DeanRx

Acco... nowhere in my post did I state that backhanding a child was OK. There is a huge difference in corporal punishment and abusing a child.

The use of corporal punishment is to cause compliance through a temporary, but non-harmful means of negative reinforcement. Its no different that a cop using pressure points to direct a detainee into a cell or a police car.

If I tell my 5 year old not to run into the street multiple times and he doesn't bother to listen, he still does it after loss of privledges, or is difiant and goes ahead and does it again (as in a power struggle) - you bet he's gonna feel it in the seat of his pants or by a pinch on the arm, etc.

It gets the point across. It puts emphasis on WHY the direction of the parent needs to be heeded. The fact that is physically uncomfortable is the same reason your body hurts when you put your hand on a hot stove.... Its a physiological response in the body that says, "Hey - don't do that anymore, because when you do, you get hurt."

You don't want to spank your kids - fine. But please respect my right to do so. It does NOT take a damn village, it takes a parent willing to use multiple methods to impart good behavoir and discipline in their child of a level and type that the child is able to understand.

Do you spank a 2 year old? no, probably not. They don't have the mental capacity to understand the cause and effect of the punishment. Do you spank a 4 to 7 year old? yes, only if you have to when other methods fail. They KNOW right from wrong and can equate the unpleasurable sensation with their actions. Jr High aged? I haven't used it yet. I have made my 11 y/o get in the front lean and rest position and hold it until he appologized to his younger brother for something he was being beligerent about. Took him about 60 seconds to decide he didn't like the burning in his arms, before he made it right with his brother. Is that abusive? Maybe. It certainly isn't going to scar a kid for life.

As I said before. There is a HUGE difference between corporal punishment and abuse. I use these methods on my children very sparingly. I would be livid if any other adult in authority tried to use them on MY child, and I would never think of using such tactics with a youth that is not my own son.

Parenting is a delicate balance between carrot and stick. But sometimes because of repeat offense, time, circumstances, etc... the stick needs to be in the bag o' tricks. 99% of the time, the fact its just in the realm of possibilities is enough to command respect and adherance. If the child tries to call your bluff - then you have to be willing to follow through. Otherwise, you've failed as a parent.

Dean

Kinda seems the writings on the wall to me on this one. Obama gets a second term and 4 more states added the recognition of same sex marraige on Tuesday. Coupled with the fact that over 53% of Catholic / Christian identified voters backed Obama, does this mean this voting block favors Mr. O's leadership over their religious doctrine?

If so, is this a de faco mandate to BSA that they need to take a serious look at national membership policies? Seems the tide has made a permanent shift with regards to acceptance or at least tolerance of gay unions. Does this threaten to cause a greater decline in retention and membership if BSA does not change its stance?

What say the forums?

If I was not included in the conversation, I most likely would stay mum as not saying anything does not imply agreement with which you disagree.

However, if it was being directed at someone else out of hate or intimidation, or in mixed company, I would say something. Most likely, "hey, knock it off... you can think that way if you want, but others find it offensive." or one other I use from time to time, "Well, I had hoped our society had pretty much moved past issues like this, but sorry to hear that some folks still can't see past XXXX (race / religion / etc...)". Then leave it at that.

The point would be if you are going to say something, it is to let the other person know that it is not appreciated being shared with the public at large. No need to debate or belittle the person as you are in no way going to influence them to change their mind, and in some cases are likely to inflame the dialgoue and perhaps risk harm to yourself or others.

Dean

I don't really have anything against the beret as a fashion issue, per se... but I just don't like them from a functional standpoint.

Really, what does a beret do? It gets wet when it rains and soaks your head. It provides nothing in the way of sunblock for your forhead, ears, or neck. They freeze your ears in cold weather. Maybe approach him to thing about function before suggesting the change. They look cool when worn correctly, but they offer very little in way of function or head protection.

Dean

I'm in need of some help, I guess... but what kind you're unsure of, and you're not qualified to offer.

