Jump to content
Jameson76

Concerns with coed rules, leadership, liability

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, gblotter said:

Out of 8 weeks, only two will be set aside as "Boys Only".

Camp Meriwether seems to be operating under the assumption that LDS troops are the only ones who care about a single-gender camping experience. Make a few accommodations for the LDS units, and everyone else will be fine with co-ed camping. It will be interesting to see how that assumption plays out in their summer camp enrollments.

Edited by gblotter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/15/2018 at 8:39 AM, gblotter said:

In the LDS Packs I have seen, there were limited transition activities between Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts. I remember that my son's Webelos Den visited a troop meeting and helped with a troop fundraiser. And of course there was a crossing over ceremony from Webelos to the New Scout Patrol. However, the New Scout Patrol was really his introduction vehicle into Boy Scouts. For my son, the Webelos period was mainly focused on earning his Arrow of Light.

As an LDS Webelos Leader myself, I confess I have indeed seen a few leaders who seem to shrug Boy Scout training off on to the shoulders of the 11 year-old leaders, but I don't subscribe to that kind of lazy mentality. I firmly believe that it is my duty as a Webelos Leader to ensure that every last one of my boys enters the Boy Scout Troop fully prepared with the knowledge and skills they need to start off successfully. 

As I have mentioned in other threads, my success is measured by each boy's ability to earn the Scout rank within 1 - 3 weeks of crossing over. If it takes him longer than a month, then it is probably my fault, and so it becomes my opportunity and duty to assess what I did wrong and to make the changes I need to ensure the next boy is more successful (I also meet next door to the 11 year-olds, and the boys are always free and eager to come to me for extra help even after they move on). 

It is, however, essential for Webelos to engage with a Troop at least a few times each year, not only to meet a number of their requirements, but because that is the nature of the Webelos program - facilitating the transition to Boy Scouting, and ensuring that they cross over to a welcoming and active troop. If a Webelos leader doesn't keep that near the top of his priorities, he doesn't understand his full duties. 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2‎/‎23‎/‎2018 at 6:25 PM, gblotter said:

Camp Meriwether in Oregon has already published their plan for the 2019 camping season.

See https://www.cpcbsa.org/meriwether

Out of 8 weeks, only two will be set aside as "Boys Only".

It seems to me they have it backwards - perhaps only two weeks should be open to girls.

The tail is wagging the dog.

 

New here....loved the thread so far. 

I think Oregon (and west coast in general) is an anomaly.  You won't see this prevalence of co-ed'ing east of Nevada.  I bet 5:1 boys:girls weeks on the eastern scout camps.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 11:02 AM, cocomax said:

The real question is when the girls join the troops and we go co-ed, will the boys stick around?  Will the boys still find it fun?  As leaders we can do everything right, but if the boys are not having fun they will leave.   I don't talk to the boys in our troop about the girls joining, but they know from the news and guys at school teasing them about it and I have overheard them talking about it and they all have decided to walk away if it happens.  My other question is why do the boys feel this way?  I honestly do not know.  Are most boys fine with girls joining and the boys in our troop just strange, I don't know.

I can tell you my son doesn't want girls in the Troop.  He's eleven, so his age may play a big part here. 

I went to pick my daughter up from a Confirmation class and noted that with the exception of three girls sitting in the last pew, all the boys were on one side of the church, and all the girls on the other.  I asked my daughter if the teacher made them sit in segregated groups.  Nope. 

We still haven't received any serious inquiries, so all this may end up being a moot point for us - at least for the foreseeable future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is, that kind of natural separation is entirely normal at that age. It's simply the way most pre-teen kids think, and so it would be unhealthy to force any legitimately co-ed program on these ages. That's why I hope National is true to it's word and creates a separate program for girls that steers as far away from the boys program as is possibly. No girl/boy patrols, no sharing troops - a total separation of boys and girls in their own programs, even if the girls are working on the same requirements. As far apart as they can be is best for these ages, developmentally speaking. 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/4/2018 at 9:24 PM, The Latin Scot said:

The thing is, that kind of natural separation is entirely normal at that age. It's simply the way most pre-teen kids think, and so it would be unhealthy to force any legitimately co-ed program on these ages. That's why I hope National is true to it's word and creates a separate program for girls that steers as far away from the boys program as is possibly. No girl/boy patrols, no sharing troops - a total separation of boys and girls in their own programs, even if the girls are working on the same requirements. As far apart as they can be is best for these ages, developmentally speaking. 

