pedophiles. 4-H is also a 100 plus year old legacy youth organization and no such files exist there.

I think they have no idea. There has been no communication from BSA to the COs other than what has been funneled through Councils. That is mostly a feel good message and in many cases there is no communication channel from the Council/District/Unit to the CO. I don't know about other CO groups, but from what I've seen from the UMC, it's still largely very vague and muted. They are concerned but still want to support scouts, at least according to the latest information I've seen. I think it's unethical that BSA is not being more forthcoming, especially with the smaller and individual CO groups.

That would be a best case scenario if it is limited to the BSA relationship with COs. In a worst case, zombie world scenario, we could see hundreds of local small COs wiped out or affected by this. For example, the Methodist Church. I work with is a state based council. A host of smaller churches by me are barely functional, but they do have some property and assets. If the UMC had to respond to the cases in our state as a council, it would likely result in the closure and sale of dozens of small churches, their parsonages, some local camp properties, community buildings, etc. If Chapter 11 is

I have wondered that as well. However, while many COs are poor, many are rich so I guess it would be worth it to drill down to that level in the long run. But that would take so much time.

I think that's largely going to be the Councils going forward? Could be good, could be bad. It might force Councils to finally understand and deal with local unit issues if they are knee deep in them. One of the dysfunctional aspects of the scouting structure is that we have different levels operating in different directions to meet different goals. This might collapse the CO/Unit/District/Council layers into one more functional entity. The bad side could be if instead of learning Councils simply tried to mandate down to units.

What I have seen in numerous COs near me is that they are mostly legacy units with relationships going back decades in the community and the members have no idea what those relationships are other than to provide meeting space and benign support. All they know is that once a year some nice person from the local boy scout troop whom they have known for years stops by and asks them to sign something. Some COs were very hands on because they used scouting as an outgrowth of their youth programming and ministry. Others may have started out like that, but over the decades as church memberships

That is something I agree with. The uniform today I think is more for nostalgic adults than the kids. It should be a survey question. It's the only activity I can think of other than marching band where I hear kids regularly complain about discomfort. They are basically still wearing what an old British guy -- a Lord no less -- wore in 1910.

The only numbers we have that are not anecdotal are the claims that were filed. Until they are further analyzed to either accept or deny them, they represent a factual data point. Everything else is conjecture. You say you are being careful about how you select your data, but several times it has been pointed out that comparing the number of claims filed in the current day to the past universe of scouting alumni of 110 million, most of whom are likely now dead or incapacitated, is not valid. I think it is also important to acknowledge that asking survivors to file claims is not the same as con

I think there is another way that has been used in other class action suits, often regarding health issues. They have the data in the claims, some of which has already been entered. Once the data is input, it's not difficult to mine for corroborating clusters of cases in certain physical locations, in certain time frames, among certain councils, units, or camps, and cross check any incomplete claims against claims with identified and known abusers. For example, you might have a cohort of scouts in X region during Y timeframe who attended Z camp. If they can be matched up to a subset who were

That's interesting. I did not appreciate that distinction.

I don't think you can have institutions taking things into their own hands when it comes to reporting YP incidents. That's how I think this whole thread got started. The discussion has been about degree -- some (me and others) feel it should not occur at all, others have argued it has a role. The topic initially came up as a result of a document used in one particular church, but it has not to my mind targeted that church. I haven't been thinking about that church when writing comments. I've been thinking about the process and how its delineated in the various states. I think you are seeing th

Is that where you want to start, though? With the perspective that immediate reporting won't matter because it's going to take an hour or a day anyway? Again, you're not hearing me. Part of the problem with YP is that we have had a lack of urgency about it. We need more urgency to get better. That's what I'm aiming at. Not continuing the status quo. Getting better. Also, I think reaction times depend on the situation, the agency, and the people involved. I have seen immediate response. Jumping out of bed in the middle of night and knocking on a door response. I have also seen institutionalize