That's nice - "I know when you are outside my moral boundries". But you will offer no solution to what should be done to correct the infraction?

Really, we need to justify WHY corporal punishment is OK for a parent, but not a coach, teacher, or scoutmaster? Its called they are the parent, therefore they have more right and influence over the child. I can be held civilly and criminally liable from my minor's actions, so WHY do I have to justify to some stranger the methods in which I enforce control over said minor? You can't have it both ways.

Most reasonable folks know the difference between discipline and outright abuse.

Dean

Yeh AZMIke, one of the many reasons I don't work for PP, however, they have their reasons for their policies (not that I agree with them). In your "what if", most if not all reasonable folks would report IF the victim is willing to back up the story.

Sorry to rain on your parade, but if the victim is unwilling to report - most folks will help as much as they can and keep their mouth shut. In your "what if" - you could just as easily be sending the poor girl off to an early death at the hands of her pimp once he finds out he's been ratted out.

More than likely - this senerio never plays out as you've outlined. WHY take her to PP or any free clinic for an abortion when the pimp can simply BUY Plan B OTC in most states (assuming he's over 18, no Rx needed). He need not be female to purchase and he need not disclose WHO its for. I would think the guy would just keep a supply on hand to dole out to his "girls" as need be.

I understand some folk's issues with PP. They do some good and not so good things in the communities they serve. But riddle me this, without them and in your "what if" land... the free clinic wasn't there to give the gal an abortion, then what? She's forced to an underground clinic? forced to have the child into that type of living condition? Not sure the issue is as cut and dried as "PP should not be shielding this molester". I agree they should not. But WHAT is your solution? You rat this couple (term used very loosely) out and you'll never see them again, and word on the street will spread and you'll never see any other girls like her = you are no help to anybody.

Its a very fine line to walk and what you are "legally" required to do is very seldom black and white.

Dean

Overall great article and I'd agree with the sentiment, "Is anyone in Irving listening?"

A couple of thoughts...

1) He is incorrect in his assesment that he would not be allowed to be a leader or otherwise involved in BSA. He could be a leader, but is a don't ask don't tell kind of way. Aside from that, there is nothing that states a gay parent cannot be involved as a PARENT in scouting. Just not an openly gay LEADER! I don't agree with the policy, hoepfully it will change, but he could still be involved as a "dad".

2) WHY? Do so many people (both gay or straight) invoke the perversion files and BSA's handling (good or bad) of these incidents in the same breath as the national policy on gays? To me, they are two extremely different issues. Am I missing something?

Dean

So, along those same lines of thought...

I sell a PlanB tablet to an underage female in my practice (in CA, the age for reproductive medical consent is 13 - I don't agree, but I must follow the law).I am a healthcare provider, and thus, a mandatory abuse reporter.

Do you think I ASK about why this girl needs the PlanB? Hell No. If she volunteers the info, then I will make a report if it is warranted. However, there is NO legal requirement for me to INQUIRE if the need is due to forced sexual activity. I'm a healthcare provider, not a cop / DA - and I do NOT need extra nooses to stick my head through to increase my malpractice premiums, thank you very much.

A girl asks for the Rx, she's over age 13 (in CA - your state varries, but most are 15 or 16 y/o age requirements now... not adult age), I advise on sexual activity risks, options for birth control, refer to OB/Gyn if need-be, and give them literature about STD's and sexual abuse. Then I give them the Rx for what they need.

I wish I didn't have to, but that is the society we live in. 13 y/o DO need plan B from time to time, the reasons vary. If they want to TELL me about abuse, I will act - but I certainly do NOT go looking for it, unless there are other outward signs of trouble at the exam (i.e. girl comes in with black eye and bruised arm, not concerned about her injuries, but wants a planB Rx or a referal to OB for possible abortion).

