Catholics turn

[fred8033 1593]

1 hour ago, Tired_Eagle_Feathers said:

Both things can be true. 

There has definitely been an ongoing attempt to undermine American institutions for most of my life.  Anything that promotes patriotism and pride in America is under attack.   "Nationalism" is now a dirty word.  There are many who want to see institutions like BSA fail.  A nation full of people who do not love their country is easy to divide.

As for the child abuse, I personally think the BSA did the best it could in the times it operated.  The earliest entry in the P-list is like 1912 or so.  There were no computer databases back then - even into the 70s.  What was the best course of action for BSA back then?  They could report to the police, but often times nothing was done.  People were not as eager to believe that a "fine member of the community" could do such a thing back then.  An abuser could simply go to another town and start abusing again.  Background checks were probably relatively impossible.  I'm convinced that the BSA keeping its own database of abusers was the best course of action prior to about 1970.

Maybe sometime after that they could have relied on the government to punish and keep track of pedophiles.  But I'm not sure I would rely on that.  I wonder if BSA still keeps a database of known abusers?

Now one thing BSA should have done was institute powerful YPT policies faster.  I'm sure we all agree that YPT is fantastic and is the best way to protect Scouts.

Anyway, the reason why charter organizations are dropping Scouts is very simple: money.  It has become too financially risky to become legally associated with a youth organization today.

The solution is self-chartering.  Troops should be chartered via their councils.  We shouldn't be trying to hitch our wagons to other organizations.

Undermining american institutions ... Agree

BSA files were a good thing.  ... Intelligible Volunteer Files were always a good idea and BSA took those files very seriously.  Lots of effort was made to keep them complete and accurate.  I wish BSA could keep such files still.  BUT, it might be in BSA's legal interest to NOT be the gatekeeper of that information as it just creates future legal risk.  Someone in the future could use those files as evidence of mistakes and liability.  ...  Business in the 1980s and 1990s started standardized record purging (emails, files, etc).  The idea was to purge before massive litigation was conceived.  Companies recognized legal shifts to liability fish.  BSA should have seen this case coming. 

"Prior to about 1970" ... 1970s started the evolution of the laws, not the tracking.  BUT, there was not and probably still is not enough of a national wide tracking database.  So, I'd argue the BSA needed to track those volunteers probably until 2010 and probably still need to do that now.

Government tracking pedophiles?  ... I don't think there is such a list except after conviction.  Maybe open cases.  

YPT policies faster ... Yes, BSA should have improved policies faster.  BUT, I'd best BSA viewed this more as a society issue and a sick person issue.  But yes, BSA should have done better on it's policies and expectations.

Self-charter ...  Councils should not charter troops.  IMHO, troops should be chartered by immediate small groups.   Perhaps a collection of parents and volunteers.  BSA can be a standards body; a certification body; a resources organization.  The issue is chartering infers more oversight than BSA can do.  Key point is BSA needs to structurally protect itself from future liability.  

 

29 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

What BSA did was to hide the fact that they had a problem within the organization with child predators using it as an environment for depredation.  They chose to protect the image of the organization and accepted the risks involved without making substantive changes to protect children, rather than  bring the problem  to light. 

Those are still horrible actions, and certainly "bad karma," but they aren't the same thing as covering up a crime.

I truly believe leaders back then viewed it as a society issue and they were doing their honest best.  Could they have done more?  Absolutely.  I am disappointed they did not.  Then again, society was drastically different back in the 1970s and even in the 1980s.  IMHO, true "awareness" started in the late 1980s and early the 1990s.  Effective organizational understanding in the late 1990s.

[yknot 1338]

1 hour ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Have you any evidence that BSA covered up crimes? In the reports I have read, once BSA became aware of the situation they removed the individual from Scouting. Depending upon jurisdiction, mandatory reporting laws came for youth volunteers came about in the late 1970s to late 1980s (first mandatory reporting laws only protected physicians from false reports, and they started in the late 1960s/early 1970s). In the files I have read,  it is noted that parents did not want to prosecute the pedophile because they did not want their child to relive the horrors in court. One file showed a pedophile going to a mental institution instead of jail because the parents would not press charges. Once he was released from the mental institution, he moved to a new location, and applied to work for the BSA. If it wasn't for the Ineligible Volunteer File that had him in it, he may have gotten hired since he did have a clean background.

