Jump to content

Former Youth Protection Director on the dangers in Scouts BSA


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

I have seen postings where casually it is said you really can not eliminate it.  It feels like the posters are saying we must expect some abuse.

I think it is plan for the best, be prepared for the worst. 

I  believe anyone here has the goal of zero abuse. Its what we plan to achieve and strive to succeed. 

But, I have never made a plan of any type that I did not expect that their would be something go wrong, no matter how hard I try. 

I think it is more the expectation some how the plan will have failures no matter how careful we are. Which I personally think is helpful, if one is TOO confident in their plan, they are less diligent. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 466
  • 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

I second all of that. Factor in this little story, as well. Add it to the consideration of “who [you] are dealing with” and “Don’t send your Eagle badge back to National. It does not seem to care.” Yo

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.

Posted Images

5 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

Agreed that would be not described as 2 10 years olds talking about sex but rather one ten year old telling another 10 year old about how she is abused. a ten year old telling another they saw mom and boyfriend kissing is not.

Especially if Mom and BF are unaware of it.  Also depends ofn what defines "making out", as there too are levels there.  All a murky and is open to distortion and inuendo.  Of course, we also have the lovely accepted so called Reality TV and some pretty questionable stuff, along with even suggestive commercials and ones for "adults".  Our culture and society is often "free range" in respect to questionable activities in front of kids and the general public.

 

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

 I think what some are saying is with youth, one must also consider the parents wants. 

While the youth may not be opposed to receiving pornography, the parent almost certainly would be. The same goes for language and others. So while a youth may be abused by your definition, the parent of said youth may see it differently.

I think that if behavior occurred within the parameters of what I outlined I am pretty sure the parent would agree that it was abuse.  

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

I think that if behavior occurred within the parameters of what I outlined I am pretty sure the parent would agree that it was abuse.  

That is my point. 

Unless I misunderstood your initial post, the example you gave would not be abuse if both youth were okay with it. 

But even if both youth were okay with it, the parents would consider it abuse. 

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

Any time a scout was exposed to or imposed upon something of a sexual nature that was unwanted by the scouter. That would include being given pornography where it was given for the pleasure of the giver (wanting to see the reaction). I cannot get graphic here.

Per this case (POC and current Plan), “making and showing pornography” is defined as “”child abuse.” That also holds true for definitions used elsewhere.

In my case, pornos were tossed in the tent on my first camp out. He was broadcast grooming every boy there. Showing 10 year old me what was in that first magazine is child abuse. There are images I saw 55+ years ago, shown to me by his brother who shamed me into looking at them, that I’ve never been able to exorcise from my brain.

Edited by ThenNow
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

I think that if behavior occurred within the parameters of what I outlined I am pretty sure the parent would agree that it was abuse.  

I can see you don't have the experience of dealing with parents. Logical reasoning isn't always how it works. 

And, there is hiarchy of units, COs, districts, and councils. Who should drive this cart?

Barry

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, HelpfulTracks said:

That is my point. 

Unless I misunderstood your initial post, the example you gave would not be abuse if both youth were okay with it. 

But even if both youth were okay with it, the parents would consider it abuse. 

That is exactly what I am saying.  this would be behavior that would have to be addressed especially to the owner of the material. It is still not sexual abuse. That would have to be explained to parents.

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

Per this case (POC and current Plan), “making and showing pornography” is defined as “”child abuse.” That also holds true for definitions used elsewhere.

If 10 year old Johnny showed 10 year old John a porn mag that he stole from his father that is not child abuse.  If twenty year old Johnny showed thirteen year old John a porn magazine and wanted to see his reaction to it (physical reaction) that is child abuse.

I would like to add though that the behavior of a 10 year old showing another 10 year old a porn mag is not behavior to be tolerated.

Edited by johnsch322
additional thought
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jcousino said:

if zero tolerance is not your goal then please get away from any youth.

Zero child abuse is the goal...

"Zero tolerance" is not, because EVERY case is different.  Some are clear cut.  Others are not.  Those that are not require dialog amongst unit leaders, parents, SE (currently), and then law enforcement and courts to find a way through the quagmire.

Edited by InquisitiveScouter
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

:huh: We appear off topic, to wit

4 hours ago, HelpfulTracks said:

No worries. This thread has been a flurry of post over the last couple of hours. I am still trying to make sense of all the back and forth, and who was replying to whom about what. 

