Jump to content

Chapter 11 announced - Part 2 (after the big slow)


Recommended Posts

Notices of "Transfer of Claim" have started showing up on the docket. I guess this is where an investor buys the claim from a creditor who wants some cash now, rather than whatever the full value might be later (and without the risk of getting nothing later). For example...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 238
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I'll do my best to explain what I have seen in this thread, so hopefully I don't misconstrue the message.  The one thing I would say about @ThenNow is that it does seem that he cares about the BSA and

You've nailed the attitude that I think is so counterproductive to ever resolving youth protection issues in scouting. There are too many who want to rationalize away the situation because they someho

I think you've jumped in the deep end of victim blaming and then failed to tread water. Blaming a child victim of sexual molestation or rape and saying the antidote is to keep them out of the program

Posted Images

17 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said:

Please don't re-word a post.  At no point did the statement include "no changes since."   The year 1990 was used to correspond with the "new version" of YPT.  See "https://www.scoutingnewsroom.org/youth-protection/100-years-of-enhancing-efforts-to-protect-youth 

Your post stated "Youth Protection Training protocols used today were enacted" which is what I quoted.  I did not re-word a post. 

We use different protocols today than in 1990.   If you stated "when no one on one youth and adult contact started" I would agree.  Youth Protection Training protocols are far beyond no one on one contact and two deep leadership.  For instance, BSA only recently decided that 18 year olds are not considered adults in terms of Youth Protection Training. 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

Its disappointing that they are not more specific.

The session is probably available on Villanova's website if you want to watch it. I heard nothing constructive on this point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, DavidLeeLambert said:

According to the terms of the most recent stipulation extending the stay against local councils, you should be able to request your former unit's roster, with names of other youth redacted, from either the TCC or the Coalition.

I'm unclear why I would want this.

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

The session is probably available on Villanova's website if you want to watch it. I heard nothing constructive on this point.

I just started a new topic about ideas to improve safety.  To me, outside of the camp property loss, is the other major outcome to expect from the bankruptcy.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

I just started a new topic about ideas to improve safety.  To me, outside of the camp property loss, is the other major outcome to expect from the bankruptcy.

I think in terms of the bankruptcy settlement, a long lasting legacy that is appropriate given the large number of victims, is for the insurance companies involved to agree to fund an independent agency like the IIHS but for youth protection.  This could improve safety not only at BSA but all youth serving organizations.  (Note: if you would want to discuss what BSA can do to improve youth protection, that could be in the linked topic above.)

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, yknot said:

Oy, no. For example, 4-H has significantly more youth members than scouting and you will be hard pressed to find any reports of youth molestation in their ranks. The IV files were an incompetent effort and to some degree they are irrelevant except for the liability insurance question. The claim totals speak for themselves. 

Yeah.  I'd be surprised if 4H is statistically different than BSA.  Lots of youth.  Lots of private opportunities.  

If 4H is perceived to be significantly different, I'd want to ask why?   More women leaders than men?  (real difference) ... Not tracking such information (data management) ... Left it to the public community to track / handle (not a real difference)

Right now I'm leaning to say 4-H did it better by not handling it and just letting it go to an outside organization.  The major part of this situation is BSA is tracking the ineligible volunteers.  It could be viewed as added value, but right now it is a legal night mare.   BSA would have been better off to let everything go external at the direction of parents and other volunteers.  

We're talking problems that were crimes or after the fact became crimes.  We're talking problems where leaders recently became mandatory reporters but often were not at the time of the incident.   BSA tracking incidents adds a gold mine to fish decades later for legal opportunities to exploit. 

I just don't accept that BSA was statistically that different than other organizations.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

Please inform the CDC that what they are now recommending to prevent abuse in youth organizations is an incompetent effort.  It would seem that the BSA was decades ahead of the times.  It seems to me that the problem is with the manner in which the legal system handles such things.

 

Can you provide reference to CDC recommendation?

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, 5thGenTexan said:

...  On at least two trips I got to sit on the floor of the van, once of those was on the floor in that little space between the most rear row of seats and the back doors.  Looking back it was stupid and irresponsible on their part.

Yeah.  That was standard of care back in the 1970s and probably even sometime into the 1980s.  People sitting loose in the back of trucks.  Station wagons with kids sitting in back (without the rear chairs).  No requirement for seat belts.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

Yeah.  That was standard of care back in the 1970s and probably even sometime into the 1980s.  People sitting loose in the back of trucks.  Station wagons with kids sitting in back (without the rear chairs).  No requirement for seat belts.  

Doesnt make it any less stupid. And regardless of the decade, putting a kid on the floor and not even in a seat was irresponsible.  

Edited by 5thGenTexan
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

I just don't accept that BSA was statistically that different than other organizations.

