Jump to content

Recommended Posts

This thread started out as trying to be helpful and has wound up becoming absurd lunacy.

This one situation is getting more attention than a Supreme Court case, its time for you people to let go and get back to your scouting units since NOTHING you decide here is going to have any bearing on what will happen whatsoever. The sad part is you only know one side of the story and you all are trying to come off as all knowing experts, especially the Beavah. Don't you all have something more important to do?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 666
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It appears that even if you are polite and respectful in articulating a different point of view and if you are unwilling to be cornered into accepting responsibility for something you did not do, and express any type confusion, you are considered to be uncooperative, argumentative and not an Eagle Scout. I guess only the adult leaders are free to expresses their feelings or thoughts and that the Eagle candidate must not have a mind of their own, they should just blindly agree to what ever is said to them , lest they be seen as uncooperative and argumentative. I find it very interesting that the only group who find my son argumentative and uncooperative are Scouters. Very strange indeed.


Just to update you in the area of demonstrates scout spirit in your everyday life...at the recent high school awards ceremony my son received 2 community based scholarships which in my opinion(but of course I am him mother)continue to support his demonstrating scout spirit in his everyday life(of the 5 senior boys in his troop who are working towards their eagle, my son was the only one to receive any awards from the community). The 1st award ..based on scholastic achievement and community involvement. The 2nd...awarded to a senior displaying involvement throughout the community, along with good scholastic achievement. Yet he is argumentative and uncooperative??? Strange how know one else views him in that light.

Link to post
Share on other sites

While the information about the awards ceremony was interesting, it doesn't show what your son has been doing or his relationship with his troop.


"I find it very interesting that the only group who find my son argumentative and uncooperative are Scouters. Very strange indeed."


What was the make-up of the group that your son appeared before? Obviously the meeting did not go the way that you expected it to.


"Will let you all know what is in the District letter when my son receives it."


Since this is the second time that it appears that your son has been turned down, there must be some strong reasons being given to you. It is hard to understand what is going on with the limited amount of information being conveyed. What are they actually saying?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello mdsummer,


This thread started out trying to give information to help you and your son with his Eagle Scout process. It has moved to a diatribe against Scout leaders. That's unfortunate.


Reading between the lines of your last post it would seem


1) Something negative, possibly very negative happened

2) The local Scout leadership believes that your son was involved and possibly was responsible

3) Your son believes he was not responsible and so expressed to the local Scout leadership

4) This disagreement has impacted your son's Eagle Scout process


Several posters have asked for information like exactly what your District has said to you. Absent that information, we can only comment in generalities and help you with preparing for the appeal process in general terms. Even with the information, we could only comment "Gee, that doesn't sound that bad" or "Wow, that is pretty serious." In either case, we do not have authority or responsibility for what happens in your local council or even in a National appeal. However, Scout leaders most places are pretty similar and your local leaders are likely not that different from those of us who post on this board.


So if you want to share more information with us, that's great, we can comment in greater specifics and help more specifically with your appeal. If not, that's OK too and we will try to help with generalities.


However, and I hope you don't find this comment offensive, at a certain point, I'm reminded of one of the very favorite stories of the nuns in my grade school. The story was about a group of children marching in a parade in formation and one mother proudly shouting out "Look, everybody's out of step but my Johnny!"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here it is to the best of my understanding:


They do not believe that he performed to the standard for the Eagle requirement of Scout Spirit. (my note: is there a different standard for scout spirit for each rank?)


They revisited the SM original letter and examined the paragraphs were he asks that my son show improvement...attendance at meetings, attendance at outings, to be a resource to the current leadership as well as an example to all the Scouts ( my note: he did not met the troops percentage for attendance at meeting or outings therefore they felt he did not set an example to all the Scouts, they acknowledge that he did do a few things to comply with the request, his POR was that of Instructor..this was an additional POR that he asked for , the POR for the eagle requirement had already been signed off as well as the requirement being active in you troop for a period of at least 6 mos after receiving Life. From the time he received the SM letter 11-08 until the end of 3-09 when he asked for a SM conference my son was never told that his performance as an Instructor was unacceptable it was not until the SM refused to give him a SM conference and the Troop committee convened that anything related to his performance as instructor was ever mention.)


They did not fell that my son did enough to contact the SM about the content of his letter. They felt that sending and email which the SM states he never received and attempting to talk to the SM twice(the SM was too busy both times) was not enough. My son explained that based on his past experience with teachers( my note: which is the only experience he has to draw upon)that after 3 attempts to talk to a teacher the teacher is aware that my son wants to talk to them and the teacher has approached my son. He felt that after 3 attempts the SM was aware that my son wanted to talk to him.) The committee felt that he should have approached other adults and that they expect more from an Eagle Scout.


