Former Youth Protection Director on the dangers in Scouts BSA

[CynicalScouter]

Oh, and he wasn't fired. It was layoffs due to budget cuts.

Let that sink in a second.

Quote

The Boy Scouts said his employment was terminated “as part of a difficult but necessary reduction in force” resulting from the bankruptcy restructuring. Like other eligible employees whose positions were eliminated, “Mr. Johnson was offered a severance package that, as standard practice, included a nondisclosure agreement and a nondisparagement clause,” the spokesman said.

So, to be clear, that REALLY does seem to indicate he NEVER got replaced as YP director.

[ThenNow]

21 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

 

@ThenNow ... could use your magic

https://www.wsj.com/articles/former-boy-scouts-head-of-abuse-prevention-says-group-is-still-unsafe-for-kids-11634066497

 

Workin on it…

[ThenNow]

1 minute ago, CynicalScouter said:

Oh, and he wasn't fired. It was layoffs due to budget cuts.

Let that sink in a second.

Quote

The Boy Scouts said his employment was terminated “as part of a difficult but necessary reduction in force” resulting from the bankruptcy restructuring. Like other eligible employees whose positions were eliminated, “Mr. Johnson was offered a severance package that, as standard practice, included a nondisclosure agreement and a nondisparagement clause,” the spokesman said.

Expand  

So, to be clear, that REALLY does seem to indicate he NEVER got replaced as YP director.

I guess that means they cut very close to the bone in all other nooks and crannies, leaving drilling into the marrow and sucking out the source of healthy blood production. Makes percent sense, er cents, to me.

[vol_scouter]

2 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

And that, in a nutshell, is the biggest blind spot for scouters and scouting.

"He doesn't really understand Scouting, therefore..."

Let me tell you this. The people who really DID "understand Scouting" got the organization into this mess because they were MORE focused on Scouting and its reputation and brand and LESS about the safety of scouts.

I WANT an outsider. I agree with Johnson: this cronyism of scouters and insiders leading the parade drove BSA into a ditch.

There needs to be OUTSIDERS or else you are just going to get the BSA groupthink of "we are great, we are perfect, we cannot be improved".

QUIT ATTRIBUTING WORDS TO ME THAT I DID NOT SAY!!!

He did a fine job with Youth Protection and was a champion.  In my discussions with him, he did not understand that the experiences in the Scouts BSA program were to build character so he had difficulty in understanding what elements needed to be retained with a new way to protect youth rather than cutting it.  It is not an excuse.  I was the one advocating external academic researchers to continuously study the program.  I agree with outside observers and did not say otherwise.  You do not have the only valid viewpoint.

[Eagle1993]

Just now, CynicalScouter said:

Oh, and he wasn't fired. It was layoffs due to budget cuts.

Let that sink in a second.

So, to be clear, that REALLY does seem to indicate he NEVER got replaced as YP director.

Um ... really.  You laid off your Director of Youth Protection while in bankruptcy due to issues with youth protection?  Um ... ok. I am just laughing right now .... I just.  I hope there is more to the story.

[CynicalScouter]

Just now, vol_scouter said:

he had difficulty in understanding what elements needed to be retained

If those elements were leading to children being sexually assaulted? Nope. They had no business being retained.

[vol_scouter]

1 minute ago, ThenNow said:

I guess that means they cut very close to the bone in all other nooks and crannies, leaving drilling into the marrow and sucking out the source of healthy blood production. Makes percent sense, er cents, to me.

As you to which you allude, it was a stupid decision.  He should have been one of the very last to go before turning off the lights for the final time.

[CynicalScouter]

1 minute ago, Eagle1993 said:

Um ... really.  You laid off your Director of Youth Protection while in bankruptcy due to issues with youth protection?  Um ... ok. I am just laughing right now .... I just.  I hope there is more to the story.

Worse, that means it got merged or dropped.

IF (and this is a giant if so brace yourself) IF BSA was strapped for cash, offered him a buy out and THEN hired someone cheaper? Ok, maybe. Maybe I can see that.

But just an outright force reduction? I mean, I can't. I just can't.

[Eagle1993]

1 minute ago, vol_scouter said:

QUIT ATTRIBUTING WORDS TO ME THAT I DID NOT SAY!!!

