dennis99ss

did not mean to imply that the medical exam was faulty, etc. Just indicating that summer camp is as stressful on the adults as the boys, and with the extreme conditions we had at btsr, with the altitude, heat, and walking, this could happen to anyone. just that the camp itself is open to causing changes in one's condition, and proper medicals and adherence to them is a good thing and should be encouraged. Again, no implication intended with regards this man or camp.

http://www.kiiitv.com/story/15063295/beloved-father-boy-scout-leader-passes-away Some of our group saw this and the life flight helicopter on the way back across texas. if any good comes out of this, maybe it can be used to encourage the medical checks, and camps to adhere to them, and, second, at least he was able to spend his last week with his boy.

Tks ntrog8r I will look into it. Sounds promising and what we may be looking for as an option. Distance is a concern for the gear but the troop has access to a couple of aircraft and a bus if the distance is to far. You should look at btsr. Given your experience at this camp and being in Colorado you may enjoy the western style camp.

We are also doing philmont. The group going to philmont is also expected to attend camp. btsr is buffalo trails scout ranch in west Texas. Thanks for the informative responses. I have ignored the condescending ones.

I want them in the same location. They can go camp w the high adv guys just in the same camp.

I am starting the process of searching for options for 2012, as just came back from BTSR yesterday. Great camp. Needs some tweaking, but overall well worth the miles to get there and the heat while there. But, I am looking for maybe something a little cooler for next year. My requirements are that the camp has 1.Trail to Eagle or trail to first class programs. 2. there are ample merit badge opportunities 3. adequate dining hall and latrine/shower facilities 4. high adventure programs for the older scouts, in a "residental type" program i.e.--the older guys

Just to be clear, I dont know how to edit. I am not saying it is a cult, but, i am saying that you can certainly see why the issue is so sensitive. I again, certainly understand what old ox is saying, and don't read anything into it.

"They need to cut the apron strings. They need to give their child breathing room and the chance to live their own lives. Boy Scouts (and by extension the OA) is NOT a parent-child program. This is what several of us are saying. Stop and think first BEFORE demanding to be at that ceremony. We can't prevent you from being there. But please re-consider." two comments. BSA brings some of this on themselves, i.e. multimillion dollar judgments for inappropriate activities of leaders and "secret" files. second, the OA does still bar attendance. I know from personal experience. And

"Seattle - Try looking at it this way: do we discourage parents from involving themselves in their sons' patrol functions? Do we discourage parents from permitting their scouts to miss meetings and camping trips? Do we discourage scouts from tenting with their parents?" Totally different set of facts and circumstances. There is never a time, or at least there should never be a time, when you would encourage a parent not to be present during any of the above events. Encourage them to allow the boys to learn and do it on their own, sure. But, encourage a parent not to show up and be arou

There is no provision in the rules that allow for a scout leader to explain and attempt to discourage attendance at any ceremony, event, etc. You are reading this into the rule that it is allowed. The rule does not say parents can attend as a last resort. It says they can attend. It doesn't say they can attend if they insist on doing so. It says thay can attend. Meet parents, explain where they can sit, and then shut up and do your thing. Doing anything else to discourage attendance is actually acting contrary to the rule. For example, you see a sign that says do not go down th

From the current guide to safe scouting No secret organizations. The Boy Scouts of America does not recognize any secret organizations as part of its program. All aspects of the Scouting program are open to observation by parents and leaders. That just about sums it up. So, when my wife shows up for the ordeal ceremony, and is told to wait in the dining hall because the event is a mystery, the people broke their own rules. Looking at what E92 and others write, I can see there are numerous people who have decided that they know better than national with regards rules.

Op talked of an ugly experience in turning A PARENT AWAY. It is still happening, and the ugly experiences are caused not by OA, but by members who choose not to follow the rules, which in turn implicates the OA, which leads to the "cult" "mason" etc. references.

frankly, some of you are so out of it that it is no wonder that the OA has problems determining what is right and wrong. If a parent wants to attend, the parent attends. PERIOD. It is not up for discussion. It should not be discouraged. The secrecy can be explained, and the parent can be requested to keep it a secret. But, the parent should not be encouraged, or placed in a position where they are made to feel unwelcome. Most everybody here says no secret society, but, you talk contrary to that statement. I don't care what you think the rule should be. The rule say

the lawyer with the most paper wins. really though, I honestly believe that juries see what is right and wrong. Do they get swayed by presentation, yes, but, presentation only goes so far. There must be some backup for it. The Plaintiff's job is to inject emotion into the case. The defendant's job is to cut through the emotion, slow the process down a bit, and attempt to piece by piece convince the jury that the emotion is unfounded on the specific facts. Depending on how good or bad the facts are, determines which way the jury goes. I also honestly believe that trials take

