CynicalScouter

Yep. Let's go back to the good old days of the 1950s and 1960s. Because that worked SO well. Oh, wait, it didn't. It result in thousands of sexually abused scouts.

Here's another scary possibility: the data doesn't exist. Who knows if BSA is actually keeping numerical track of the number of incidents, data associated with the incidents (unit, council, type of abuse, victim characteristics, abuser characteristics, etc.) or if it is just burying its head in the sand and saying "Everything is fine." Or it is just cursory: number of incidents. Which is a starting point, but does not allow BSA or anyone to really examine the how/why of the abuse and how/why to stop it.

Nope, I do not. But when the man in charge of the program for 10 years says "We have a problem" I'll take his expertise over your lack-of-knowledge any day of the week.

I agree. My broader point is the BSA is a black hole in black box in a black bag. There is precisely ZERO data reported on any of this for the public or researchers outside of those handpicked/cherry picked by BSA. That's why the Catholic Church and USA Gymnastics got OUTSIDERS to audit and review and PUBLISH for the public and what Johnson is advocating for in terms of BSA. Unless and until BSA is willing to open up and be 80-90% transparent (we don't need to know victim names, for example, but knowing type of abuse, council, program type, etc.) BSA will never be a credible source.

The former head of Youth Protection for BSA says it is. You know more than him? As for percent, BSA made darn sure it will NEVER, EVER release that data. Johnson, who DID see that data, says it is a problem. But again: you know more than him? But let me ask this: what percentage of sexually abused scouts is acceptable enough to protect your precious, precious patrol method? How many cases of sexual abuse until you believe change should be made? 1%? 10%? 50%? How many sexually abused scouts are you OK with, in other words, in order to preserve the status quo? I have my numbe

At the risk of repeating myself: I'm happy to hear if you have a 4th option.

If Boy Scouts of America cannot operate the patrol method in a way that does not result in this level of child sexual abuse, then it has three choices: Continue to operate the patrol method and accept as a given the current level of child sexual abuse and subsequent lawsuits. Modify the patrol method to ensure scout safety. That means no more scout-only activities (as already has occurred with needing two-deep leadership). That means tearing Scouts BSA in half (11-14/15-18). End the patrol method. I'm happy to hear if you have a 4th option.

If a byproduct of the patrol method is child sexual abuse, then the patrol method has to go. Period.

By the way: this USED to be called ScoutParent and evolved (sorta) into Unit Scouter Reserve.

Yeah, I can see that this will absolutely devastate Cub Scouts unless BSA is prepared to pick up the tab for thousands upon thousands of criminal background checks (at least).

According to the PDF's metadata, the PDF was created by Joelle Casteix. Maybe she reviewed? https://www.snapnetwork.org/joelle_casteix https://twitter.com/joellecasteix?lang=en

Yep, eh (sorry, had to). What I bet is going to happen is that this is going cause major issues with some dads who have (non-sexual-offense) criminal records that they do NOT want disclosed but they still want to go camp with their sons. As soon as they get confronted with the need to clear a CBC, they'll pull their kids out of scouting (rather than just, you know, not camp).

This is IN THEORY what the CORs are supposed to be doing. As we know: it doesn't happen or if it does, it is rare.

I stood with my daughter at cookie booths. Cookie booths. Broad daylight. Registered adult leaders (GSUSA style). Background checked.

"In light of 100 years of child sexual abuse inside scouting, we have to ensure that anyone who has overnight access to a scout is criminal background checked. This applies to everyone, so please don't feel you are being singled out or picked on." There, done.

This is going straight after the Catholic units. Moreover, this gets even more broadly at what I had previously stated: the entire CO system is a joke. The COs/CORs are SUPPOSED to be reviewing these people and at the very least interviewing them. The adult applications going back to the 1920s had lines that the COR/Institutional Head had reviewed the applicant. We know that is mostly not true, that the CORs are simply signing whatever is put under their noses, etc.

You may recall the recent Senate hearing where members of the USA Gymnastics team testified about their abuse. I wonder what it would take to get a similar House/Senate hearing on BSA in particular or youth organization sexual abuse in general.

I agree that is possible and a fair question. If I am reading where he is going (especially the 72 hour rule) it is going the way of "I objected to every part of this every step of the way and then when I couldn't take it anymore I quit."

This is what USA Gymnastics did and what the Catholic Church has done at the national level and in each Diocese. Why on earth BSA continues to fight this is beyond me.

Johnson on "Some examples of this standard of care failure include:” More than 50% of the reported sexual abuse incidents into Scouts BSA are perpetrated by youth in the program. This is due to a lack of adult supervision and vigilance on the part of Scouts BSA including: lack of screening of youth; the large range of ages of youth at many events; and the lack of diligence to inform parents, youth, and leaders of the risk. Lack of proper screening procedures for adult volunteers and leaders (per CDCs “Preventing Child Sexual Abuse Within Youth-serving Organizations” and the Non-

For ease of reference, I'm posting Johnson's 12 reforms ("Necessary Action Steps") Congress should begin immediate hearings and an investigation into the scope and breadth of child sexual abuse, predatory grooming, and the cover-up of crimes against children in Scouts BSA. The investigation should include specific dangers to female and LGBTQ+ youth, the issue of preventable youth-on-youth sexual violence, and the institutional disregard for the plight of survivors and their families. The investigation should include a review of the misuse of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code to subvert the exposu

So, I read his 12 recommendations. In short, as I've said and others; the BSA cannot be trusted. OUTSIDE folks with NO BSA connections (no more insiders) need to be put in charge or have oversight power over this process. A lot of this tracks with the USA Gymnastics resolution: outside experts, outside committee of victims and experts, etc. No more hand picked BSA people telling BSA what they want to hear: everything is fine.

Why not at this point?

Read the letter ThenNow just posted from Johnson

I said earlier, my pure tinfoil hat theory is that this was timed to hit right when the bankruptcy ballots were getting into the mailboxes of the victims to vote no. It could be pure coincidence. But there's a cynical part of me (get it, ha!) that says this press conference timing was not a coincidence and is timed to have maximum effect on the vote. So yes, literally an October Surprise.