I got enough on my plate to abide by the laws that govern my practice. I don't go looking for additional messes to poke my nose into. Call that passing the buck if you want, but its BS that I'm expected to be healer and police and social worker all in one! Unless someone tells me otherwise, THEIR reproductive health is THEIR business, not mine. I educate and give options / resources, then treat based on what the patient wants / needs. I do not judge and I certainly try not to impart my personal morals / values on their situation / decision. I sure as hell do not go on any abuse witch hunts that are not either readily apparant or reported to me. I think most healthcare providers do the same.

Dean

Yeah, as others have posted... you treat him the same unless you need to intervene because of a behavoir issue. He might over-react, might under-react to streesful situations. My only expirience was a youth that had WAY too much knowledge about how things worked (birds and bees wise), and for whatever reason was sharing his knowledge with fellow scouts - at about age 10. Come to find out after the fact, he had been abused - so had 1st hand knowledge of how things work. Mom didn't want to anyone to know, so she didn't bring it up. However, would have been a nice tidbit of info to have, as myself and fellow adult leader(s) would have likely handled the situation differently if we had the backstory info.

Makes me wonder about his likihood of being an abuser himself once he grows up. Most boys 11-14 y/o are in the talk and giggle about it stage, or eeeewww its gross stage. This kid was fascinated about ways and techniques. Not something you want as a topic of conversation on scout outings.

Not saying this youth will be the same, but a word to the wise to be on the lookout for inappropriate language / discussions. In my book, more likely than an over-sensitive or overly hostile kid. Kids like to talk about what they know, especially if they are percieved by other youth to have subject matter knowledge others do not. Unfortunately, for kids of abuse, they have knowledge about a subject that is both taboo and intriging, yet unknown to most of their peers. This puts them in a position to be the "subject matter expect" so to speak when these types of conversations come up. Lots of strange stuff gets talked about in a tent full of scouts - you need to be aware this may be an issue and have a plan on HOW to handle it before you are faced with it.

Other than that - I'd treat him like any other youth. Best of luck.

Dean

I think one way to avoid the over abundance of "bling" is to instill in the youth the fact that their badges should MEAN something and a rank on the left pocket means they have already earned the previous ranks, or they wouldn't be wearing their current rank.

The emphasis should be on SKILLS not on bling.

Then again, we need to model the correct attitude. I get sick of going to trainings and seeing adult leaders with more knots above the left pocket than the joint chiefs of staff have ribbons on their uniform! Then add the do-dad training beads, their silver beaver, antelope, wood-badge beads, etc... sheesh !!

far too many folks, adults and kids, seem to think its about the bling. It needs to be about the skills. If you have skills - you don't need bling to let others know you are a leader and an effective scout.

This is also why I favor Troop T-shirts on campouts over class-A. It drops the whole, "I outrank you" BS that goes on far too often in troops. The only people who outrank anyone else is the SLP, ASPL, PL, and APL... and that is limited to their role in leadership in the troop.

Dean

I'm not a big fan of el Presidento... but I'll give him props for a classy move. I'd agree with the comment that most folks are quick to make the distinction between scouts, their units, and national's policies that they may view as incorrect.

Good for you Mr. O.

Heck of a story for that youth to tell for the rest of his life.

Dean

Honestly the behavoir would be inappropriate even if they were married.

Ea.

I would tend to agree with you. However,

When the behavoir is in direct violation of BSA policy (i.e. coed sleeping in a tent and they are not married) - to NOT act is to ENDORSE the action.

When two adults in the unit have the majority of everyone else (other adults and scouts alike) concerned with thier behavoir instead of concentrating on program, then its an issue.

Finally, I don't give two bits for WHY they are acting the way they do. Its an interesting mental exercise, but I'm not involved in scouts to try and help THEM figure out why they do what they do. Not my fault if mommy and daddy didn't love them enough as a child, or they didn't have the same opportunities as a kid that our scouts are given. My job as a scouter is to provide good program to the youth we serve, so hopefully in one more generation - none of these youth will be carrying on in a scout unit as these two are today.

