Jump to content
Tatung42

Youth Protection Clarification Question

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, perdidochas said:

Has YPT changed since this summer? 

An updated version of the new YPT was released on March 1.  Mostly minor additions dealing with the introduction of girls into Scouts BSA, although I did think what they have done with the bullying segment is good. 

There is no need for those people who did last year's version to retake YPT until they expire next year.  I did it again so I can answer questions I may get as an ADC.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/9/2019 at 3:02 AM, Tatung42 said:

Lets say a patrol leader wants to have a patrol meeting at his house.  The patrol's fully trained ASM adviser will be there as well as the patrol leader's mother.  The patrol leader's mother has taken youth protection, but she is not a registered member of the BSA.  This is a youth protection violation right?

Now lets say that nothing changes, expect that the patrol leader's mother pays national $33 to become a committee member.   Now this is perfectly ok?

I just want to insure that I am understanding how the rules work correctly. (yes that is a snarky tone that you detect in my question)

 

 

Not sure how this can be misinterpreted  (it was announced in May 2018 and went into effect 10/1/18)

Source:  https://www.scouting.org/health-and-safety/gss/gss01/#a

Adult Supervision

Two registered adult leaders 21 years of age or over are required at all Scouting activities, including meetings. There must be a registered female adult leader 21 years of age or over in every unit serving females. A registered female adult leader 21 years of age or over must be present for any activity involving female youth. Notwithstanding the minimum leader requirements, age- and program-appropriate supervision must always be provided. (Youth Protection and Barriers to Abuse FAQs)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RichardB said:

Not sure how this can be misinterpreted  (it was announced in May 2018 and went into effect 10/1/18)

Source:  https://www.scouting.org/health-and-safety/gss/gss01/#a

Adult Supervision

Two registered adult leaders 21 years of age or over are required at all Scouting activities, including meetings. There must be a registered female adult leader 21 years of age or over in every unit serving females. A registered female adult leader 21 years of age or over must be present for any activity involving female youth. Notwithstanding the minimum leader requirements, age- and program-appropriate supervision must always be provided. (Youth Protection and Barriers to Abuse FAQs)

RichardB , your replies are sometimes annoyingly condescending.  The policy is easy to misinterpret, or more accurately easy to subject to multiple interpretations, when the first FAQ linked to at the end of your quote SPECIFICALLY contradicts it in at least two instances.  Since the policy clearly is not meant to be universal than it is subject to interpretation: is the situation described by the OP analogous to a fundraising situation, to a merit badge counseling session?  I think it looks very much like what a merit badge counseling session would look like: a registered leader and a parent, especially one who has undergone YPT.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Yep, Youth protection is also intended to be Adult Protection, yes?

So how do we "require"  our Scouts to ONLY meet within eyesight and/or earshot  of two or more registered and YPT certified Scouters, at least one of which must be of the female persuasion if we are talking about girl ScoutsBSA? 

What is to prevent young Patrol Leader Indiana Jones of the Crystal Skull Patrol from asking his Scout Buds to flash mob at the Panera ?   And ask Marion to attend with her "additional"  Troop? 

Edited by SSScout

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, RichardB said:

Not sure how this can be misinterpreted  (it was announced in May 2018 and went into effect 10/1/18)

It disturbs me that someone who is responsible for/assist in making national policy could or would make that statement. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good point @Sentinel947.

I have to imagine I'd find a lot in common with anyone who spends 40+ hours a week invested in Scouting.  Locally I cherish the friendships I have with the dedicated unit, district, and council Scouters and professionals in my community.  While I may not always agree with each decision, I do see that everyone is doing their best to make Scouting the best program that they can.  I fully expect that that I would find the same in the National level professionals and volunteers.  I fully expect that people involved at National have different challenges and problems to solve and it may lead to decisions that I may or may not agree with.  But, that's OK.  They are Scouters all the same and I'd be happy to share a campfire with them any day.

As best I understand, most members of this fourm are volunteers.  I'm really glad that we do get some professionals who contribute as it helps me to develop a richer understanding.  Honestly - I like the openess we get from the professonials who do contribute.  it gives me a better senes of some of thought processes behind what we see.  I very much appreciate the honest, direct dialog that we are able to have here.  If anything, I would welcome more direct discussion with our national level professional colleagues - even when I do not agree.  Truthfully I'd much rather have a frank discussion and disagree with someone than get a watered down public relations statement or a helpdesk response.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sentinel947 said:

Consider this, if the members of this forum, who are likely some of the most engaged and active Scouters in the country, are having these discussions and confusion regarding the rules, what does that mean for the typical unit? 

They ignore the contradictions of the rule book and go scouting.  Or, they walk away because it's no longer worth he effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, walk in the woods said:

They ignore the contradictions of the rule book and go scouting.  Or, they walk away because it's no longer worth he effort.

