Jump to content

Former Youth Protection Director on the dangers in Scouts BSA


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 449
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

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 s

You need to slow down and take a few breaths between reading and typing, you aren't even responding to the right point of outrage here. Eagledad was talking about the Scouting program and the pat

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.

12 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

Does anyone here seem to think that today’s news conference will change the course of the Bankruptcy?

Not really, in this sense:

  1. The plan was going down in flames anyway. This just reaffirms it.
  2. The TCC was going to demand tougher YP standards. This just reaffirms it.
  3. Johnson may (or may not) have gotten subpoenaed, now  he 100% will get deposed by like EVERYONE.
  4. The TCC wanted $1.5 billion? Yep. That just got more likely.

Where it comes in the longer term, post-bankruptcy

  1. The bankruptcy covers claims prior to February 2020. All future claims? Johnson is their star witness. As I noted and Kosnoff put it better: he'll be in depositions for the rest of his life.
  2. The BSA is going to get put under some kind of receivership as it pertains to YP. It doesn't want to report data? Too bad. It doesn't want to name names? Too bad. It doesn't want to hire outside auditors annually? Too bad.
  3. Membership is going to take another hit. That 1 million scouts by 2025? Yeah, maybe not.
  4. Congress may in fact at this point step in and hold hearings similar to the USA Gymnastics. Don't bet the house on it, but it is now a better-than-0% chance.

 

 

Edited by CynicalScouter
  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

I think it gives more ammunition to the forces that think Chapter 7 is the right way to go.  Dissolve the organization and start over.

Honestly, I think it primarily shifts the full force of leverage back to the TCC, where it rightfully belongs (imnsho). It utterly validates what it has been saying and likely assists in tanking the current Plan, opening wide the door to TCC 1.0.

Edited by ThenNow
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

So questions to the legal folk.  The BSA solely has made policy for youth protection.  Local councils were expected to follow national promulgated policies.  In the past, the local and national council would be sued together and the insurance would be held by the national council.   So questions:

1.  If the BSA has been liquidated, could not the councils say that they followed national policies that they had no role in making so they should not be liable for a national policy failure?

2.  If the BSA has been liquidated, the local councils will not have access to the insurance companies because they did not have the contract (some councils have had additional policies that they would be able to access but the large dollars are the national ones)?

3.  If the insurors are out, could this not end up being fewer dollars than is on the table now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the concerns I have is the specific names in the IVF be distributed, which was called for in the press conference.

I have been tangentially involved in that process for a few names placed on the list. None we for sexual abuse or physical abuse to a scout. They were for things, like white collar crime, fraud, incomplete of misleading information on BSA app, assault against an adult outside of scouting, even the use of fowl language/gestures etc. Of those that had criminal consequences, only one had gone through the justice system. 

The thing is there is not a typical due process function, at least since I have been involved, I cannot speak to past years. Someone gets accused, a review is held, national gets notified and they are put on the list (some are permanent some can appeal for reinstatement,). In some cases they can appeal for reinstatement at a future date. I have not seen the appeal process, but I can say even though some have said they would, that I have seen only one reinstated, but with conditions. That person never attended another event. 

The only case of sexual about I know of personally (as pertains to my Scouting position), is a case where a Scoutmaster was accused of offering to have sex with two scouts on separate occasions. The Scouts declined and nothing physical occurred. The Scoutmaster denied the allegations. The scouts and their parents did not press charges. The Scoutmaster was placed on permanent ineligible in the IVF.

My concern is two fold. 

1. If the IVF is routinely made public, then it is possible, even likely, that innocent people will be labeled as child predators. And without any due process required. Which has a whole set or legal and moral ramifications.

2. If the bar is raised to place someone on the IVF then we will likely still have child predators running free in Scouting. 

I think the names should be placed with authorities, but not released publicly but still maintained as ineligible by Scouting.  If the authorities find cause to press charges then they will become known publicly.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

opening wide the door to TCC 1.0.

Right and that is where I think we are heading: a chapter 11 that looks like the TCC (whatever that looks like).

Chapter 7? Here is the thing: even a TCC plan requires 2/3rds. Is it possible there are enough victims who are now in the “No, let it burn, vote no on any plan”? Group?

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

the BSA has been liquidated, could not the councils say that they followed national policies that they had no role in making so they should not be liable for a national policy failure?

