What would you have done?

[msnowman]

I am a registered committee member for Nephew's Troop. As such I have been asked to sit on BORs for different boys and generally enjoy doing so. However, for the second time in a year I have politely declined to sit on a BOR for one specific Scout. At both refusals the CC was, shall we say, irked. I didn't hedge, hem and haw about it. I simply said "No, I'd rather not." When asked why I truthfully answered that I disliked the boy in question and didn't feel it would be appropriate for me to sit on his BOR.

 

I know, I'm supposed to like all the boys simply because they are Boy Scouts.....but the reality doesn't always work like that.

 

Am I the only one to decline to sit on a BOR for that (or any other) reason?

 

ETA - I would hope any adult who dislikes Nephew would decline to sit on a BOR for him as well. I'm not naive enough to think every adult he encounters finds him as funny and charming as I do.

 

YiS

Michelle(This message has been edited by msnowman)

[Beavah]

Yah, I think if we're honest with ourselves, there are always a few boys who just get under our skin, eh? I'm not talkin' about boys who aren't living the Scout Oath or Law, I'm talkin' about boys who other adult leaders enjoy and get along fine with, but they just get on our nerves (and often vice-versa!).

 

In such cases, declinin' to be on a BOR is a kindness. While yeh no doubt would have done your best to be honest and objective, chances are the boy's level of comfort and his responses would have been changed a bit by your presence.

 

Now, if the case is really that the boy is not living the Scout Oath and Law, and other leaders are seein' that too, then you might have been exactly the right person to sit on the board, because you'd be more likely to be blunt and honest, eh? And boys need that sometimes. So I think yeh at least need to give the CC a reason .

 

Beavah

 

 

 

[evmori]

I have declined to sit on Eagle boards because I knew a Scout well & didn't want anything to taint the board. When I was the advancement chair of our Troop, I never declined to sit on any BOR.

 

I think, msnowman, what you did was the correct thing to do.

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[scottteng]

If you opt out you have that right but is not liking someone personally imply that you lose the ability to review their rank advancement. I have had people working under me that I did not personally like for one reason or another but that did not affect my evaluation of their job performance. Part of the lesson youth need to learn is a willingness to work with people that you do not particularly like. Heck sometimes I don't even like my own kid and most of the time he doesn't like me. I think that you may be depriving the youth of the opportunity of overcoming your dislike with his accomplishments. I kind of like the old saw keep your friends close but keep your enemies closer, seems to me that the friction adds to the learning process.

[jr56]

If you felt that you couldn't be impartial, then you did the right thing.

[scoutingagain]

I tend to agree with the others, if your personal feeling towards a scout have the potential to effect your ability to objectively evaluate whether or not he had completed the requirements for rank advancement, you should recuse yourself as you did.

 

On the other hand, if the scout really does rub you the wrong way, and you feel you can objectively evaluate him, in spite of your personal feelings, and the scout knows how you feel, you may lose a learning opportunity by being able to demonstrate to the scout how an adult can still be objective and fair in their evaluation, regardless of how they personally feel about an individual.

 

However, you should recognize your refusal does not make the CCs job any easier, and now he has to find someone else. Maybe a small matter, maybe not. As advancement chair if I apporached a committee member about sitting on a BOR and they said, "Ah, not this time." without an explanation, I might display some frustration as well.

 

At least you have plenty of snow this year!

 

SA

[mk9750]

VERY interesting question!

 

I just set up and sat for an Eagle BoR. As Advancement Chair, I also feel I have a responsiblity to participate, regardless of my personal feelings for a Scout. However, there have been times, like this one, that I wish I could have taken the easy way out and declined. I truly don't believe this boy fulfilled either his "Active" requirment nor his "Position of Responsiblity" requirment. I knew the rest of the Board was not going to be persuaded that my position was correct, and I also knew that an appeal was likely, which would have been succesful. So even though I held my nose, I voted with the majority and there is one new, less than exemplary Eagle Scout among us today. I have vowed to mayself to never be in this position again. As a Scout demonstrates he isn't fulfilling his responsiblities, I will be much more up front with him so that he knows well in advance that there is a problem.