That's very similar to what I see too.

We had a couple of conversations about the new rules when they came out.  Most of the Scouters in our midst just wanted to know what they needed to do.  One adult, two adults, whatever - they really didn't care.  They just want to know the rules so that they can get to Scouting.

Edited by ParkMan
clarified the idea
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, RichardB said:

Not sure how this can be misinterpreted  ... Notwithstanding the minimum leader requirements, age- and program-appropriate supervision must always be provided. ...

The dissonance comes from a deep understanding that the newly imposed "minimum leader requirements" directly clash with what the majority of us were led to believe was  "age- and program- appropriate supervision" required for an average patrol meeting/activity. When I was a scout, the appropriate supervision for a meeting was a patrol leader and an assistant. That continues to be the case, on some visceral level, for the majority of 11-18 year old boys in this country, and they will find ways to form their "patrols" outside of the auspices of the BSA.

This is the crux of the problem. The core program at its best will ensure that adults don't need to be present at a gathering of Scouts or Venturers. The youth will maybe invite us join them for some brief opening, then we adults could literally go on an hour hike (most of us should) and come back for closing then get a re-cap from the officers regarding plans, questions, etc ... But, that ideal program butts up against the tragedy of a perverse and litigious society -- one which is setting a moving target as to how to defend against its worst actors.

Edited by qwazse
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/11/2019 at 4:18 PM, perdidochas said:

Has YPT changed since this summer?  

Yes.  The 2019 G2SS is up at open discussion, program. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/11/2019 at 3:30 PM, RichardB said:

Not sure how this can be misinterpreted  (it was announced in May 2018 and went into effect 10/1/18)

Source:  https://www.scouting.org/health-and-safety/gss/gss01/#a

Adult Supervision

Two registered adult leaders 21 years of age or over are required at all Scouting activities, including meetings. There must be a registered female adult leader 21 years of age or over in every unit serving females. A registered female adult leader 21 years of age or over must be present for any activity involving female youth. Notwithstanding the minimum leader requirements, age- and program-appropriate supervision must always be provided. (Youth Protection and Barriers to Abuse FAQs)

 The reason why there is confusion is the below found here https://www.scouting.org/health-and-safety/yp-faqs/#as

Adult Supervision

Q:  The Barriers to Abuse say that there must be two registered adults present for all Scouting activities and meetings.  Does that include merit badge counseling? Fund-raising events?

A. Yes. However, the parent or legal guardian of the Scout may serve as the second adult. This parent or legal guardian does not have to be a registered leader.

 

The question then arises, if parents counts towards MB counseling and fundraising, why not other events?

 

Also as others have pointed, the new policy goes against 109 years of BSA Policy.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The OP is about a meeting.  Not a youth attending a MB counseling session or a sale.   Two deep is not new, the second adult is now required to be 21 vs. 18 and a registered leader.    It is the path forward.      

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, RichardB said:

The OP is about a meeting.  Not a youth attending a MB counseling session or a sale.   Two deep is not new, the second adult is now required to be 21 vs. 18 and a registered leader.    It is the path forward.      

With all due respect, having 2 adults over 21 attending patrol day activities is indeed new. Prior to October 1st, 2018,  patrols could do patrol day activities  WITHOUT ANY ADULTS (emphasis). So having 2 adults over 21 attend patrol meetings, hikes, field trips, etc is new, and as I stated goes against 108 years of policy.

Also something not covered by the FAQs: What happens if the MBC is in the 18-20 year old range? Will 2 adults over 21 be required, whether both registered or 1 registered and 1 parent? That is indeed a serious question and one I am being asked about by a troop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RichardB said:

The OP is about a meeting.  Not a youth attending a MB counseling session or a sale.   Two deep is not new, the second adult is now required to be 21 vs. 18 and a registered leader.    It is the path forward.      

RB, spare us the doublespeak. This is no path forward. It is a compromise to keep litigants at bay.

The OP is not about "a meeting", it is about a patrol meeting. You know full well that as recently as three years ago the patrol leader's handbook said:

Quote

Patrols may also set out on day hikes, service projects, and overnighters independent of the troop and free of adult leadership as long as they follow two rules: (1) The Scoutmaster approves the patrol activity and (2) the patrol activity does not interfere with any troop function. A patrol activity without adult supervision should be allowed only when it has been thoroughly planned and the Scoutmaster is satisfied the activity is well within patrol members’ levels of training and responsibility. If the Scoutmaster has any doubts, he should encourage the patrol to reconsider its plans or should assign adults to accompany the patrol during the activity.

And the guide to safe scouting backed that up.

This is no subtle change. This is a turn careening into the abyss.

What membership gains do you expect to see as SMs lose their pool of caring adults who could back up on meetings, hikes, and campouts?

  • Like 1

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

×