Another situation I am aware of was never reported to anyone.. The individual was a 'well respected and upright member of the community," Individual knew no one would believe him, except his parents, and he did not want his father taking the law into his own hands. He does not blame BSA, but the abuser, who is now long dead.

In a May 28, 2019 letter to Congress Chief Scout Executive Michael Surbaugh admitted that BSA did allow credibly accused child abusers to return to scouting. That is covering up for them, and it was exposed multiple times in many of the lawsuits that were resolved or pending prior to the bankruptcy. It was reported upon in multiple places as a follow up to his earlier December 2018 letter to Congress in which he had denied such events ever took place. 

[Tired_Eagle_Feathers 30]

19 minutes ago, yknot said:

In a May 28, 2019 letter to Congress Chief Scout Executive Michael Surbaugh admitted that BSA did allow credibly accused child abusers to return to scouting.

Well what was the point of having the pervert files?!?!

[AwakeEnergyScouter 247]

1 hour ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

I think you have this part wrong.  BSA did not cover for anyone.  It's that they had accusations, and not enough info to make allegations.  False allegations are a crime... defamation, libel, slander, etc.

As I understand it, where they had enough info, or victims or families who wanted it brought to the authorities, they reported.

What BSA did was to hide the fact that they had a problem within the organization with child predators using it as an environment for depredation.  They chose to protect the image of the organization and accepted the risks involved without making substantive changes to protect children, rather than  bring the problem  to light. 

This could well be. @Eagle94-A1, I didn't have any particular report in mind when I typed that, no. It was just my overall impression of the scandal, but it's quite possible that I'm wrong. I didn't follow the unfolding of the scandal in detail, since it wasn't my old NSO and also didn't think I'd be involved with it. I'd imagine whatever faults someone might find in this characterization, it's almost certainly more accurate than mine, and my point wasn't really so much about re-litigating the details of the scandal but rather that introducing a bunch of side tracks to that the BSA put organizational reputation above taking action to protect children is not taking action to protect children in the future. That also applies to observations about problems with rule of law in some of the posts above. It's non-actionable, especially when it comes to the past. Bad stuff happened. Ok, what are you going to do about it? Conclude that it was too bad, so sad, but there's nothing to be done? Surely not. That's how the scandal happened in the first place. 

To actually protect children in the future, we need to accept responsibility in the leadership way. By that I mean that you accept the responsibility for cleaning up messes that weren't your fault and apologize while doing it. I doubt anyone here on this forum causally did anything to contribute to the scandal. (If nothing else, odds are in favor of this.) So on a personal level, nobody here has anything to apologize for. But now, every single person in the BSA has an opportunity to do something about this, including the vast majority of people who had no idea, especially not of the scale. And a key part of doing something is looking at what went wrong without being defensive and fixing it.

Own the failure, commit to continuous improvement. This could include pointing out that "pillars of the community" can and have committed serious crimes, and that this is exactly why rule of law is so important. The BSA as an organization can't fix weak legal institutions, but the individual voters in it can advocate for strengthening rule of law politically. The rape report and prosecution rates at least in Sweden have gone up quite a bit compared to where they used to be, and that's because people in general started to expect the police to investigate and prosecute rape once people started to realize how common it was, yet rare for perpetrators to be held to account. There was a slow collective WTF reaction. So even those kinds of cultural factors beyond anyone's direct control can change after shared societal experiences like this CSA scandal. 

This is the nuts and bolts of actually building strong, transparent institutions. Even when you get unfair criticism or even plain made up criticism, getting all defensive as a leader makes you ineffective. Let's face it, part of leadership is always having unfair accusations lobbed at you. In your role as a leader, you can't be responding to every unfair accusation with a point list of why it's unfair. You can complain privately to your spouse and personal friends, but in your role as a leader you need to have a stiff upper lip. And when there are real problems, your job is to fix them whether you caused them or not.

YPT is a concrete answer to "what are you going to do about it?" That's constructive. Is there more? Are we all implementing it well enough for it to be effective? Are there potential holes in it? Those are all productive directions to take the scandal. "It was the Illuminati" isn't, especially when people don't agree on whether the Illuminati even exist. 

[Tired_Eagle_Feathers 30]

1 hour ago, fred8033 said:

Self-charter ...  Councils should not charter troops.  IMHO, troops should be chartered by immediate small groups.   Perhaps a collection of parents and volunteers. 