 

We have one other gentleman on our committee who seems to be asked to serve on Eagle BoRs for the guys in our Troop all the time. When I asked him in this case, he declined, saying he was likely to vote no. When I explained that if that was his position, he should serve so that a Scout who did not earn the rank would not pass. He still declined.

 

As far as having a preconceived bias before the Review, I am of the belief that most everyone has a bias TOWARD voting yes at Boards of Review, and we all still participate for those. Having a preconceived notion is not a bad thing - We develop them by observing the Scout in their activities in, and sometimes out of Scouting. Just because the prior opinion in negative doesn't mean it isn't valid.

 

Good luck to you!

 

Mark

[Spiney Norman]

Michelle, You did the right thing.

As Advancment Chair I have had this experience in our troop more than once. Usually, if someone declines to sit on a BOR I already know the reason why. I do not quibble but move on and ask someone else.

 

For any rank beyond First Class I choose the board a bit more carefully. I try to ask both sympathetic and not so sympathetic adults. Depending on the boy I will even seat the troop curmudgeon (is that an official position?) just to keep the scout honest.

 

That being said, we are very lucky to have so much adult participation that I can do this. A few years ago when I took over this position BOR's were far and few between. Since that time I have had adults express their disappointment at not being asked to sit on BOR's.

 

Ken

 

 

[msnowman]

Thank you all for offering your views. You all have certainly given me plenty to consider the next time this bridge is placed before me.

 

As Beavah says - this is one of those boys that other adults seem to like well enough, but he gets under my skin. Thus I don't believe I would have been able to be impartial. If it was just a matter of not believing he was living up to the expectations of being a Boy Scout I would have sat on the BOR simply to see those addressed.

 

Again - thank you to everybody who has ventured forth an opinion. I'm sure this subject will come up again. I will be pondering your words in the meantime.

 

YiS

Michelle

[packsaddle]

I've never had this problem but I think you did the right thing for exactly the reasons Beavah mentioned.

[scoutingagain]

Mark,

 

Please take this as positively as I can make it. I truely mean no disrespect here, but; "As a Scout demonstrates he isn't fulfilling his responsiblities, I will be much more up front with him so that he knows well in advance that there is a problem." Based on this sentence it seems to me it was not just the scout that had not fulfilled his responsibilities. I confess I am also guilty of the same for BORs for at lower ranks.

 

SA

 

[acco40]

I think you should have sat on his BOR. I'm a Scoutmaster, I don't pick and choose who I give SM conferences to. Part of the responsibility of a committee member is to sit on BORs. I don't believe you should participate only on BORs that you "enjoy doing so." I'm not interested personally, but the reason you dislike the Scout is germain to the problem. As such I agree with Beavah's response Now, if the case is really that the boy is not living the Scout Oath and Law, and other leaders are seein' that too, then you might have been exactly the right person to sit on the board, because you'd be more likely to be blunt and honest, eh? And boys need that sometimes. So I think yeh at least need to give the CC a reason..

 

 

[mk9750]

Scoutingagain,

 

Although I took your comment as constructive even without the effort to soften the blow, I appreciate your effort to be kind. Truly, no offense taken.

 

I mostly agree with what you are saying. In this case, I know we were very clear when discussing the expectations, and also with the training he received for the position in which he was supposed to serve. It was the Scout who did not make the effort that was expected and that he agreed to make.

 

However, I think we did a terrible job providing guidance along the way. At one point, we attempted to have this discussion with him, but it happened as his father was there waiting for him, and it turned quite ugly. Later, as it became obvious that improvement was not coming, we took the easy way out and avoided further confrontation. In the end, we did not do our job. We've not had this problem in the past - Every Scout who has sought a Position of Responsibility has at least made an effort. So when the first guy who didn't needed to be lead toward either improving or resigning, we didn't do things well.

 

There is enough breast beating required because of this instance to go around the block. The Scout didn't make an effort, the SM and I didn't do our job in guiding the scout, the SPL didn't ask for help when his ASPL wasn't showing up, and the Scout's dad inserted himself into a conversation in which he really didn't belong. And remember, I also took the chicken way out at his BoR.

 

But we'll know better from now on.

 

Thanks!

 

mk