Ojoman

At that time that was probably as good as any other youth  programs were or could do. Of course it is and will always be less than perfect. 

1 hour ago, Eagle1970 said:

If they only pay 10% of that amount based upon recovery, this will not even begin to have been worth it.

Unfortunate turn, be nice if the same thing happens to the lawyers and law firms... 

6 hours ago, Bzzy said:

No, it is just picking and choosing between "winners" and "losers" when there are no winners here except the insurance companies,

6 hours ago, Bzzy said:

BSA worked to limit the amount that they would pay victims from the start.  To me, this move alone destroyed any credibility BSA might ever have as being any different from any other corporation, as it put its own welfare above the Scouts and parents who trusted it. 

6 hours ago, Bzzy said:

But there were also ad campaigns to recruit attacked Scouts.  That was as slimy as it sounds.  Class-action (scumbag) lawyers borrowed money from "private equity" firms at usurious interest rates that would make a loanshark jealous, and used that "litigation financing" to carpet-bomb social media with ads.  While I can't imagine that any Scout would ever lie or mislead, and would never accuse any Scout, these attorneys may have "recruited" some folks who will not be found in any troop rosters, 'nuff said.   But these firms were representing many people, and wanted as quick a settlement as possible, as the interest on those loans was accumulating.  So, these attorneys in many cases are as much an "abuser of Scouts" as the original attackers. 

6 hours ago, Bzzy said:

And they aren't even acting in the best interest of the Scouts they actually represent!  They will make far more than any attacked Scout will be paid, so they are just parasites.

3 hours ago, Eagle1970 said:

This has indeed pitted scout against scout and has left me with likely minimal compensation, while a scout in another state may receive far more for far lesser abuse.  The harvesting of claims remains a huge concern and if they are not deeply investigated, that alone will result in substantial inequity.  Your points regarding the aggregate dollars from insurance companies are also valid.  But nothing in this Trust is worse than the outcome of a scout in one state receiving a theoretical $1 Million who suffered lesser abuse than a boy in another state who may receive a few thousand after greater abuse.  And if claims proceed with little or no proof, that will make a mockery of the whole process.  To me, the settlement is a mess.

Sadly, I expect that this will drag on for several more years at the least. I wish all survivors receive just compensation but has been pointed out, there will be inequities. There are lawyers and firms that just saw $$$ signs and didn't care if claims were factual or directly related to BSA programs (while most are) but just wanted to sign up as many people as possible and increase their slice of the pie. Certainly the corporation BSA has to do what it can to limit the damage and try to remain viable. The program did and still does serve huge numbers of youth and adults. While the total number of cases remains a fraction of a percent of overall youth registered, even one incident in which a BSA official swept abuse under the rug is too much. We are hearing more and more about the exploitation of children and a week hardly passes that there is not some breaking story.  Predators must be held to account. The BSA made serious errors in judgement and that has come home to roost, as it should have. It is shocking that of the roughly $2.4 billion that a billion goes to the lawyers and firms. These types of actions should be done to help the victims, not line the pockets of people trusted to represent them. 

2 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Yes, but they have to give up their under 18 friends in Scouting per GTSS YP rules, which many refuse to do in this area.

This is an interesting conundrum. I suspect it could be rectified if the troop associates with a Venture Crew and the 18-20 year old's transfer into the crew and then are still youth members???? 

Sadly, membership losses have been going on for half a century and mostly due to mismanagement. There are still strong units, perhaps even a few strong districts but they are rare. Here at the Longhouse Council in Syracuse the membership is down by at least 85 to 90% over the past 2 dozen years. The district that I ran back then had more membership and units in it than the entire council does today. We have a new SE and I hope he is up to the task but I don't know if the council and districts have the manpower (professional and volunteer) to do the job. (Frankly, I doubt it). Time will tell... 

3 hours ago, PACAN said:

Nationally we dropped from 923,399 in January 2023 to 893,117 in January 2024, a -3.28 % loss.

It would be helpful to see where those losses are in the program. Is there growth in cubbing? Are the losses still due to covid and a lack of older cubs to cross over? How is retention compared to the past and is recruiting down? The massive advertising campaign along with the documentary that aired last fall that made BSA look like a movement that does not care about the safety of their membership. There is still hope for a turn around if National gives good direction and support and if local councils really service the grass roots volunteers as they should. If.....

2 hours ago, Eagle1970 said:

I opted for (what was then called) Indian Guides through the YMCA for my boys.  There was not a moment at an event or meeting where we fathers were not there with our boys. 

Sadly even the YMCA has had a spotty history with child abuse... It is incumbent on parents to see that their children are safe in any youth environment. I'm glad your group was well supervised and safe. 

17 hours ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

Your posts above are neither. As you quote me telling you previously above. Asking you to stop attacking a fellow scout's character is frankly something that shouldn't even need to be said at all, yet here we are. Attacks are not nice. Being asked to stop attacking isn't not-nice.