He did a fine job with Youth Protection and was a champion.  In my discussions with him, he did not understand that the experiences in the Scouts BSA program were to build character so he had difficulty in understanding what elements needed to be retained with a new way to protect youth rather than cutting it.  It is not an excuse.  I was the one advocating external academic researchers to continuously study the program.  I agree with outside observers and did not say otherwise.  You do not have the only valid viewpoint.

Thank you for contributing and sharing this info!  I really think having external CSA experts with experienced scouters working on change is a great approach.  There are aspects of the program that are critical.  External experts may not realize that so hopefully they can help provide solutions within the framework of the program.  I could imagine that is a tough balance at times.

[vol_scouter]

1 minute ago, CynicalScouter said:

If those elements were leading to children being sexually assaulted? Nope. They had no business being retained.

So one day we had a conversation of why there should even be an outdoor program as it would be easier to protect children in just weekly meetings.  So we should have just ditched the outdoor program?  No, we needed to improve our methods to protect children in the activities.

[CynicalScouter]

Just now, vol_scouter said:

  So we should have just ditched the outdoor program?

Like I said: there are people for whom "Keep the campfires AT ALL COSTS" is an acceptable stance.

Not for me. If child sexual abuse is running as rampant as it has been and is? You just keep doing what you are doing and keep dumping on people like Johnson who "don't get scouting"

[vol_scouter]

2 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

Thank you for contributing and sharing this info!  I really think having external CSA experts with experienced scouters working on change is a great approach.  There are aspects of the program that are critical.  External experts may not realize that so hopefully they can help provide solutions within the framework of the program.  I could imagine that is a tough balance at times.

Yes, it can be tough to find that balance but it can be achieved.  Victor Vieth who was part of the press conference has been very helpful in being strict with policies to protect children while preserving the vital program elements.

[Eagle1993]

4 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Like I said: there are people for whom "Keep the campfires AT ALL COSTS" is an acceptable stance.

Not for me. If child sexual abuse is running as rampant as it has been and is? You just keep doing what you are doing and keep dumping on people like Johnson who "don't get scouting"

I don't think anyone said that.  What they said is that we shouldn't just do weekly meetings and eliminate the outdoor program.  Honestly, scouting without an outdoor program is not scouting ... its school.  So why continue?

Risk management is not eliminating all risks.  It is mitigating them while still ensuring the program/process/product can continue.  

My son downhill skis.  Yes, he can die.  He could get seriously injured.  He wears safety equipment and skis within his ability ... but there is still the risk.  The ski club makes me sign a wavier to tell me of the risks.

My son mountain bikes.  Yes, he can die.  He could get seriously injured.  Once again, there are mitigations & waivers.

At scouting ... yes, there will and should be an outdoor program.  There should be mitigations in place to protect him.  However, there will still be some remaining risks.  Perhaps there should be more transparency over some of those risks for parents and perhaps more mitigations ... but there must still be an outdoor program.  Otherwise, I see no need for scouting.

 

[vol_scouter]

10 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Like I said: there are people for whom "Keep the campfires AT ALL COSTS" is an acceptable stance.

Not for me. If child sexual abuse is running as rampant as it has been and is? You just keep doing what you are doing and keep dumping on people like Johnson who "don't get scouting"

If we cannot instill character in the program then it is no longer Scouting.  Unlike you appear to be, I am confident that outside experts and experienced volunteers can modify programs to make a safe environment.  

[CynicalScouter]

3 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

If we cannot instill character in the program then it is no longer Scouting.  Unlike you appear to be, I am confident that outside experts and experienced volunteers can modify programs to make a safe environment.  

We'll never know because a) BSA fought tooth and claw to keep outside experts OUT and b) only agreed in the RSA plan (remember that) to have an outsider that IT SELECTED ("External Evaluator") and then only allowed that that person could "suggest" and "recommend" changes.

BSA has demonstrated it clearly cannot be trusted in this particular area.

I will note that in the last TCC townhall it was brought up that the TCC plan (which should be filed with the court literally any day now) will include much stronger language including, I suspect, that the BSA does NOT get to cherry pick its expert, that that outsider will have more power than just "Suggest" and "recommend" and that the outsiders report and other material will be made public (which is what USA Gymnastics does and the Catholic Church does as well annually).

After all this time, after all this mess, do you really think BSA is going to change voluntarily? Unless it is ordered to by a court-ordered external person?