Dean

My favorite commentary from a friend of mine on FB...

I can't wait for the political ad season to be over so we can get back to decent commercials about erectile dysfunction, feminine hygeine products, and toliet paper.... I will feel so much better watching them instead.

Pretty much sums up my thoughts.

Dean

I have never looked at the numbers, but I would think it would be cost prohibitive.

If the issue is having enough passenger room / cargo space... you can RENT a couple econoline vans and get most of the troop and gear into two vehicles for the weekend at a fraction of the cost of maintaining a bus and keeping both vehicle and driver cert.ed and liscensed.

My Troop used to use the church van to haul kids and one parent with a big ol' dual wheeled pickup with wooden side racks to haul all the gear. A whole Troop of 15 kids, plus leaders could go for a weekend in 2 to 3 vehicles.

My 2 cents,

Dean

The sleeping issue, I thought, was only an issue known to the other adults on the campout. The adult patrol sets up camp far enough away from the other patrols for it to not be an issue.

However, mom of SPL spoke with me at the Troop meeting. Mentioned that her son and ASPL from campout were both discussing the sleeping arrangements - as both had noticed it at the campout. So, it IS a known issue to at least some of the older boys... I assume (maybe incorrectly) that if the older boys know about it - it either is a topic or will be a topic of discussion throughout the ranks very soon. Can't really keep these youth from talking about it as they all go to school together.

Dean

Ok, so putting this in Program, because I frankly don't know what other topic to post it in...

We have two adult leaders in our unit male and female (both single - well we think the one has a divorce pending / finalized, not sure but he his no longer with his wife)... that have begun a dating relationship. The beginning of said relationship resulted in both leaders (one was the SM at the time and the other ASM) being asked to take a leadership hiatus by the CO and COR, because the soon to be ex-SM's wife stormed into committee meeting with accusations of adultery (CO is a church). Upon return, they were both reinstated as ASM's.

They now attend unit functions as a couple, both in uniform. Scouts, fellow scouters, and many parents have grown VERY uncomfortable with their PDA (public displays of affection). This includes hugging, kissing, shoulder rubs, little games of "tickle" on the ribs... one leaning into the other, etc... It is not a full make-out session, but much more than a quick peck on the cheek type kiss. Several toungue-in-cheek type comments and sexual inuendos between them have been overheard by scouts and scouters.

While I could care less about their blossoming rommance, it puts the unit in an awkward position to have these two carrying on at unit functions and campouts, in plain view of the youth and fellow scouters. It went as far as last weekend, they shared a tent on a Troop overnighter and as far as anyone knows, they are NOT married. That is in direct violation of G2SS camping guidelines.

My two quesitons for the forum:

1) I know its in bad taste and should not be done, but do you know of ANY published guideline / rule that states a scouter should not engage in PDA while in uniform? Can you quote me the reference?

2) Myself and a few other adult leaders and concerned parents are trying to formulate the best way to approach the "couple" and the COR to lay out how uncomfortable / inappropriate all this is and WHY it needs to stop. How would you go about doing it? Would you seek their resignation from Troop leadership at this point? (we have enough ASM's to cover the leadership roles).

There is part of me that feels they have already betrayed the trust of the unit and lost the respect of scouts and scouters alike with the 1st intervention of the COR and CO, that they should just be thanked for their service and shown the door. On the other hand, if they could just knock it off with the PDA and be professional when in uniform, I don't have a problem with them staying on.

Neither have youth in the Troop as both their sons have Eagled and aged out of BSA, so its not like asking them to depart is going to drive a kid away from scouting. As a newly minted ASM, I'm really struggling with how to approach this issue.

Thanks in advance for your feedback.

TwoCub...

It is already a witch hunt !!!

That poor volunteer. Bet she wishes she would have taken a couple more seconds to take a 2nd leader with her to go looking for the lad.