I've been reading about this, and evidently there is significant liability that could fall on the individual board of directors if a troop self-charters by making itself a 501c3.  In addition, the problem is that the BOD will constantly be changing as parents come and go in the troop.

But whatever we do we need to move away from counting on external charter organizations propping us up.

[fred8033 1593]

38 minutes ago, yknot said:

In a May 28, 2019 letter to Congress Chief Scout Executive Michael Surbaugh admitted that BSA did allow credibly accused child abusers to return to scouting. 

The sentence is misleading.  Inferring a general rule.  It is the far, far exception and the outlier that proves the rule.  BSA had millions of registered adults.   I've read many, many of the IVF files and did not see what is inferred here. 

The quote was "I have reviewed information that now makes clear to me that decades ago BSA did, in at least some instances, allow individuals to return to Scouting even after credible accusations of sexual abuse."  ... It was not the policy or rule.  Any organization of millions of people will have "some instances".

It is interesting in the same 2019 letter / testimony that he advocated for creating a government run national registry that youth organizations can use to screen volunteers.  50+ years since the 1970s laws started and in 2019 there was still no effective way for youth organizations to screen volunteers. 

Edited August 7, 2023 by fred8033

[fred8033 1593]

24 minutes ago, Tired_Eagle_Feathers said:

I've been reading about this, and evidently there is significant liability that could fall on the individual board of directors if a troop self-charters by making itself a 501c3.  In addition, the problem is that the BOD will constantly be changing as parents come and go in the troop.

But whatever we do we need to move away from counting on external charter organizations propping us up.

I agree on avoiding an external organization propping up scouting.  The charters were far more about marketing and very, very little about oversight.  The issue was the paperwork did not match the intentions or the execution.  Thus, massive liability.  

I'm not sure the leaders of a troop are ever fully protected; no matter who charters.  They should be insured and trained.  Also, it seems right to me.  Responsibility closer to the immediate people.

Edited August 7, 2023 by fred8033

[Tired_Eagle_Feathers 30]

16 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

The sentence is misleading.  Inferring a general rule.  It is the far, far exception and the outlier that proves the rule.  BSA had millions of registered adults.   I've read many, many of the IVF files and did not see what is inferred here. 

The quote was "I have reviewed information that now makes clear to me that decades ago BSA did, in at least some instances, allow individuals to return to Scouting even after credible accusations of sexual abuse."  ... It was not the policy or rule.  Any organization of millions of people will have "some instances".

It is interesting in the same 2019 letter / testimony that he advocated for creating a government run national registry that youth organizations can use to screen volunteers.  50+ years since the 1970s laws started and in 2019 there was still no effective way for youth organizations to screen volunteers. 

Thanks for that, Fred.  Certainly puts things in the light that I understood them to be all along. 

It seems clear to me that the BSA did the best it could in keeping track of harmful people.

I wonder if they still maintain such a list or have abandoned it due to potential liability? 

[yknot 1338]

34 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

The sentence is misleading.  Inferring a general rule.  It is the far, far exception and the outlier that proves the rule.  BSA had millions of registered adults.   I've read many, many of the IVF files and did not see what is inferred here. 

The quote was "I have reviewed information that now makes clear to me that decades ago BSA did, in at least some instances, allow individuals to return to Scouting even after credible accusations of sexual abuse."  ... It was not the policy or rule.  Any organization of millions of people will have "some instances".

It is interesting in the same 2019 letter / testimony that he advocated for creating a government run national registry that youth organizations can use to screen volunteers.  50+ years since the 1970s laws started and in 2019 there was still no effective way for youth organizations to screen volunteers. 

The context for his letter and the quote were, as I cited, the hundreds of lawsuits that had been settled, gone to court, or were still pending at that time and were what pushed BSA into bankruptcy. BSA's liability for the child sexual abuse cases had been definitively established by 2019, which was why the organization had to file for bankruptcy. 

However more you may want to try and minimize the BSA's admission in a letter that was already expertly crafted by lawyers and PR advisors to minimize and deflect that responsibility, the fact remains that BSA does have an established history of covering up for child predators and it's documented in that letter. 

[yknot 1338]

52 minutes ago, Tired_Eagle_Feathers said:

I've been reading about this, and evidently there is significant liability that could fall on the individual board of directors if a troop self-charters by making itself a 501c3.  In addition, the problem is that the BOD will constantly be changing as parents come and go in the troop.