I'll give you what my personal bias is in this discussion. I have had some involvement with a juvenile counseling and diversion program and while most of it did not involve sex abuse cases, it did underscore the necessity of immediately reporting and dealing with juvenile crises. An hour in some of those situations can be too late. You may see it as the needs of an organization to protect itself or maybe even just the lawyerly desire to proceed in an orderly fashion but crises with kids are never orderly. They are messy and can get out of hand quickly. Think of how impulsively the average adol

Let me try to explain it this way: We can't minimize risk if we keep trying to blame youth protection failures in scouting on outside societal trends. What's going on in society is almost irrelevant. If we can't do a better job of minimizing risk within scouting, it really can't go forward except possibly as a family scouting destination program. The attitude that abuse occurs ubiquitously in society anyway so there is nothing more that can be done to prevent it deflects blame away from scouting and prevents the organization from dealing with the fact it still has a problem. That, in my opinio

In my opinion this is the nut. This attitude. If we don't get past it we'll lose scouting. It is not about blame. It is about minimizing risk.

I think discussions about youth protection in the context of the religious institutions that have been involved in scouting, of which LDS is certainly a dominant one, are perhaps some of the most relevant discussions on this forum. Trying to understand the differing attitudes among all the players involved regarding youth protection policies, training, reporting, etc., has been central to this our greatest crisis and will be exquisitely relevant to any future survival of the BSA. We have to be willing to be brutally honest that we have had attitudes, policies, beliefs, and procedures that have

I took the time to re read my own comments to make sure I did not inadvertently say anything that could be construed as emotional or offensive because I would not want to do that. I did not. Virtually all my comments are factual -- stating state laws and resources, including ones that are used by BSA, and in some cases providing links. When I have disagreed with you and have been unable to follow your logic, I have clearly said so and been respectful in doing so. Frankly, I think you and others are having emotional reactions to statements of facts or opinions you don't agree with. I can under

Again, I'm sorry, but this seems like an awful lot of backflip rationalization to support protecting an institution and not a kid. Please, just re-read all that you have written. You have put an awful lot of thought into defending deferred reporting.

This is something I had trouble with with my last AOL den. They were very well prepared for cross over. The Troop though went through Scout very laboriously with a couple of fun exceptions. Then, all cross overs had to sign up for a Dan Beard program at summer camp, which the kids started calling Dan Bored, and did a lot of the same stuff all over again. The Troop lost about a third of the boys that first fall because they were bored stinkless. I think it's important to honor the progression but also realize it can seem very repetitive and boring to 10 and 11 year old kids. People have talked

Nowhere in this list do they address the volunteer problem for one.

In my state everyone is a mandatory reporter and the requirement is that the abuse be reported immediately to an identified state agency and possibly 911. I think that's pretty clear. Again, I'm not clear why there is this degree of pushback on immediate reporting. Who is it protecting? Your scenario of 9 p.m. vs. 1 p.m. is fictional. You or I have no idea how the reporting process would work once it veers outside of what is legislated or inferred or seems responsible. I don't care what my position or role in an organization is, if I see child sexual abuse occurring, hear it occurring, or sus

Once again, I am having trouble with the logic. I think a lot of religions have positions that are in some kind of gray area as do plenty of other fields. Doesn't change the fact that you are a mandatory reporter. That's a failing of the organization if it doesn't adequately inform its members of their responsibilities and train them if needed.

That could be true except a priest is not a layman in this situation. They are a mandatory reporter in many if not most states. They would be, or should be, at least as conversant with reporting requirements as would be a licensed driver would be with traffic law. Especially given the abuse environment since the 1980s. This is not new or surprising information to any clergy in just about any church.

I'm still having trouble following this logic. When I see flashing lights behind me, I don't call my lawyer before pulling over for a traffic stop and complying. The laws in each state are pretty generally known to residents in those states. I don't understand what is being advocated for here or why.

"Who h'are you? I must know...." -- Inigo Montoya. The Princess Bride