Scoutmaster denies 17 year old Life Scout Eagle

[Hedgehog 334]

Let's suppose for a moment that the boy succeeds in getting the council to overrule his unit and award him his eagle.  How would his unit react?

 

I would see it as an act of defiance and disloyalty to the unit. 

 

 

Yet, from the sounds of it, the adults in the unit are being (and has been)  disloyal and NOT helpful to the scout.  You don't add requirements at the last minute to screw someone who has done everything required and deny them something they have worked for over the last 6 to 7 years.

[Beavah 205]

 

IMHO, this is clearly one of the times to step in and turn an  unfair situation into a fair fight.

 

Yah, fred, I hear yeh.   I've even shared that sentiment at times.

 

I think da thing to ask ourselves is "if I'm viewin' things as a fight with other parents and volunteers, have I lost my way?"   Is that really da sort of character and citizenship I want to teach my boy?

 

We all have to answer that question for ourselves, I reckon.  Me personally, I think too many of da folks who are tryin' to call themselves "leaders" want to whip folks up for a fight against fellow citizens these days.  Seems to me leadership should be a more a calm, service-minded thing, and citizenship means sacrificin' some of what we want for the sake of da group.

 

So for me, if Junior didn't get an "A" that Junior though he deserved, that's junior's issue to deal with.   If junior's teacher is clearly harmin' lots of other boys and girls, then maybe that's on Mrs. Beavah and I to raise respectfully.  That's a decision to try to fire/replace da teacher, though, eh?  Not to get my kid an "A".

[Krampus 696]

Let's suppose for a moment that the boy succeeds in getting the council to overrule his unit and award him his eagle.  How would his unit react?

 

I would see it as an act of defiance and disloyalty to the unit. 

 

Really? You have adults violate half a dozen BSA policies here and you'd hold it against the Scout for going to council to arbitrate? 

 

The clock is ticking on this kid and rather than being helpful -- of God forbid, proactive -- the adults here breaking several rules just to flex their tiny little muscles. Please!

 

Where is the adult's loyalty to this Life Scout? Huh?

 

Yet, from the sounds of it, the adults in the unit are being (and has been)  disloyal and NOT helpful to the scout.  You don't add requirements at the last minute to screw someone who has done everything required and deny them something they have worked for over the last 6 to 7 years.

 

EXACTLY!!!!

 

Let's assume the adults are correct in their application of the "active participation" clause and there was an pre-established, well-documented troop activity level this Scout fell below. Shouldn't they (they adult leaders) have done their job and notified this kid that he's in jeopardy?

 

I am all for holding a Scout's feet to the fire, but you have to abide by the BSA rules and policies. Even when you (the adults) are in the right you need to think about the message you are sending if you dig in too deep. 

 

No argument, these adults are WAY off on this one. Cannot fathom anyone holding this against the Scout. Not in my unit!

Edited April 14, 2016 by Krampus

[David CO 1783]

Boys often ask me why I wasn't an eagle scout.  The answer is very simple.  I was a Lone Scout.  

 

I remember seeing a scene in a Cary Grant movie where the adopted son receives his award to the cheers of his troop.  I remember thinking that it must be a wonderful thing to be honored by your friends in that way.

 

Yes, as a Lone Scout, I could have earned the award.  But it wouldn't have been the same.  Something would have been missing.

 

I know that many people disagree with me.  They want the award any way they can get it.  If it means lawyer-ing up and going to council, so be it.

[Krampus 696]

 

I know that many people disagree with me.  They want the award any way they can get it.  If it means lawyer-ing up and going to council, so be it.

 

To borrow a phrase from another thread, with all due respect that's a load of crappola.

 

The kid is not" lawyering up". He's reporting a SEVERE violation of BSA rules -- as outlined in the cited section of the GTA -- to his council for them to take action.