What does [not] "statistically that different" mean? This goes back to a long line of posts and responses about the differences between Scouts and most other youth organizations, which reasonably give rise to higher incidences/opportunities for abuse. The chess club has fewer injuries than the Lacrosse team. Statistically, they look wildly different and for good reason.

When you have adults and kids in every context imaginable,  opportunities for abuse and exploitation became endless. You also must add, at least historically, the secret society element that made it attractive to many boys, at least me. "Us guys, young and old, out on adventures away from concrete and steel and the ignorant eyes of the masses."

In my experience, which is long gone, Scouting has a million reasons to be statistically different than other organizations in terms of high incidence of sexual abuse. It just does. As I said back when, I participated in everything from Scouts, to sports, to Altar Boy, to choir, to forensics, to Boys State to academic and civic clubs, theater, band...and no other organization had the vulnerabilities of Scouting. Combine several such activities/organizations and Scouting is still more problematic and attractive to pedophiles. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

Yeah.  I'd be surprised if 4H is statistically different than BSA.  Lots of youth.  Lots of private opportunities.  

If 4H is perceived to be significantly different, I'd want to ask why?   More women leaders than men?  (real difference) ... Not tracking such information (data management) ... Left it to the public community to track / handle (not a real difference)

Right now I'm leaning to say 4-H did it better by not handling it and just letting it go to an outside organization.  The major part of this situation is BSA is tracking the ineligible volunteers.  It could be viewed as added value, but right now it is a legal night mare.   BSA would have been better off to let everything go external at the direction of parents and other volunteers.  

We're talking problems that were crimes or after the fact became crimes.  We're talking problems where leaders recently became mandatory reporters but often were not at the time of the incident.   BSA tracking incidents adds a gold mine to fish decades later for legal opportunities to exploit. 

I just don't accept that BSA was statistically that different than other organizations.

 

BSA is different by nature of what we do with kids and when and where we do it. I think you have to recognize that and understand it as a risk specific to scouting before you can make any headway with understanding why YP is such an issue. There is no huge issue in 4-H.  There are very few cases reported involving 4-H leaders. No one's hiding them, they just haven't been reported.  I'm sure there are some random adults attached to some random clubs that abused kids, but it's not occurring in the 4-H setting to the degree it does in scouting. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Eagle1993 said:

Your post stated "Youth Protection Training protocols used today were enacted" which is what I quoted.  I did not re-word a post. 

Actually, that is a portion of my comment and not the whole comment.  Regardless, my intent in positing was, and is, to share information so that people can make informed decisions.  Here is the claim information by year as shared by the TCC at http://www.pszjlaw.com/assets/htmldocuments/BSA Summary of Sexual Abuse Claims 003.pdf  People can view it, remember that most victims do not come forward until well into their 40's or later, remember that the court has appointed a "Future Claims Representative" to deal with such victims, and decide for themselves whether the BSA is a "Leader" in youth protection.  FYI, since 2010 when YPT training became mandatory for all adult volunteers, claims have now been filed stating that there have been 600 victims of abuse.  Those are claims by individuals and do not represent multiple acts of abuse.  For anyone still believing that this bankruptcy is addressing an "old" problem, that is not the case.

 

 
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

Yeah.  That was standard of care back in the 1970s and probably even sometime into the 1980s.  People sitting loose in the back of trucks.  Station wagons with kids sitting in back (without the rear chairs).  No requirement for seat belts.  

My parents' family car in the '80s was a Chevy station wagon with the rear-facing back seat. By the time my youngest brother was born (seven kids total), we had to sit three in the back (or four in the middle), and there were only two seat-belts in the back. And my dad is a scientist who worked for a car-company, and had to read NHTSA traffic-safety papers as part of his job.

(This discussion prompted me to go find world records of how many people could fit in a vehicle.)

 

Edited by DavidLeeLambert
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said:

 FYI, since 2010 when YPT training became mandatory for all adult volunteers, claims have now been filed stating that there have been 600 victims of abuse.  Those are claims by individuals and do not represent multiple acts of abuse.  For anyone still believing that this bankruptcy is addressing an "old" problem, that is not the case.

 

What constitutes abuse? We had one situation where an ASM lost his temper and hit a scout with his plastic coffee cup. The scout wasn't physically hurt AT ALL, but he and his parents were mentally worried the adult could loose his temper again. We reported the situation to district and council and restricted the leader from the scouts. We never saw him again accept at his son's ECOH. The family was satisfied with our actions, but could they go back on this litigation?

We had another adult claim her son was a victim of abused because she heard scouts cussing near her son. Her son said it never happened. Could she try to file a claim?

My high school teacher son has a lot of stories where students claimed unproven acts of abuse. It is a big deal because teachers are put on leave until the investigation is completed. But, students know the actions and use them to their advantage. So, I wouldn't hold 600 recent cased as an example of continued problem. There are some bad people out there and I hope they are sorted out from claims that don't rate up to those bad acts.

Barry

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