yknot

There is no policy, that's the point of this whole interesting discussion. You can say the SM was enforcing 'his' policy, or you can say he was trying to do his best in the absence of any policy. Also, the issue with the original poster seems to be that scouts weren't present. There was no mention that another adult was not present while the search was conducted, which, if not, I agree is essential to protect both the scout and the person(s) doing the search. However, without a BSA policy, no matter what he does (or any of us would do) in a difficult situation could be construed as wrong.

I'm surprised at the number of posters who are shocked at the idea of a worried SM searching backpacks. Obviously experiences vary in different parts of the country, but if bag searching isn't yet common for overnight youth activities near you, it probably will be. It would be good for BSA to develop a policy for when and how scout belongings should be searched. Preemptive searching, even if cursory and tied to presentation, makes more sense to me as a deterrent but at the very least BSA ought to give guidance on how a SM or any leader should handle it if they have reason to be concerned. It

A 'scout is trustworthy' will not be an adequate legal defense when a scout arrives at a camp site with an inappropriate item and something unfortunate happens because a leader didn't check the bags. We're involved in a youth organization and as adults it's our job to keep them safe. No other youth organization would allow kids on an outing without checking bags. On school, church and sports outings I've been involved with, it's been done by adults as part of the routine while loading buses and cars and no kids are present.

Why would a scout need to be present? More important that two adults are present so that nothing can be "planted" on a kid. Frankly, it's only scouts where kids' luggage, backpacks, etc., is not routinely subject to adult search. BSA needs to get with the times. Class trips, sports team travel, band trips, it all gets searched no bones, no big deal about it. I applaud that scoutmaster.

I think this is another case where BSA is 10 or 15 years behind the times. There should be no expectation of privacy on a scout outing. It's not a matter of trust, it's simply the current reality. There should be no discussion here. Scoutmaster, camp personnel, other designated leaders should have ability to search backpacks at any time if they have just cause. Whether it's cell phones, medications that could make someone sick if not administered properly, or contraband snacks in bear territory, the SM and the camp and troop leaders shoulder the responsibility of keeping everyone safe.

I would suggest contacting your council to get coverage details from the horse's mouth. I have not always found a great deal of clarity about who is covered and when even at the council level, but at least it is a place to start. Whatever the pack or troop thinks is likely to be wrong.

We're doomed.

No matter what we are or how we view ourselves, we have to hold ourselves to a very high standard. Our public trust is at stake. I don't want to read posts that try to equivocate or rationalize this. We need to be perfect. We have put very good systems in place that should help us achieve that and we have decades of mistakes to atone for.

Frankly, right now, it has to be zero and there is no reason why it shouldn't be. If anyone has a qualm about an SM, an ASM, a unit, they/it should be shut down for review. We have almost zero public confidence. The days of covering for folks has to be over. Can you not see the headlines? No one will care about statistics. All they will see is that another scout has been abused despite our assurances otherwise.

If zero isn't the goal then why are we doing this? You can't compare BSA to the teaching profession where teachers and administrators are still allowed to be one on one with students and sometimes even behind closed doors. We are supposed to be the gold standard in youth protection simply because this cannot continue. There cannot be any rationalization for continuing cases.

Despite all the training and precautions in place, there were still 5 current cases of sexual abuse reported in 2018. That percentage is still very low, but with all the attention on this issue, how can this still be happening?

I am often amazed at how oblivious scout leaders are to potential liability and risk, not just for safety but for membership and advancement issues as well. First, know the BSA guidelines and training for whatever you are doing with youth and follow them even if they seem like overkill. Second, be cautious, prudent, fair, and document. Third, make sure anyone else you are leading with is also following the first and second points. The best way to avoid liability and risk is to prevent problems by being knowledgeable and cautious. It can make you an unpopular Dudley Do Right. However, even if y

Sometimes you can help a kid. Sometimes you can't. I always cringe when I read or hear someone say just pair them with a good scout. As the parent of a couple of good scouts who always seem to be paired with a "that kid" who had severe issues, I can say over time this is exceedingly stressful and unfair. If adults can't handle the kid, we shouldn't expect another scout to be able to do so except in short doses. I would also point out that this is also a strategy that schools use, so a mature, capable kind kid like this is frequently stuck with a scout buddy or study buddy who is unpleasant and

This has filled me with such a sense of sorrow. Scouts is such an iconic organization, but I do not feel that the organizational leadership has itself modeled the behaviors we try to instill in the boys and now girls at the unit level. I believe if the leadership had made decisions based more on how we expect our scouts to problem solve, prepare, plan ahead, and manage, this outcome would have been different.

Coming late to this discussion, but I am surprised the NYT article did not mention one of the main reasons U.S. soccer lost so many kids in particular. In 2016, U.S. Youth Soccer changed the age determinations for play from school year to calendar year to bring U.S. clubs and players more in line with elite international clubs. So, kids who played together as a team suddenly couldn't play with half their friends. It broke up a lot of teams in our region and caused a lot of kids to drop out. It would be like scouts suddenly splitting cub dens up by calendar age on January 1.

That is interesting but the problem is everything has become expensive. When I was a kid, we toured the northeast and southeast on fantastic family summer vacations for free except for the cost of gas and a cheap hotel room. One year we went to FLA and had to pay to get into Disney world. To do the same thing now is thousands of dollars. It's not just scouts, it's everything. Because of insurance liability, informal arrangements that are free are almost nonexistent. Things you never had to account for in a cost calculator now have a price. Oh, we did have one expense when we drove to Florida

Food has become very interesting as a group activity. Food allergies, food intolerances, vegan, kosher, organic ... we might be moving to a model where everyone just brings their own food. BSA should get with the times and change requirement from cook for your troop/patrol to cook for yourself. It's getting too expensive to accommodate all these needs even if you split them.

I love scouts but it's not cheap and people who try and say it's more economical than sports aren't being truthful. Yes, elite club sports can be pricey, but so can high adventure scouting trips that require airfare, etc. Like everything, the costs benefits analysis depends on where you are and what you want to get out of it. I think youth sports and scouting are wonderful, complementary activities and I do not like to see either group bash the other. Scouts teach teamwork, leadership, citizenship, and service, and so do many sports, especially if the same caliber of person is involved with th