 

These adults are mucking with what is essentially this kid's life work so far. If he's spent 5 years in Cubs and 7 years in Boy Scouts, that's nearly 3/4 of his life spent toward this goal. He's reporting this abuse of power because it's wrong. He's reporting this abuse of power so that it does not happen to him or anyone else. He's reporting this abuse of power because it is the RIGHT THING to do.

 

Sorry you didn't get your Eagle. I walked away from mine of my own volition. But don't let your story of missed opportunity and some misplaced sense of loyalty to the unit cloud your perspective. THESE ADULTS ARE WRONG! Period! When they became disloyal to this Scout and violated BSA rules they broke the covenant of loyalty that bound this Scout to that unit.

[David CO 1783]

Please don't get me wrong, Krampus, I have never regretted my decision to not pursue the award.  I don't consider it a "missed opportunity."  

 

I think you're being just a little bit extreme when you describe the advancement program as a  " kids life work."

[Krampus 696]

Please don't get me wrong, Krampus, I have never regretted my decision to not pursue the award.  I don't consider it a "missed opportunity."  

 

I think you're being just a little bit extreme when you describe the advancement program as a  " kids life work."

 

Really? How would YOU feel if someone was breaking established rules to take away something YOU worked 7 years for? What if it was YOUR kid?

 

I would say that if a 5 year old worked until 17 (12 years) to accomplish something, that could be considered his "life's work" up to that point.

 

It is certainly something that, if taken away by some silly adults, might influence him the rest of his life. So yeah, it's a big deal.

Edited April 14, 2016 by Krampus

[David CO 1783]

Anyone who has followed my posts on this site would already clearly know where I place my loyalty.  My loyalty is to the Chartered Organization.

 

Yes, I do think that many people exaggerate the importance of Scouting and its advancement program.  But they're not alone. The athletic program is also known to exaggerate its importance.  They often feel that sports is a kid's "life work."

 

I feel that it is the role of the Chartered Organization to moderate such views and help its youth members to develop a better sense of perspective as to what should be most important in their lives.

 

I have said it before.  Scouting is not the largest or the most important program in our organization.  Scouting is simply not that popular.

Edited April 14, 2016 by David CO

[Krampus 696]

I have said it before.  Scouting is not the largest or the most important program in our organization.  Scouting is simply not that popular.

 

To YOU!!!

 

To this kid it might be EVERYTHING!!

 

Forget even that for a moment. I fail to see why you wouldn't be in this kid's corner when these adults are obviously breaking the rules and policies of BSA. Since your a CO champion, why wouldn't you be there, with COR in tow, to discuss with these adults why they are not abiding by the charter agreement the CO signed up for?

 

Instead you berate the kids for "lawyering up" by going to council calling him defiant and disloyal. That's unreal...especially for someone who professes his backing of the CO. The CO signed an agreement with BSA, shouldn't they honor it, stand behind THEIR members when some adults go rogue?

 

Not seeing your justification for blaming the kid for using the tools there for him when the CO seems to be failing him, as well as the adult leaders this CO should be managing.

[perdidochas 658]

I think you have overly assumed.  Most of our early ranked Eagles get JASM, then bored to death because they can't be involved the way they used to and mature out by 15 or 16.  The fun and adventure is gone.

 

I've found the opposite to be true, but then again my sample size of Eagles under 17 in my unit is three, two of them being my sons. BOth have been actively involved, albeit not as involved as before, but that is due to competing activities, not boredom.

 

Let's suppose for a moment that the boy succeeds in getting the council to overrule his unit and award him his eagle.  How would his unit react?

 

I would see it as an act of defiance and disloyalty to the unit. 

 

I disagree.  I think in this case (if what we have read is true, and there aren't other circumstances), it's the SM that is being disloyal to the boy.  The boy is in his rights to be defiant. 

Edited April 14, 2016 by perdidochas

[perdidochas 658]

But that's not how the "active participation" section reads (it is not just being active of 6 months while Life). You can have an active Life Scout at 14 who get Life at 13, puts in his six months of "activity" and then disappears until 17. Is he really "active" in the unit? Nope. Does the unit have an "active" level established? If so and he is not meeting it he's out of luck.