The rules of the road nowadays is - don't EVER allow yourself to get into a position for someone to make a claim. Buddy system works for leaders too...

Dean

At the risk of feeding the trolls...

WasE61-

1) You have an extremely narrow view of BSA's policies. We are now REQUIRED to report to authorities ANY time there is suspected misconduct of a sexual nature - period. Its been that way for over 20 years now in BSA.

2) If you are that concerned about our "good old boys" network - then either pull your son from the program OR get involved in you kid's life and VOLUNTEER to attend an outing with him!! Also one of BSA's policies - any and all activities are open to ANY parent at ANY time.

3) If I am your boy's "only chance at survival" in a "critical situation" and you have doubts in my or other leader's abilities... then don't blindly sign off your trust to us. You are the parent - take some parental responsibility!!

4) The cases being discussed are from 20+ years ago and back. Many changes and improvements have been made BECAUSE of not in spite of BSA having these files. Go grind your ax with the dead men who were in charge two generations ago when these acts took place, not with the current crop of volunteer leaders who now subject themselves to being held suspect until proven otherwise all because of what some pervert did to a lad 30 years ago!

You act as if you have no choice in the matter. Sounds like this is an issue between you and your ex, I'm guessing? Well, man up and tell her you don't want the lad in the organization then.

Better take a hard look at whatever OTHER youth group you place your son into to replace his scouting activity, because I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that the other organization doesn't do HALF the youth protection that BSA does - to include keeping a file on known or suspected abusers that have been removed from the program !!

Dean

This is EXACTLY why a unit needs by-laws.

Our cub unit went to individual "cub bucks" accounts (against my objection) while I was the CM for the unit. I insisted that the unit by-laws be ammended to clearly state WHAT was to be done with "cub bucks" when a scout departs the unit.

Age out of cubs, cross over to Boy Scouts, or just up and quit or transfer to another unit... all "cub bucks" were reverted back to the general unit fund to be used by the unit as the unit sees fit. Period.

A scout had 30 days from transfer to another unit or cross-over to Boy Scouts, to redeem his scout bucks for scouting related gear. Uniforms, books, camping gear, etc... was all allowed, but he (or parents in this case) had to provide proof of purchase with a copy of the receipt to get reimbursed.

I know of one time when a cubbie used some of his left over "cub bucks" for a down payment to his new troop on troop summer camp. That is the closest we ever had to a "transfer" of funds from our unit to another.

had one set of parents in 3 years ask for a "cash out" when they were moving out of state. Sorry, nope - by-laws do not allow for it. Scout spent up about 80% of his funds in the month before moving on new gear... thats fine by me.

The point is: have the policy well defined BEFORE the issue comes up and apply the standard equally. My own son had a few bucks left in his account (about $35) when we graduated into Boy Scouts. We used $8 to buy his handbook and left the rest to the pack.

My 2 cents...

Dean

The 3 things that make this bad for BSA:

1) The public perception that BSA was / is loose with their youth protection. Not being defended very well in the media by BSA national right now. The appology from the nations SE was a start, but they could have highlighted CHANGES to the YPG program that has made things better in the past 20 years... maybe even point out that this was 20-40 years ago and that in many of the cases, the PARENTS did not want to press charges. Even by today's standards and IF you are in a mandatory report state, how many leaders are going to go against a PARENT's decision?

2) BSA knew this was coming and let the files be released on the planfit's lawyer's terms instead of BSA's terms. Why not self desclose? Show the GOOD that had been done in keeping these adults away from leader positions? Pre-empt the bad spin with some good spin about HOW BSA has progressed and is a youth organization LEADER in screening, training, and acting on suspected / reported abuses!

3) No other DATA given !! So, the pervert files are released. WHY? not give data on HOW MANY great volunteers you have nationally? Show what little percent of offenders the total population block was and compare / contrast against OTHER youth organizations or society as a whole? Use METRICS to make your case. Use METRICS to tear down the misconception that BSA is full of would be molesters...