They brought up the camping incident again and state that there was a lot of controversy over what happened and that my son does not take any personal responsibility over what happened. (my note: This is where my son told me that he felt they were pushing him into a corner to say he did something that he didn't do) They say that one of the adult leaders from that trip has dropped out of scouting due to his experiences on this trip(my note: No, this man was in uniform at the leaders table at the last troop meeting I attended. This was the gentleman that decided it would be appropriate on the way back home from the outing to crank up the volume on his car radio so loud that it was hurting the boys ears and when they asked him to please turn the volume down he pretended not to hear them. The other adult leader who was on this trip felt that cursing at the boys is an appropriate scouting behavior. He is the one who is accusing my son of staging a 'mutiny' when this adult dragged them oput of the tent in the middle of the night and continually yelled at them and told my son what a horrible leader my son was. Finally, my son politely got up and said to the adult...its cold, its late, I'm tired , I'm going back to the tent. He left. The other scouts waited and then asked if they could go. The adult said I don't give a s--t what you do. This is this adults idea of my son leading a "mutiny". When questioned by the SM at the meeting the SM had with the scout and their parents every scout stated that my son was polite and respectful when he made his remarks to this adult)


They again went into his attendance records and stated that he did not meet the troop guidelines of 50% Camping and 75% troop meeting attendance. His camping attendance from 1/08-08/08 was 23% and from 09/08-04/09 it was 40%. For troop meetings it was 42% since 08/07 and 60% from 09/08-04/09. (my note: these are the troop records and I have kept track of his attendance since 09/08 and my records differ from the troop...but this numbers game is really a moot point isn't it?)


In regard to some specific of Scout Spirit in everyday life They said that usually they see scouts performing well in the troop while under the eye of scout leaders and the challenge is outside of the troop. They commented that in my sons case the shortfall is in his unwillingness to invest with the Troop while he has performed well at school( my note: The LOR's were from a variety of people and not just school people). They feel that scout spirit begins in the troop and it is exhibited in the troop, school and community. And that while his performance in school is most praiseworthy(my note: they never mention his outstanding performance in the community)his performance in scouting is a more fundamental factor for the purpose of defining scout spirit. (my note: by whose definition..the troops/districts or nationals definition?)


They also felt the need to include comments regarding me in this letter. The committee chair and committee offered to talk with me after the meeting. The content of this letter did not accurately reflect what I had said at that meeting. I will not go into all of that because it has absolutely no bearing on my sons appeal. I only mention it here because I wonder what their purpose or intention is to include me in their letter.


The End


Okay guys have at it...dissect it , chew it up, spit it out, have fun.



Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough. Thank you.


1) If your son completed attendance requirements and POR requirements at any time during his service as a Life Scout, that meets the requirement. It does NOT need to be immediately before the Board of Review. This is an extremely common misinterpretation of the advancement requirements.

2) Percentage attendance requirements are strictly prohibited, as I understand matters, for meeting Scout Spirit, active Scouting and POR responsibilities. Any attempt to impose such requirements should be reversed on appeal.

3) Scout Spirit is different as ranks become higher. More is expected. For some Scout leaders, Scout Spirit for Eagle Scout is qualitatively different. The advancement requirements don't support such a qualitative difference. Eagle Scouts do not need to be perfect, walk on water, etc.

4) The incident you mention on a campout would seem to be "he said, she said." That's a problem if two adult leaders say one thing and nobody is supporting your son.


Based on what you have written, subject to verification, Board of Review, etc. if I were an appeal board member, I would vote in favor of your son. I am not on the appeal board. I would suggest that the appeal to your local council be pursued and then, if necessary, an appeal to National be pursued. The results should be favorable. Strange and unexpected things sometimes happen but I hope not in this case.


I again would suggest that the approach your son should take on appeal is "I met the requirements to be an Eagle Scout." I would hope that our system works.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the comments above, i.e. not meeting percentages, that is not allowed and Appealable. Also as stated any time after getting Life the 6 mos POR rule works, whether it was 6 months immediately following the Life BOR 4 years prior to the EBOR or withing the last 7 mos of the EBOR.Appeal to the Council BOR.



Also the He Said Shee said is spot on. In cases like this, national errs onthe side of the Scout, so if council doesn't approve, appeal to National.


Again go to council appeals board! Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In one of your first posts you said something along the lines of the SM hold 3 positions in the district/council. Given that, I am not surprised at the outcome of the district appeal level. I would also not be shocked at a similar result at the council level. There are insiders and there are others, and your SM apparently is an insider. They are protecting their own.


The participation percentage aspects are going to net them nothing at the national level. The troop/district/council (should they use the same reasoning) is plain wrong on this one, and will be told so. The spirit part may be a slight issue; should the council level appeal fail, you may wish to quietly gather some statements (in writing) from a few of the more mature scouts involved in the incident for use in an appeal to National. I say quietly because I could see coercion coming into play if it's done too overtly.


And as someone said, I would definitely be looking for a transfer for son #2, and I would be looking at a troop that does not currently have "insider" leadership.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All the reasons from Council that you listed are excuses not reasons and all are adding to the requirements and appealable! Time to go to National!


I would also send you council exec & council board a letter expressing your displeasure with what has happened. And I would CC National & Mr. Mazucca.