No because independent whatever national established the councils have an obligation to ensure the safety of those scouts and how those units were operating. they didn’t. That said you get your question on parsing out liability it helps the LC. It reduces the liability but I don’t think 100% absolves.

 

3 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

If the BSA has been liquidated, the local councils will not have access to the insurance companies because they did not have the contract (some councils have had additional policies that they would be able to access but the large dollars are the national ones)?

 Let’s be clear here: even a BSA liquidation means the polices still name all councils as insureds or co-insureds. More likely to happen: the insurance companies refuse to honor them claiming BSA in conjunction with the LCs covered up and hid, pretty much Hartford’s argument until it made the deal.

not saying it will work but that is where that train is headed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

Does anyone here seem to think that today’s news conference will change the course of the Bankruptcy?

Depends what people's opinions were before. For me, the conference listed changes to YP and tried to paint a picture of clumsy leadership. The changes seemed good to me and might be a bit more detailed than what the TCC wants. As for clumsy leadership, the BSA hired one great person but, due to their constant lack of focus on what's important, they dropped the ball.

There were no numbers about how bad it is now, so I don't see that the sky is falling. If anything, that group of speakers believed in the mission of the BSA. Other than YP changes, the only suggestion I took was a change in leadership. But, that's my bias so maybe I'm just seeing what I want, just like everyone else.

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

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. 

As someone who wants to see Scouting preserved, I would like to hear more of your thoughts on how we can achieve this. 

2 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

So we should have just ditched the outdoor program?  No, we needed to improve our methods to protect children in the activities.

I agree 100%

2 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

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.

Can you expound on what he has done and how we can incorporate it in Scouting? I am not familiar with what he has done.

2 hours 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.  

I am glad to hear you say that. I hope we get the chance. 

Edited by HelpfulTracks
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, HelpfulTracks said:

One of the concerns I have is the specific names in the IVF be distributed, which was called for in the press conference.

Somehow the Catholic Church and USA gynamstics figured out ways to do it.

BSA can continue to refuse and it will get ordered by the court to do so.

Here is the Permanently Ineligible and Ineligible Members and Participants

https://usagym.org/pages/aboutus/pages/permanently_ineligible_members.html

and the Catholic dioceses do it diocese by diocese not one big national list.

So it can be done. 

Edited by CynicalScouter
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Somehow the Catholic Church and USA gynamstics figured out ways to do it.

BSA can top order it will get ordered but the court to do so.

Here is the Permanently Ineligible and Ineligible Members and Participants

https://usagym.org/pages/aboutus/pages/permanently_ineligible_members.html

and the Catholic dioceses do it diocese by diocese not one big national list.

So it can be done. 

Yes, if you look at the violation code, those people have been arrested and/or convicted of a crime. Even searching the first few that did not have a violation listed, it was easy to find they had been convicted or pled to crime. 

I am definitely in favor of doing what US Gymnastics is doing. 

But the IVF also contains people who have not even had criminal complaints filed against them. 

Do you think that people who have not had any criminal complaint should be included in what is put out publicly?

Edited by HelpfulTracks
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, MattR said:

As for clumsy leadership, the BSA hired one great person but, due to their constant lack of focus on what's important, they dropped the ball.

You mean Mr. Johnson? If so, I think they punted it over the fence and into the tar pit.

22 minutes ago, MattR said:

There were no numbers about how bad it is now, so I don't see that the sky is falling. If anything, that group of speakers believed in the mission of the BSA. Other than YP changes, the only suggestion I took was a change in leadership. But, that's my bias so maybe I'm just seeing what I want, just like everyone else.

Here’s my take, now that I’m somewhat recovered from the press conference. (It will take more than a couple therapy sessions to work that out, I’m certain of it.) Regardless how damning or not, sky falling or aloft, sour grapes or not, highly substantive or not, it happened and it looked, sounded, smelled and tasted rotten to the majority of the public who might view it. To survivors, you read some of our reactions and you will certainly hear and read more. “Pitching it over to you, TCC, up in the booth.” Net, net? BSA took a YUGE credibility hit in the bankruptcy, if not much more broadly. HEADLINES (not details). BSA is going to need to eat some road kill crow and wring its hands if it’s going to maintain any equilibrium in the case. That’s just what I think and feel. Maybe too much feeling, but can you blame me?

Edited by ThenNow
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
×
×
  • Create New...