Did BSA national do any of this? Nope. They issued a statement saying, "we're sorry this happened." That needed to be done. That's a great start. But, there is much more that could (and should) be done to mitigate the negative perception scouting is going to get from this release.

Will this cause a drop in membership? Maybe. Will it force changes to addmitance policies? Maybe - I hear on these boards some Methodist churches are questioning their involvement as CO's because of this AND because of other membership standards. Only time will tell...

I don't think the BSA is getting off lightly.

1) The BSA has already paid out what, 15.8 million in one of the cases... the release of the files will no doubt lead to follow on lawsuits and the precedent has been set. Many lawyers will make their living off the BSA in the years to come. Much like Mesothelioma suits, once the data pool is there and the first verdict sets the tone, the wolves will feed.

2) While the BSA fought long and hard to not allow the release of the files (you can debate the wisdom in that ad nauseum in another thread) - they at LEAST had files and EVERY adult in the files was kicked OUT and not allowed to re-offend. A couple might have slipped back in by moving councils, etc.. but for the most part the files did a good job of keeping pervs out once they were ID'd. Now, the BSA could have done more to turn these guys in to the police, but it was a different time and I don't think we can sit in judgement with today's standards on what took place 10, 20, or 30 years ago... different times / different societal standards.

The RC and Penn State - BOTH have been documented to KNOW they had an abuser in their ranks and not only did they not alert authorities, BUT they KEPT the person(s) around and allowed them to molest more youth!!! In the case of the RC - there are documented cases where priests KNOWN to have molested were moved to a new diocese and placed in a position of a youth pastor or in charge of a Catholic School !! Big difference between kicking someone out and trying to keep them out, but not calling the cops AND just moving the person around and letting them keep interacting with youth.

3) The majority of the reports PEAK in the late 1980's and then supposedly decrease. This occurs at the same time YPG, 2-deep, no one-on-one and background checks were instituted. BSA screwed up by not calling the cops, BUT as an organization they did LEARN and change their policies based on the data they had collected (which I believe would be a secondary reason to keep the files, after keeping offenders out of the leadership ranks).

4) BSA has agreed and welcomed a congressional audit to asses whether or not the improved policies have actually curtailed abuse in the 1990-2000's.... They AGREE with the plaintifs lawyers that this is a good thing to do.

In my book, BSA could (and probably should) have done better with reporting to the police. However, they at LEAST attempted to do the right thing and thier policies progressed as their data points showed that they needed to do something. That's more than can be said for BOTH the RC and Penn State.

Finally, the BSA (at least not to my knowledge) liquidated their funds and hurriedly built Capital Improvements (as the RC did) when a big $$ lawsuit was being handed down in order to show the organization to be cash poor, thus limiting awards to the abused. RC did that all over the country, including the parrish down the street from me here in San Diego. Getting sued, big payout looming, hurry and build a new building b/c the court stated that PROPERTY could not be taken, only liquid assets in the awarded $$ - thus avoid PAYING the full amount to the plantiff when they won the suit!!

Overall - given the terrible circumstances - BSA did the best they thought possible at the time and are standing up and taking responsibility at this point. RC and Penn State are still ducking responsibility.

Dean

Nice to see someone from across the pond inject a little perspective into the situation...

So what. WHY is he telling you? Is he doing it to test the system... then explain what is likely to happen if he does, he will more than likely eventually bump into someone (unit, district, council, national) that will show him the door because of it. This may or may not happen before he earns Eagle - assuming he is trying to do so. Does he want to assume the risk?

Is he asking for help to com out to his parents? Well, then either offer that help or refer the lad to someone better prepared for that task.

Is he letting you know him and Jimmy from his patrol are dating? Well, thats a whole new can of worms then, isn't it?

