New Rank Requirements

[SMEagle819]

Message I received from my council this morning:

The National Youth Protection Committee recommended additions to Boy Scout rank requirements that were approved and will become effective January 1, 2008. These changes will help us advance the importance of Youth Protection training beyond the initial Boy Scout joining requirements, and keep youth informed and actively engaged in understanding the key elements of personal safety and protection.

Tenderfoot Rank

Revised requirement 9: Explain the importance of the buddy system as it relates to your personal safety on outings and in your neighborhood. Describe what a bully is and how you should respond to one.

Second Class Rank

New requirement 8b: Explain the three Rs of personal safety and protection.

First Class Rank

New requirement 12: Describe the three things you should avoid doing related to use of the Internet. Describe a cyberbully and how you should respond to one.

 

The changes will be represented in the 2008 Boy Scout Requirements book and the revised ninth printing of the 11th edition of the Boy Scout Handbook.

I actaully like these, especially the new Second Class requirement. However, I didn't realize that "bullies" were so rampant nowadays. I have heard of the "Cyberbully" before, but have not had any of the scouts tell me they have been accosted by one.

Any other thoughts out there on these?

 

[Gold Winger]

For some reason "bullying" has become a big issue. Our local Blue Cross/Blue Shield company is waging an anti-bully campaign. Apparently, now if someone ignores you that is bullying.

 

Cyberbully? If someone's mean to you complain to the moderator? Leave the chat room?

 

It's all part of the "let the government take care of you" campaign. It used to be that the way to deal with a bully was to stand up to him and show that you aren't afraid. Not any more. Now it's cry and run for help.

[GernBlansten]

Columbine changed everything.

[Gold Winger]

Nah, it was going on long before "Columbine."

 

I think that the government's attempts at pacification may have helped promote incidents like that at Columbine High School. Anger and resentment build and instead of becoming a tussle on the playground, it becomes a plan for a massacre. Express anger, frustration or even dislike for another person and you're headed to the school shrink and that was going on long before Columbine.

[John-in-KC]

???

 

When I went through some Hell in my life, a very good friend, Christian sister and an Annapolis grad, embedded a piece of wisdom in my heart:

 

"You have a finite amount of emotional energy. Use it with wisdom. Don't burn energy on something that is beyond your ability to operate."

 

We're unit, district, and in some cases council level volunteers. A few of us, certainly not I, have influence in the rarified air of regional, and there are folks here who know the National personsae.

 

We cannot change this decision. We need to figure out, as Scouters, how we're going to implement it.

 

Has anyone seen resources to place against any of these requirements yet?

 

PS: I know a lady who counsels Computers MB. She has included a module on internet safety for several years now. She'll be glad for 1C 12.

[John-in-KC]

Post Scriptum:

 

They are already added into the BSA Requirements online!

[Gold Winger]

"We cannot change this decision."

 

We actually can't change anything in Scouting. All we do is blunder along while those on Olympus do what they want.

[Eamonn]

While I don't follow what is happening in UK Scouting, I did notice some time back that a Scout Group who has a very dear and close friend as the Group Scout Leader, had added a Anti-Bullying statement to the Scout Groups Web Site.

Being as my friend is a retired Metropolitan Policeman, I thought it was just something that was him at work, however looking at the UK Scouts.org site, I see this is something that they have been doing for a few years.

http://www.scouts.org.uk/bullying/AntiBullyingGuide.pdf

 

Does seem to cover a lot of the information that we might need .

Eamonn.

[John-in-KC]

E,

 

Wonderful resource. THANK YOU.

[AvidSM]

I believe most of these new requirements are covered by the new DVD version of the BSA's video "A Time to Tell". The DVD is broken into five sections: Abuse by a Relative, Abuse by a Youth Leader, Abuse by a Youth, Internet Safety and Bullying by Peers.

 

If you show this video to the scouts and use the "A Time to Tell Troop Meeting Guide" they should be able to explain and describe the information per the new requirments.

 

Be advised that this video and related discussions take a while and it's a bit much to show all five sections in one sitting. My boys also mentioned that they all recieve bullying awareness instruction while at school and the Bullying by Peers section of the video is just a repeat of that.

[evmori]

While all this is important, I don't see how it relates advancement? All these new requirements are very subjective & more of a check-off than an actual requirement.

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[eolesen]

I agree, Ed. It doesn't relate to advancement one bit. It's just CYA.

 

This may all be included in "A Time To Tell" but that is still opt-in training for the boys, and there are still parents who don't want their kids to attend.

 

By making it a requirement, BSA covers its arse.

[acco40]

What? We now have new ranks?

 

:-)

[ASM915]

This afternoon while on the way to work, there was a discussion on NPR's "TALK OF THE NATION". The person being interviewed had written a book about child predators.

 

How did the interview relate to this thread?

 

The person being interviewed stated that it didn't matter how much was spent on background checks, that the background checks would only reveal the predators that had been caught, not the 1000's to 10,000's that were smart enough to fly under the radar. She stated that the monies being spent on the background checks would be better spent on educating the kids and parents on what to look for.

 

Sounds like the new advancement requirements fall right in line with this concept. Maybe National realized that by having "A TIME TO TELL" as just an optional training for the troops, that the word was not getting out there, because many SM's thought the training was time ill spent, and could better be utilized on something more fun.

 

Now we have no choice. It's part of the advancement. Is this really such a setback? Is this really such a bad idea? Are we complaining because we are now being dictated to, because we didn't take the earlier hints and suggestions? Are there some people out there that are upset, because now they have to present this material to their Scouts, and possible opening up some uncomfortable dialogues and possibly bring unpleasant/improper situations to our attention, forcing us to deal with them? Or uncovering some bad Scouters in the process?

 

As for the supposed parents that don't want their Scout exposed to this training:

1) They can't shelter them forever, or

2) Are they scared that something at home might be uncovered if the Scout gets the training and see the video?

 

Watch out for the ones who scream the loudest against such training and want to bury their heads in the sand. They may be trying to cover up something in their past that they don't wish to remember, or something in the now and present they don't want the rest of us to know about.

 

I'm not trying to be a conspiracy nut, just a realist.

[Gold Winger]

I just don't think that it belongs as part of advancement. Make it mandatory that every troop go over it every year but get it out of advancement.

 

Better yet, leave the burden on the parents. When I was about six, my mother sat me down and had a talk about strange adults and how they might want me to do strange things and if ran across anyone like that, I was to get out of there and tell her. I think that she would have beat the guy to death with a rolling pin. The point is, my mother took charge and her advice stuck with me until this day.