Link to post
Share on other sites


The letter that they received was from the District. They are appealing to the Council which others have said is the appropriate next step and the required before appealing to National. From what I have read here I suspect that it will be reversed at the council level. My gut tells me that this SM has clout in the district but hopefully those at the council level give the boy a fair shake and that will be the end of it. If not, then an appeal to National is the next and final step.



Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ed

Let me answer that question...what I posted was from the letter my son received Tuesday from the District people. He has not had the meeting with the Council people as he needed to wait for the letter from the District. The Council people know he will be appealing and he has the name of the Council individual he needs to contact with a letter. Thats where he is at this point. Hope this helps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yah, hmmm...


I can't for da life of me figure out what da CSE has to do with this. I suppose yeh can write your congressman and complain too, eh? ;)


Seems like the October disciplinary incident was a pretty big deal if some adult leaders were so disgusted by the lad's behavior that they considered quittin' scouting. We had that hint with da fact it triggered an immediate disciplinary meetin' with da parents. I reckon that sort of incident is a real Scout Spirit issue, and lack of follow through after the meeting with the boy and his parents would be a serious thing.


Goin' forward, it seems pretty clear that da core of the issue is that the boy is being perceived as a smart-aleck who doesn't take responsibility (either for his negative behaviors or for helpin' the troop in positive ways). Da troop's expectations have been well-communicated, and their disciplinary responses and expectations fairly well documented.


Succeeding on an appeal when the reason for denial is disciplinary/behavioral is much harder, eh? I think if he's goin' to be successful in an appeal, your son needs to overcome folk's perceptions of him. That's hard, eh? Might not be possible. But I'd suggest avoidin' some traps at least:


1) Don't imply that there's somethin' wrong with the SM for not hunting your son down for a meeting the way teachers do at school. Teachers are paid to be in the same buildin' with the lad 8 hours a day. The SM isn't paid, and sees your son about once every three weeks, perhaps less (based on his attendance figures).


2) Similarly, things like an adult usin' the S-word when boys woke him and a neighboring campsite up at 2am, or an adult playin' the radio loud in his car so as to help stay alert while drivin' (or not to listen to the boys' chatter) are trivial. By makin' them an issue you and your son look petty and argumentative.


3) It's not OK for a lad during a disciplinary incident to blow the adult off and walk away. No matter how "politely" he told the ASM that he wasn't going to listen to him any more, his actions spoke louder than his words. Most scout leaders would be on da phone with you at 3am telling you to come get your kid. As it is, the troop responded with a mandatory parent meeting on a disciplinary issue, as they should. Your son needs to take responsibility for that poor choice.


4) For older scouts who are leaders in the troop, responsibility goes beyond what they did personally. If you're with a bunch of lads who are smokin' weed, the argument that "I wasn't smokin' weed personally!" doesn't really matter. Same if you're an older boy in a tent that's disturbin' the whole area at night. A Patrol Leader is responsible for da actions of his patrol. An older scout is responsible for da actions of younger guys in his tent. Da point is not whether or not your son was being loud at night, the point is that he didn't take responsibility for the group. And still isn't takin' responsibility. That's somethin' he needs to address (or learn!). Some day when he's a manager in his job, he's goin' to have to take responsibility for his division, including the actions of his subordinates.


I don't see the percentage attendance figures as bein' an issue in this case the way the others do. There's no evidence to suggest the troop is usin' a strict percentage cutoff for "active." Rather, your son's poor attendance is just more evidence that he isn't contributing to the troop as a good member or takin' responsibility. That's allowed. If a troop expects youth leaders to be there most of the time, and communicates that expectation clearly, then a lad who shows up only occasionally really is showin' lack of commitment, eh? It's da lack of commitment that's a Scout Spirit issue. Especially after a disciplinary incident and a letter outlinin' what he needs to do to improve.


Scoutin' is a funny place sometimes, eh? Sometimes lads who do well in a highly structured environment like school become a bit edgy in the less structured environment of scoutin'. Based on what you've told us here, I would support da troop on the Scout Spirit issue, especially if your son's attitude mirrors your own.


My advice would be that goin' forward to a council appeal, you stay away. Send your husband ;). And your boy should be ready to take responsibility for his attitude, for his effect on other scouts, and for the actions of those for whom he should be responsible.


If he does that and means it, includin' admitting his earlier attitude and mistakes, that's good Scout Spirit. And that might be what convinces a council advancement committee to go his way, eh?


This case is a bit on da edge, because there's some adult attitude and overreaction too. As the other posters show, we tend to be harder on fellow scouters than on kids. Scouters tend to give da lads every benefit of the doubt. Your son needs to take away the reasons to be lookin' at him instead of at the troop's actions. He does that by takin' responsibility without excuses or qualifications. That earns him the benefit of the doubt.


Leastways, that's my opinion as BadenP's "all knowing expert" ;) Or at least long-winded goof!


Beavah(This message has been edited by Beavah)

Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Create New...