Every time you say girls are ruining the program for boys, you're reducing our chances of growing membership and creating a culture of growth. You're spinning that wheel of cause and effect every time you say that here. So please stop. Let's move forward.

Some folks will always be resistant to change. That's their opinion and at the present time those folks can continue to run single gender programs. World Scouting has been co-ed for many decades and it has worked out well. The BSA is a Johnny come lately on that score. There have been hundreds of girls now that have earned Eagle or been elected into the OA and who have held leadership positions. I think that is GREAT! The folks in favor of this are many and that is a good thing. 

5 hours ago, Eagle1970 said:

I'm so proud to have refused to allow my children to be exposed to the potential of the abuse I suffered, which is still occurring to this day.  I'm so proud to have found alternative adventures to lead them through.  And I am so glad that my grandchildren have safer means to socialize and learn, without having to face exposure to what is clearly an ugly and unpredictable part of scouting.

There is no program that serves kids that does not have the potential to attract predators. That is a sad fact. Also, children are more at risk from family members and close relatives/neighbors/friends than most other individuals. Sadly, Scouting now has the stigma of what mostly happened 30 plus years ago. The past several decades have seen Scouting create barriers to abuse that make it extremely difficult for predatory people to get exclusive access to kids. I know of no program that has come so far and done so much. Sadly no program is 100% safe and a predator without any 'history' could slip through but if the training/guidelines are followed there would be no opportunity to abuse. Again, no system is foolproof. I would encourage you to check out the BSA Youth Protection training and the parent supplements in Cub Scouting that must be reviewed with their kids annually including on line videos and all of it is available to any parent in or out of the program to use to give their kids the tools they need to protect themselves. It is extremely well done. Youth protection is a major emphasis of BSA and will only continue to improve. I'd be interested to know your opinion of their efforts and what improvements you might feel need to be made as a survivor. 

8 hours ago, Eagledad said:

Real feminists are fighting to gain that ground of equality and fairness back into society, but they fight an uphill battle with today's facade of progressivism. Scouting is the one place where they can get that ground back, but you want to take that away as well.

My mother was a den mother back in the day... scoutmaster, cubmaster and Webelo's leader positions and accompanying assistant positions were not available to her. Today women can and often do hold all of those roles and it is only fitting that girls can join into the program and enjoy the benefits of leadership, character and citizenship training/learning that takes place while they enjoy fun and adventure. No child ever joined to have their character developed... that just naturally happens (sort of sneaks up on them) while they are having fun being given the opportunities to learn, lead and teach. Pretty neat. 

4 hours ago, Eagle1970 said:

the only ones having a good day are the attorneys on salary and, of course, the insurance companies.  

Not too sure about the insurance companies... if the chartered partners are put at risk they were covered by the blanket liability from the mid 70's. That would mean more exposure to the insurance companies and for those incidents prior to that the CO's would probably have to depend on whatever coverages they had then and also drain down their own resources... a sorry mess all around. 

4 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

In short... financial disaster for the BSA.  Some claimants may see more money but I expect the vast majority would see less and it would drag out.  Hopefully it doesn't come to this.

I'm no legal eagle but I suspect that the BSA National would retain the funds collected by councils to pay those that accepted the present deal. Local councils would have to fight their own battles in court or settle which would probably mean selling off more camps and other properties and drawing down endowment funds. Donors would, as you said, flee as they would not want charitable dollars to go to lawyers and claimants. The additional bad press, loss of future funding and loss of assets would probably result in at best, more council mergers, fewer council staff to provide support services and a further drop in units and membership. Ultimately it could mean the demise of the BSA. 

35 minutes ago, BadChannel70 said:

23A741 LUJAN CLAIMANTS and DUMAS & VAUGHN CLAIMANTS, Applicants, v. BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA, et al., Respondents. | PDF | Boy Scouts Of America | Fourteenth Amendment To The United States Constitution (scribd.com)

I expect that cases exist where a third party (ie; chartered partners) may have exposure. Because of the nature of the BSA and its dependence upon chartered partners to approve and recruit leaders and to use the program as their own to better serve youth (the idea being that the chartered partner would assign persons of good character) putting the burden on the national organization and its insurance coverages would reassure those organizations that they could continue to charter/partner with the BSA. Imagine if a wholesale exit of churches and service clubs were to happen what would happen to the program. Additionally, this could/would mean more money to law firms and attorneys who already are the biggest beneficiaries of this whole thing. 1 billion of the 2.4 million going to 'legal expenses' already. 

14 minutes ago, Eagle1970 said:

https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/boy-scouts-victims-cant-change-quick-pay-decision-judge-rules-2024-02-06/

Sounds like they didn't receive very good legal advice. Perhaps they need to bring a class action claim against their lawyers who will be receiving about 1 billion of the 2.46 billion settlement. Of course lawyers seldom eat their own. 

2 hours ago, Eagledad said:

your program is rare. Typically only one or two packs and troops in a district are that successful.