 

The GTA is pretty clear on what is done here. If the unit has not stated active level policy then he's within his rights to use the alternate test.

 Well, that's how I read it. Here are the actual rank requirements:

 

1. Be active in your troop, team, crew, or ship for a period of at least six months after you have achieved the rank of Life Scout.

Nothing about that says that they have to be active at the time of the EBOR or anything more than 6 months after becoming Life. 

[perdidochas 658]

Registered and pays dues but that's been it after Life.  No Camporee or Summer Camp

 

Well, I don't see Camporee or Summer Camp as being a requirement for Eagle.  What is the Troop participation policy?  

[Krampus 696]

 Well, that's how I read it. Here are the actual rank requirements:

 

1. Be active in your troop, team, crew, or ship for a period of at least six months after you have achieved the rank of Life Scout.

Nothing about that says that they have to be active at the time of the EBOR or anything more than 6 months after becoming Life. 

 

"Active" is further defined by the active participation section of the GTA. One would think those two things would be linked somewhere so as to make it more obvious, but they are not...at least not officially anywhere I could find.

 

The phrase "be active in your troop" is not really clear. The GTA defines that by saying active means being registered, in good standing and meeting the unit's pre-defined requirements for defining active. Absent any unit pre-defined definition it gets a bit ambiguous...and then you have that alternate test.

 

Yes, you *can* have a Scout who makes Life at 13, is active (under the GTA definition) for 6 months and then goes silent until he's 17 when he wants his SMC and BOR for Eagle (or any rank really). Should he be counted as active? Sure, if he meets (or met) the GTA guideline of active for the duration required during the period of time in that rank.

 

Where I have seen this issue go south is when that level of activity is not continuous. I don't recall (may have missed it) if the GTA addresses that. I believe it does and says it does not have to be contiguous months of activity, just totaled.

[jr56 92]

Unfortunately, I have seen my share of this nonsense too.   There are many adult leaders out there who think they know all about scouting from A toZ..............if you don't believer them, just ask.......they will tell you how much they think they know.

Just have the scout complete the merit badge, fill in all the paperwork, and submit it to the council......which it sounds like you've already done.

All you can do at this point is wait.  If your council does not give you a satisfactory answer, you can appeal to National.

[Beavah 205]

I disagree.  I think in this case (if what we have read is true, and there aren't other circumstances), it's the SM that is being disloyal to the boy.  The boy is in his rights to be defiant. 

 

Yah, hmmmm....

 

I admit I'm an old-fashioned sort of critter, eh?    I just wonder if we really want to teach the lads that it's in their "rights" to be defiant.   Especially when the man or woman who they're busy gettin' all defiant with is doin' the job for free.

 

I've seen this sort of thing cause grief in many troops, and harm the scouting of lots of kids.  Nuthin' worse for units than when adults are fightin' other adults.  The kids are always collateral damage.

 

I know as a young eager little beaver I got in a few tussles with teachers and coaches and whatnot.  It's part of growin' up.   Happily even when I was right my parents supported the teacher/coach/leader, eh?   It taught me that I had to make my case politely and respectfully.   It also taught me that even when I thought I was right it was more important to lose politely and calmly than to win at all costs.  

 

It's a kids' program, eh?   It's not da codes to the nuclear missiles, and BSA guidance documents aren't Holy Writ.   No need for jihad here, just some calm adult perspective.

 

If it's "everything" to the lad, then I reckon he'll figure out a way to meet his Scoutmaster's expectations.  He'll probably have fun doin' it, too, since goin' on a few extra campouts and helpin' out with the younger lads can be a lot of fun.   Askin' the boy to behave the part of an Eagle Scout within his troop might be addin' to da requirements dependin' on your view, but it's not harming the boy.   Odds are, it's helpin' set the sort of example we want for all the other boys.   Dependin' on the partner, it might also be more consistent with da values of the charter than a fine-toothed read of da "policies."

 

Our mission is the kids, eh?