Sadly, it looks like National disagrees. 

Edited by Gwaihir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess I don't really see what the big concern is with coed rules and the like - there has been co-ed Scouting in the US since the 50's; the Polish and Ukrainian Scouts (ZHP and Plast, respectively) have been coed in this country since they "moved" here in the 1950's - not sure why we just don't confer with them to see how they've been dealing with these issues for the past several decades in the US. I'm sure they've figured out most of the 'bugs' by now.

220px-Orlykiada_2007_foto_0011.jpg                                                                                Image may contain: 3 people, sky and outdoor

 Ukrainian "Plastunka" - female member of 'Plast'                                  Polish ZHP (Hufiec/Council "Warmia"

I'm sure they could offer a ton of info  - Just sayin'

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/13/2018 at 11:50 AM, MikeS said:

Guess I don't really see what the big concern is with coed rules and the like - there has been co-ed Scouting in the US since the 50's...

There is also the BPSA-US, active in the states co-ed for over a decade, and active globally for far longer. 

There is no shortage of organizations that BSA members can look to for an example of how to deal with specific issues surrounding co-ed activity logistics. The conversation here does seem to frequently devolve into something along the lines of, "How will we have enough separate toilets for boys AND girls?" But in reality, these other co-ed scouting organizations have made it all work and continue to do so. I suspect some of them might even get a good laugh at us for worrying about some of the things we've discussed here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, FireStone said:

There is no shortage of organizations that BSA members can look to for an example of how to deal with specific issues surrounding co-ed activity logistics.

Yes, and we don’t know that they haven’t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/13/2018 at 11:50 AM, MikeS said:

Guess I don't really see what the big concern is with coed rules and the like....

My biggest concerns are the following:

1) What happens when "linked troops" are having a "joint" meeting, but there is no female Scouter present for the meeting?

2) What happens when "linked troops" are suppose to have a "joint" camp out, but no female Scouter is able to attend?

3) What happen when "linked troops" are suppose to do a week long activity, but no female Scouter is able to attend?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

My biggest concerns are the following:

1) What happens when "linked troops" are having a "joint" meeting, but there is no female Scouter present for the meeting?

2) What happens when "linked troops" are suppose to have a "joint" camp out, but no female Scouter is able to attend?

3) What happen when "linked troops" are suppose to do a week long activity, but no female Scouter is able to attend?

@Eagle94-A1, what @T2Eagle said, or nothing.

A troop who decides that BSA policy does their kids more harm than good will temporarily violate BSA policy. National can't enforce this any better than it can enforce patrol method and youth leadership.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

My biggest concerns are the following:

1) What happens when "linked troops" are having a "joint" meeting, but there is no female Scouter present for the meeting?

2) What happens when "linked troops" are suppose to have a "joint" camp out, but no female Scouter is able to attend?

3) What happen when "linked troops" are suppose to do a week long activity, but no female Scouter is able to attend?

Let's be honest. That is all CYA for National. There will be some tut tutting from Council and District folks and some "did you know" at training sessions but for those Troops that want a de facto co-ed Troop their will be little blow back or correction until AFTER something bad happens. The rules make a pretty good buffer for National if local units ignore the rules and something bad happens. Then we ALL will get some required additional training. I suspect many units will just make a "mom has to come along on campouts" rule.

I think the only problem will be when there really is not any "linked" troop, even a sham, and it affects some young lass going for advancement--particularly Eagle. If some stops her advancement they will appeal it and since we do not punish the Scout of the sins of the adults they will find a way to make it happen. So for those girls who cannot find the minimum number of 4 for a Linked Troop but can find one who will let them join anyway.

Seems like a low level risk for the Scout advancement wise, a mid level risk for the Scout safety wise, and a high level risk for the unit Liability wise.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

My biggest concerns are the following:

1) What happens when "linked troops" are having a "joint" meeting, but there is no female Scouter present for the meeting?

2) What happens when "linked troops" are suppose to have a "joint" camp out, but no female Scouter is able to attend?

3) What happen when "linked troops" are suppose to do a week long activity, but no female Scouter is able to attend?

I think @qwazse and @TampaTurtle are spot on. Those units will do what they want, and with tour permits being a thing of the past, they will get away with it unless there is a crisis of some sort.

Look at all the people applauding BSA4G who say their pack has had girls take part in every activity, meeting and outing for years. District and council professionals have to have known about all that, and either said nothing or told them they cant do that (wink wink)

 

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

×