This is where training comes into play. If you lay out how to do a quality program so they already have a track to run on then it is more likely to happen. Train the unit commissioners to sit in on the pack committee meeting and train them. Perhaps bring a member of the cub leader training committee to assist. I complemented the leadership of one pack I worked with on their program and membership growth and they responded with, we just did what you told us to do! Without direction their program might never have grown. The CM and his wife (mostly the wife) ran two council pow wows a year or two later and they were great. Share the vision, show the way! 

4 hours ago, DannyG said:

Most of them didn't make it to crossover. The program ultimately isn't for them.

Frankly, when I was CC for a pack, we created a program that met the needs/wants/expectations of the kids and parents and virtually had ZERO dropout (except for those that moved away). We grew from a half dozen families to well over 50 and had multiple Webelos Dens that crossed over with their leaders to rebuild the troop. Dens had their own field trips appropriate for the age/ability of the kids and the pack ran a full 12 month program. If a kid and family come to the signup night, the program is for them if you meet their needs/expectations. 

1 hour ago, Eagledad said:

This has nothing to do with the intrinsic value of either gender. It's about providing a program that gives each the best opportunity for growth. We could just call the genders A & B, so the biases don't cloud the discussion.

Barry

15 hours ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

Do you have anything at all supporting this theory? 

OK FOLKS... THE GENDER ISSUE IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT TOPIC... THE TOPIC HERE IS 'DO WE HAVE A CULTURE OF GROWTH!... CAN WE RETURN TO THE TOPIC???

10 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

Yes. Each gender grows and matures differently and mixing the genders dilutes the strengths of the program for developing character and integrity.

That continues throughout life as any married man will attest... LOL, some boys may mature faster than some girls, some girls faster than other girls... however, they will all have to live in a world filled with both genders and multiple levels of 'maturity'. We do know that for certain ages that boys prefer to hand with other boys and the same with girls but that is no reason to keep them apart in the program. Learning to appreciate each other through scouting makes a lot of sense to me. Many girls and parents are attracted to the BSA program for multiple reasons and they are valid reasons. The girls deserve to have a quality program built around character and citizenship and there is none better than BSA. IMHO

6 hours ago, Eagledad said:

For the best development of character and integrity, some folks would rather use the environment of single gender units, at least up to puberty. 

Kids attend school based on age, not on maturity which varies individual to individual with no emphasis on age. These days we are told that the higher reasoning functions of the brain are not fully developed until the mid 30's. Exploring has been co-ed for over half a century and Venturing since its inception. Most other countries have a blended program. Personally, I feel that co-ed scouting offers far more benefits than issues. IMHO

4 minutes ago, qwazse said:

that men and boys developed, then preserved, a program that was fun, character-building, and largely egalitarian to the point that a percentage of American girls preferred it to programs with “girl” in the name.

A great decision and parents of girls in the program are much more likely to step up and take leadership positions which has been on the decline for decades. We need both. About the only decision made in the past 5 decades that I 100% agree with. 

3 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

And we are missing a great opportunity to be THE organization that puts outdoor stewardship as a core value

I would suggest that every new scout be introduced to the Distinguished Conservation Award. If incorporated early it can join the trail to Eagle and a Scout can have two very prestigious awards. In fact the Distinguished Conservation award makes the Eagle look commonplace. Just a thought. 

3 hours ago, Jameson76 said:

With the MBO focus now no one EVER goes and talks with successful units. 

I agree with a lot of what you posted. Several big reasons for membership loss... In the 70's some folks shied away because they thought we were too militaristic, then there was a proliferation of other youth sports and activities. Volunteerism started to dwindle, single parent families exploded and mothers were no longer 'stay at home' to become den leaders for cubs. Tigers were added and Webelos became a 2 year (really 1.5) program and the added time in Cubs caused a drop in retention and crossover recently exacerbated now by Lions. The program drifted more into urban emphasis as Green Bar Bills' handbooks were replaced by book with more advancement and program geared to city life. As we exited the 90's and entered the 2000's a major confrontation came with the gay (now LGBTQ+) segment of the population which lobbied donors and funders including United Ways to cut funding and painted the BSA as homophobic, bigots and hate mongers. (not politically correct to say but true) and just recently on top of Covid impacted program delivery we had years of negative advertising in local papers, tv and social media on the lawsuit and resulting bankruptcy. There are a few other things I could toss in but suffice it to say that Nationals reactions and decisions were generally counter productive and that is being generous.  Personally, I doubt that the BSA will ever 'recover'. We may do a bit better than just hang on but the glory days of Scouting will only exist in a few pockets of program where council and district leadership, professional and volunteer, act together to secure in their districts/council what should be possible nationally. 

3 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Campfire was the official female counterpart to BSA

Been Campfire boys and girls for a long time and yes, it was the original 'sister program' to the BSA...

2 hours ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

If the two organizations did merge in the future,

Trust me, even after hell freezes over the BSA and GSA will not merge. There are just too many differences from program structure to philosophical and frankly some 'resentment' built up over the years. It would make sense for a merger but just won't ever happen.