Jump to content
Sentinel947

Youth Protection In The Digital Age.

Recommended Posts

I do not follow certain procedures in order to keep kids safe, I do it to keep the police off my front porch with a warrant.

 

So much this.

 

I try to make this point during any discussion with Adults about why these contact rules are in place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" it should be clearly spelled out in the guidelines like all the other rules."

NJ, did you seriously just write those words? Really?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" it should be clearly spelled out in the guidelines like all the other rules."

NJ, did you seriously just write those words? Really?

Um, maybe. Who's asking?

Edited by John-in-KC
Bbcode in the quote removed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a third person indeed must be party to every telephone communication, we have to hang up if a Scout calls to arrange a MB meeting or hang up if only the Scout answers a telephone call to his number.  Otherwise we would be communicating in private.

 

Consistently, I could only counsel a MB candidate if every word is heard by a third party, which is not required by the specific rules for MB Counselors.

 

I chose to believe that cannot be the rule until BSA expressly says so.  

 

I believe that particularly in light of the demonstrated inability of BSA to consistently communicate clearly.  For example with specific regard to YPT, the YPT training AV formerly said that all "discipline" in Scouting must be handled by adults.  This apparent dictat, of course, contradicted a good many other statements in concurrent BSA literature and would reduce the troops leaders, by which I try to always mean Scouts, to nothing more than snitches: "Mr. Smith, Johnny won't do his share of KP/stay with the patrol on the trial/keep his tent neat.  I would talk to him about ti, but you said all discipline must be handled by adults."  (Upon complaint channeled through my council, the language was amended to require consultation with adults before anything is done along the lines of discipline - also contrary to other BSA literature.

 

Someone should reprise Bill's old unofficial role of making sure all the statement coming out of National make sense and make sense in the context of Scouting, as opposed, say, only in the context of risk management.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems I do not have "permission" to use the edit button on my post,  I will try not to need to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I misspoke, not merely a third party but another "adult leader" must be party to every telephone call with a "member." (Apparently we care less about non-member minors.  Strange since the rules are to protect us.  Are members really more likely to falsely accuse?)

 

And how can we be sure this rule is obeyed?  

 

First, no telephone calls to houses without adult leaders unless you first call another adult leader and only then add the number of the "member.".  

 

The same applies even if the member's house has another adult leader in residence because he or she might be absent or otherwise not on the line for the entire conversation..  

 

Finally, accept no telephone calls from Scouts unless you have a second adult leader who can pick up with you on "1, 2, 3  'Hello.'"  Otherwise, you cannot be sure the required second adult leader is on the call.

 

I hope this is a mistake, as was the former rule that only adults were to deal with "discipline" in Scouting.

 

I know better than most that we live in the age of the lawsuit.  But trying to shape the entire enterprise to deal with narrow risks runs another risk - destroying the enterprise out of fear to run any risk.

 

Further, history tells us that enacting rules that inspire doubt, distrust, hostility, and contempt for the rule-makers tends to reduce compliance with all rules.  

 

Were he alive, we could ask George Germain,, Secretary for America, how all those rules for the colonies worked out for the UK.  He too was a superior person who saw more clearly than the mill run of folks out in the day-to-day world.  He too would not listen to the discontent of his "inferiors," much less hear them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I misspoke, not merely a third party but another "adult leader" must be party to every telephone call with a "member." (Apparently we care less about non-member minors.  Strange since the rules are to protect us.  Are members really more likely to falsely accuse?)

 

And how can we be sure this rule is obeyed?  

 

First, no telephone calls to houses without adult leaders unless you first call another adult leader and only then add the number of the "member.".  

 

The same applies even if the member's house has another adult leader in residence because he or she might be absent or otherwise not on the line for the entire conversation..  

 

Finally, accept no telephone calls from Scouts unless you have a second adult leader who can pick up with you on "1, 2, 3  'Hello.'"  Otherwise, you cannot be sure the required second adult leader is on the call.

 

I hope this is a mistake, as was the former rule that only adults were to deal with "discipline" in Scouting.