Its kind of like me stating, "I'm married and I kissed a girl." OK, so what? Am I cheating on my wife, or did I give my neice a peck on the cheek when I dropped her off at my sister's house?

Life is about CONTEXT, but too many adults are either too stupid or too stubborn to figure this out. Its like a republican or democrat latching onto something a candidate says, one or two sentences and slamming them over and over about how right or wrong the statement is WITHOUT any context as to WHAT the question was, WHO asked it, and WHY the candidate was answering it in the fashion they did. Sometimes we adults really do NOT deserve to be in charge of youth.

If you can't come up with an even keel, non-judgemental answer to this one, regardless of your personal belief system, then you REALLY need re-evaluate WHY you are leading youth in the first place!

Dean

My son is on the receiving end of some of this type of "leadership" right now as a junior boy in his troop. It sucks and it KILLS younger scout's interest.

Some SM's (including my son's) approach has been to discuss with the Sr. leaders regarding living the law and oath, but also to inform them that failure to lead also means they will not receive leadership credit for that term! You cannot just "mark time" in the POR and expect it to be signed off.

I assume, maybe incorrectly, that most of these boys NEED the POR as part of their advancement? If not, then hard to use it as an incentive.

If they are not willing to lead - then hold a new election. Not next term, but NOW! I'd rather see a motivated rookie that makes mistakes than some 15-18 year old that is only doing the POR because they "have to" to complete their advancement.

This to me is one of BSA's shortcomings. I haven't really figured out HOW to remedy it, but it seems there is a LOT of "leadership" that is done to complete a POR for rank, then once the box is checked, said scout is more than happy to let the leadership slide. This servant leadership idea is a tough nut to crack. Many adults have the same attitude... in it until MY son gets what he needs out of the program, then I'm outta here. Lets do lots of fundraising, unless MY son isn't going to summer camp this year, then we don't need that, etc....

There also seems to be much confusion amongst youth leaders about the difference in being the boss and just being bossy. Pulling rank and getting to tell others what to do is NOT being a leader, regardless of what a majority of the youth (and some of the adults) seem to think.

I'd say in general, the boys are only mimicking what they observe in real life. That's a sad indictment of adult society as a whole.

The real trouble is - once you have this type of issue in your troop, its hard to kill. My son has already been overheard to state, "Once I make 1st class - then I can choose shotgun (riding in the car), and go to the front of the line at the COH potlucks...." This is what he sees, thus this is what he EXPECTS once he has achieved a certain rank in the unit. RHIP - rank has its privlesges, as the saying goes in the military.

Tampa Tutle writes, "I think we will see some guys dismissed unjustly. There will always be some injustice in that kind of system--On what side of the scale should we err--the Scouter or the Scout?"

Yup, that pretty much sums up the attitude. Tis better to tarnish the grown man and loose a leader than to perhaps second guess a child because what might be happenning is soooo terrible, one must defame the adult to protect the child. I don't really disagree with that stance, up until the point its you or your close friend / relative that is being accused. Then the perception changes pretty dang quick.

After all, a child would never make something up to get back at or get out of doing something an adult told them to do. Especially a culture savy pre-teen or teen who knows the best way to get an adult in trouble is to make a claim of ANY type of abuse? I'm not saying blame the victim, but how else do "false positives" occur? Is there any money tobe made in reporting false positives? Becuase there sure as hell is a LOT of money to be made out of reporting and accusing.

When the policy is, "remove and no youth contact until its proven otherwise" instead of a legitimate investigation to assess what, if anything, is actually amiss, then the organization while appearing to have a hard line stance, is really only perpetuating a "guilt until proven innocent" approach.

I'm not convinced this keeps scouts any safer and certainly makes scouting a much more dangerous place for scouters to navigate.

Face it folks - we are ALL just one phone call away from being asked to no longer be a leader in this organization. We need to be VERY aware of that fact.

It might be good for youth protection, but it does very little to promote trust and confidence in adults by todays youth.

Dean