I love it. almost as bad as did you know there was a problem? yes. Did you know that the problem would effect the plaintiff? yes. did you tell the plaintiff to warn them? no. should you have? yes. If you did, would this have occurred? no. Sit down, grab a drink of water, and pass the witness while the jury sits their shaking their head at the dummy on the stand

Eagle 007, bwahahahaha As volunteers, we agree to follow the rules of bsa. this gives us some protection and should bring us under bsa insurance policies, but that does not mean bsa would be the exclusive party to look towards if something goes wrong. The following of bsa policies would simply be a defense against the personal liability. But, if we step outside of bsa policy, the question would become whether the stepping out was the cause of the incident. While there are immunities, they are not all encompassing, and can be broken. It all depends on the facts. I have gotten arou

Bummer. 7 years of school and 20 years of practice down the drain. But I am not getting into a argument here. Lets just say we have a different view of the law and what standards would be applied. Liability out there, yes. But that's why you have an umbrella policy. Being knowledgeable about your potential liabilities is a good thing. It allows you to adequately plan and prepare.

beavah--had not thought about local guys. good idea. scoutfish - the husband is always wrong--at least in my household i am always wrong. but, re: good samaritan laws, we are really not in a position where they apply. We are not good samaritans in the whole sense. we have taken on a duty, and, if we act in a way that causes harm, i believe negligence could be there given the right facts. Good samaritan is really designed for passers by. we do not fall into that catagory. i agree that 1 on 1 is dangerous, both for bsa and the leader personally. liability exists whenever we

This issue is something that came up on a webelos campout this weekend. I had three adults, and my son was the ill one, so I did not run into a ypt or 2 deep issue in leaving the campout to run him home, but it did raise an issue that I have been thinking about since. So, I have come up with a scenario, that I can see coming up. A camp outing with the minimum 2 deep leadership, but, just 2 adults present. One scout becomes ill and needs to leave the camp site, either to go to a doctor or to go home, and the adult leadership is not the ill scouts parent. so, do you leave one ad

Thanks for all the messages. BS-87-sorry the description was a bit vague in the op. That is not an issue I am aware of, thankfully. But, to all, thank you for the reply. We had a great outing. Scout did great. Probably his best campout he has had. Others helped him, and he helped others. I could over analyze why he did so good w/o dad, but that may be some of it. We opted the volunteer route. Our den chief stayed by himself, and we only had 4 boys this trip, with 3 adults the first night and two the second. The 4 paired up, 2 and 2, (which turned into a tent of 3) but, when

I agree with seattle. Safety is first. It is my number one concern at all times. I also see Seattle point that dad should be there. This time he cannot and I am trying to make sure the scout attends as this is his last web campout but point taken. With regards the other scouts if I can say so I have a great bunch and I have seen nothing from the others that suggests they will leave because of this scout. I have one that likely will not cross to my troop but I think it is parent driven and where they live as opposed to scout issues. Scoutfish I agree. I want the peer to work but.

i think it is more of an outside the tent concern. and, there is a little history,whereas when he was a younger scout there were some physical incidents that occurred. While I think they were over the line, I have seen a change in him in the last several years. He has gotten better, but he does roughhouse more than the others, and, I believe it is not with malice. It is simply the boy acts without thought sometimes. he likes swinging sticks, and has some difficulty not picking them up again. he has used a stick on a tent which was not a good scene. But, he does understand "put it down"

I am putting my webelos leader hat on here and taking my asm hat off for the moment. I know how i would handle this as asm, but webelos i am not to sure. we are having our last webelos patrol campout before crossing over, and have an even number of scouts going. we have one scout that is "active". He really is a good kid, but his past actions have caused the other scouts to not want to share a tent with him. It is not language, inappropriate comments etc. but is his active nature and sometimes short attention span that cause the other boys to run for cover and grab anyone else for

I have looked at some of the other threads on this topic, but would like to get some thought on a couple of issues does anybody enforce structure on the plc? by this i mean requiring that the plc follow a formal set of rules, i.e. roberts rules. I see that the plc is very inefficient, and becomes clickish to some extent. While attempting to keep the boy lead idea, what are your ideas on instituting rules for the plc to run by. I am sure that some will say that turns it into adult lead, but, if the rules would be instituted, wouldn't that be the means of making the plc more efficient a

thank you for the responses. I have gathered that it is not a mandate one way or the other.