But whatever we do we need to move away from counting on external charter organizations propping us up.

I would say the traditional charter organization model, except for a few outliers, is heading towards extinction. It just doesn't work from either an operations or a liability standpoint in today's environment. 

[skeptic 997]

Part of the broader issue.  While your comments are indicative of some very poor decision making, it is not the whole picture over the history of the program.  For some reason, the FACT that the IV files were even created should be a positive piece of this, especially since there are instances where the intent of the files did what was needed.  This was at a time when few, if any other groups were even trying to find a solution.  Let us not minimize the larger society's poor response and even greater evidence of hiding issues, especially where money or political power was involved.  BSA is not, nor ever was the focus of this problem, only another victim that was used by the actual abusers, just as they used other groups.  Just as much, if not more, fault should be found by the legal profession, our corrupt leaders, predators in most larger institutions like schools, churches, other youth serving groups. and even many familial responses.  And, it is obvious that it is still a major societal issue, and BSA has made huge efforts to deal with it, including taking a lead role in trying to find viable ways that might stop some of the darkness in the larger community from intruding.  But, it will never fully succeed, as it is not the whole of society, and it cannot control everything in that larger society.  Trying to blame BSA for all of the larger issue is simply unreasonable and foolish.  JMHO of course.

[fred8033 1593]

21 minutes ago, yknot said:

... the fact remains that BSA does have an established history of covering up for child predators and it's documented in that letter. 

Poppycock.  The legal system found BSA with it's huge insurance and property assets liable.  In the same context, the parents, police, schools and the rest of society covered up too.  The issue is legally tying liability to all the other conspirators.  This was looting for legal profit.  

Edited August 7, 2023 by fred8033

[yknot 1338]

57 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

Poppycock.  The legal system found BSA with it's huge insurance and property assets liable.  In the same context, the parents, police, schools and the rest of society covered up too.  The issue is legally tying liability to all the other conspirators.  This was looting for legal profit.  

As a kid, I never heard coach jokes or priest jokes, but I sure heard scoutmaster jokes. Abuse in scouting was pretty widely known and pretty much batted aside as just another humorous woodland hazard like wet socks or a nosy bear. If it took lawsuits to change that mentality, I think that says more about scout leadership than lawyers, frankly. 

[AwakeEnergyScouter 247]

3 minutes ago, yknot said:

As a kid, I never heard coach jokes or priest jokes, but I sure heard scoutmaster jokes. Abuse in scouting was pretty widely known and pretty much batted aside as just another humorous woodland hazard like wet socks or a nosy bear. If it took lawsuits to change that mentality, I think that says more about scout leadership than lawyers, frankly. 

W H A T ? ? ?

Absolutely not normal in the scouting movement as whole. Massive red flag.

I have never heard of this joke category. That's pretty insane. I mean... WTF. Rape is nothing like wet socks. Even if this was just your local scouting environment that would still be super damning. Going to stop typing now before I lose my composure and generate unmeritorious karma myself by acting in anger. 

May all survivors have happiness and the source of happiness

May they be free from suffering and the root of suffering

May the not be separated from the happiness devoid of suffering

May they dwell in the great equanimity free from passion, aggression, and ignorance 🙏

[MikeS72 437]

1 hour ago, yknot said:

As a kid, I never heard coach jokes or priest jokes, but I sure heard scoutmaster jokes. Abuse in scouting was pretty widely known and pretty much batted aside as just another humorous woodland hazard like wet socks or a nosy bear. If it took lawsuits to change that mentality, I think that says more about scout leadership than lawyers, frankly. 

I don't know when and where you were a kid, but I can tell you from experience in multiple councils (6) in multiple states, beginning in the early 1960's, that in those councils abuse was not 'pretty widely know and pretty much batted aside'.

In all those years I can only attest to being personally aware of two concrete cases of abuse in scouting.  One resulted in the individual being permanently banned, with the local police being the ones who did not pursue the case any futher.  The other resulted in the individual being sentence to 12 years in prison.

To state that a letter admits that BSA covered things up and allowed people with credible accusations to move from one unit to another, while not providing the actual quote is disingenuous at best.  As @fred8033said earlier, with as many millions of adult volunteers who have been registered with the BSA it would be next to impossible to expect the IVF to filter them all out.  It could be as easy as someone using Bob instead of Robert on an application for it to slide through.  That doesn't mean that BSA "allowed" them back in; it means they were able to fool the system.