 

I know better than most that we live in the age of the lawsuit.  But trying to shape the entire enterprise to deal with narrow risks runs another risk - destroying the enterprise out of fear to run any risk.

 

Further, history tells us that enacting rules that inspire doubt, distrust, hostility, and contempt for the rule-makers tends to reduce compliance with all rules.  

 

Were he alive, we could ask George Germain,, Secretary for America, how all those rules for the colonies worked out for the UK.  He too was a superior person who saw more clearly than the mill run of folks out in the day-to-day world.  He too would not listen to the discontent of his "inferiors," much less hear them.

 

Yep, this over the top useless kind of rule (along with slip-n-slides will paralyze you) pretty much just teach everyone that BSA National hasn't got a clue about what they are doing and not only can but probably should be ignored most of the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, this over the top useless kind of rule (along with slip-n-slides will paralyze you) pretty much just teach everyone that BSA National hasn't got a clue about what they are doing and not only can but probably should be ignored most of the time.

Well, the whole slip-n-slide thing was about adults and heavier teens on them.  As a large male (5'11, 250), I have experienced it.  My momentum is a lot more than that of a 60 lb cub scout, and the risk of the slip-n-slides is probably unacceptable for anybody my size. My last experience on a slip-n-slide, while I didn't get hurt, was scary due to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess I will need to start CCing someone if I do not have a parental email; though most of my emails for scouts are through parents anyway, until they are over 15 or so.  But, since half the emails sent to troop members appear to be ignored or read after the fact, it makes little difference.  

 

Now texting is a problem for me, as I still have just a simple phone without a keyboard, and it takes me forever to text stuff if it is needed.  So most of my responses are "thx" or "yes or no"; whatever will get the message with the least effort.  I also cannot bring myself to learn and use most of the shortcuts; at times I only get half what someone sends me by text, as I do not know the lingo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  

Now texting is a problem for me, as I still have just a simple phone without a keyboard, and it takes me forever to text stuff if it is needed.  So most of my responses are "thx" or "yes or no"; whatever will get the message with the least effort.  I also cannot bring myself to learn and use most of the shortcuts; at times I only get half what someone sends me by text, as I do not know the lingo.

 

I have one of them there "smart" phones and I can do the texting but I always use punctuation and complete sentences without any funky lingo.  Surely the younger generations laugh at me for it.   :p   

 

As for communication via text, I find that with non-Scouts it turns into a conversation that we could just as easily have over the phone.  Scouts are very succinct in their texts and responses to texts.  "Yes", "No", "Sorry can't", etc.  If I ever text a Scout I always include another adult whether his parent or another volunteer who is relevant to the question at hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ironically, I text in complete sentences with punctuation. It drives my friends nuts. My parents use more texting slang than I do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a #1 ludidite when it comes to phones.  Computers, no problem, phones... no way.

 

I went years without a cell phone.  Finally one Christmas my kids got me one of those Star Trek Beam-me-up thingies.  

 

Then they insisted I upgrade to having texting on it.  That too a long time.  I was too cheap to pay for other people's messages.

 

Now I have the Smart Phone at their insistence.  Cost me an arm and a leg each month and now I can Skype!!!  And guess what.  Now my kids don't call.  Go figure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite what has been suggested in the blog, it is not readily apparent that the policy of the BSA is that e-mail and text communications between leaders and scouts must be copied to someone else. The should in the sentence suggests that it be done, but doesn't mandate it.  Of course, that's not to say it isn't a good idea for the reason Stosh provides - it just isn't required.  Unless deleted, e-mail and text message will remain available - even if the leader deletes texts and e-mails that cross that line, the scout will still have it.  If a leader was being inapproriate in e-mail or text communications with a scout, unless both parties delete the messages, one of them will have it.  Even if text and e-mail messages are deleted, if there is an accusation and it's taken seriously, there are often ways to retrieve the messages.  Certainly copying them to someone else or to a blind mailbox makes retrieving things easier, but I suspect in most instances, it's going to be overkill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×