  

4 hours ago, ThenNow said:

Moderators: You know I LOVE to banter, bloviate and blather, but I think we are getting nowhere (slowly) and some are reacting so quickly that substantive comments by some who are being thoughtful (even agreeing) are getting buried under the frenzy. I like it, but how to reign it in a smidgeon? Send it to a tag-team cage match thread? I think there’s a lot of “let’s wait and see” that we need to agree to adopt. Just me. I want to hear more about the 72 hour food drop experience. I’m intrigued.

 

Topic was temporarily locked for some housekeeping. Sorry for the inconvenience.

@gpurlee@Eagle1993@elitts@MattR @T2Eagle

Edited by RememberSchiff
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Zero child abuse is the goal...

"Zero tolerance" is not, because EVERY case is different.  Some are clear cut.  Others are not.  Those that are not require dialog amongst unit leaders, parents, SE (currently), and then law enforcement and courts to find a way through the quagmire.

For example, recall the "zero tolerance" case of Eagle Scout who was suspended for 20 days for keeping a 2-inch utility knife locked in his car parked on school property.

https://www.foxnews.com/story/school-chief-sticks-by-zero-tolerance-ruling-for-eagle-scout

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, RememberSchiff said:

For example, recall the "zero tolerance" case of Eagle Scout who was suspended for 20 days for keeping a 2-inch utility knife locked in his car parked on school property.

https://www.foxnews.com/story/school-chief-sticks-by-zero-tolerance-ruling-for-eagle-scout

Yeah, big difference between two 12 year olds sharing a SI swimsuit issue and a SM showing graphic stuff on his phone. Both require a response, but it doesn't sit well with me to say that the 12 yo should get kicked out of scouts and reported to police for that action vs guided in appropriateness.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, malraux said:

Yeah, big difference between two 12 year olds sharing a SI swimsuit issue and a SM showing graphic stuff on his phone. Both require a response, but it doesn't sit well with me to say that the 12 yo should get kicked out of scouts and reported to police for that action vs guided in appropriateness.

Not sure your comparison.  The OP shared a link about an Eagle with a knife in his emergency kit in his car.  Still, point taken as to S.I. and phone.

 

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

Not sure your comparison.  The OP shared a link about an Eagle with a knife in his emergency kit in his car.  Still, point taken as to S.I. and phone.

 

Its more that I get really leery of very wide zero tolerance policies and was giving a specific example.

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

The youth numbers could use some specifics also. We had mother/leader overhear a tent of scouts talking about sex. She filed on that. We investigated and found the tent had four scouts the same age who had all been close friends (her son was one of them) since Tigers. It was nothing more than curious sex talk. Mom felt here son was a victim.

Not to say that youth sex abuse doesn't happen, we have had a couple of pretty bad scandal's of youth sex abuse in our state high schools, partially in sports.. But, I have also heard some edgy discussions from tents full of scouts on high adventure trips where we are forced to set up tents next to each other. 

Interestingly my wife had the same experience with girls in the the GSUSA. Innocent in the nature of the situation, but eye opening for parents/adults. My wife asked if there was anything she was supposed to do, and the leadership told her to call the police. Really? She didn't But, I can certainly see why there might appear to be so many sex abuse claims without further investigation. 

That's the problem I have had with this whole thing. I was accused in other posts of not having any experience with the data being used here. True, nobody here does. But i have experience with situations that were filed under the category of abuse that wouldn't come under the sex abuse most folks are thinking in these discussions. I would really like to know the real numbers.

Barry

Maybe it's normal now, but I don't remember any sex talk going on in my troop from 90-94.  There literally was no discussion of girls when Scouting was going on.  Seems really strange to me that this occurs now.  Even when we met international units that had girls, we just did our own thing.  Scouting was an escape from girls.  Our parents didn't "open the hanger doors" at dining outs, and we didn't talk about girls.

10 hours ago, Eagledad said:

An older scout tenting with a younger scout would be a red flag that would require further discussion, not so much because of a predatory behavior, but because it is so rare, something isn't normal. 99.9 percent of scouts tent with their friends. I certainly would have the discussion. 

Barry

This might also be a new thing.  Maybe it was because our troop was so small - about 20 Scouts.  I shared my tent with anyone who asked.  Mostly because mine was the only tent that wasn't canvas and didn't leak.  I had a nice LL Bean Geodesic and it was roomy.  Never thought about the age of the Scouts with me.  

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...