"getting rid" of a family

[jenniferden8 10]

as for the backround check, we were led to belive that as long as you don't lie about having a record, and the offence was unrelated to children or sex crimes they would let it through.

[FScouter 24]

It is the responsibility of the council Scout Executive to deal with a report of child abuse. YP training tells us to immediately report abuse of a child, sexual or otherwise involving an adult leader or registered child, or abuse that took place during a Scout activity. Abuse that took place outside of Scouting, and not involving a registered child or adult leader should be reported to the local child protective services agency or child abuse hotline.

 

Proof positive is not required, just a reasonable suspicion that abuse has taken place is all that is required. There is no need to investigate, just report and let the child abuse professionals deal with it. Once a report has been made to the Scout Executive, an investigation will be initiated. No one except the parties involved will be informed about the progress or results of the investigation.

 

In the story that was related here a teenage girl was making out with a teenage boy at 3 AM, resulting in the father yelling across the camp and apparently making a scene. Apparently neither the girl, the boy, nor the father are registered members or adult leaders. This doesnt sound at all like child abuse, but if in doubt, a report could be made to child protective services because the individuals involved are not Scouts, and also to the Scout Executive because the incident took place at a Scout activity.

 

The incident with the boy, apparently a Cub Scout, that touched a 3 year old and was intimate with his cousin does sound like child abuse that should have been reported. If fact you said that it was reported. The council will absolutely revoke the membership of any member that has been accused of child abuse and the resulting investigation substantiates the accusations. The fact that the boy is still with his parents and the council has not revoked his membership should give you a clue as to the result of the investigation. Even still, knowing that the boy may have problems with child abuse it would be prudent to keep an eye on him. You may want to require a parent to accompany him at all Scout activities.

 

If the boy is disruptive to the pack, then the unit has an obligation to work with the boy and his parents to plan a course of action to eliminate the disruptive behaviors. If the problems continue, to the detriment of the pack, there may be no alternative but the remove the boy from the pack. This is the responsibility of the unit committee and the chartered organization rep. The council will not do this for you. This is not their role.

 

If other family members like the sister and her boyfriend are disruptive, dont invite them to participate in your pack activities. Dont expect your DE or council to solve this for you.

 

The den leader was arrested for assault. A criminal background check is done on all new adult leaders. If the council did not inform the unit that the application would not be accepted, then either there was no conviction, or the charge was minor and not significantly serious enough to preclude that individual from serving as a leader. Other than that, the council will not intervene regarding the units selection of adult leaders. It is the unit that selected the adult, the unit that approved the application. It is the unit that may choose to remove that leader. Your DE or council should advise you how to go about this, but dont expect them to do it for you.

 

What your unit commissioner told you is correct. The unit may remove the leader. The unit may also remove the boy. This council will not do this for you, barring failing the background check or a substantiation of child abuse. It is not the responsibility of the commissioner, the district, or the council to step in and solve unit issues with a troublesome family.

 

The bottom line here is that the council will support the unit, advise the unit, but they will not step in and take over simply because the unit finds the challenge of removing a leader or boy to be distasteful.

 

Best of luck.

 

[evmori 11]

Actually, the CO is the one who removes a leader. The unit can't do this without the CO.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[FScouter 24]

The unit is not a separate entity from the chartered organization. The unit is a part of the CO and they are intimatly connected. The point is that the council does not revoke memberships except for flagrant violations of the charter agreement with the CO, including YP and other policy violations. Troublesome families must be removed by the unit.

[Prairie_Scouter 10]

While FScouter is correct that it's technically not the job of the district or Council to remove a disruptive Scout or family from a pack, you can approach them for support on the correct way to handle these kinds of situations. Support such as this IS their responsibility, especially if you believe that there is a concern over bodily harm. You're not expected to have the expertise or experience to know how to handle more extreme situations such as this, and they can and should help you there. When in doubt, giv'em a call; worst case is that they blow you off (not likely); best case is that they have experience with exactly this kind of problem and can give you good advice.

[Lynda J 10]

YOU HAVE TO REMOVE THIS FAMILY IMMEDIATELY. You have the legal responsibility to protect the boys in your pack. If my understanding is correct. If a member of this family assulalts or touches one of the other boys in your pack the leaders could be held responsible.

If you knowingly allow them to attend functions you could be putting the other boys in the Pack in danger.

 

I also have a problem with the adult being allowed th be a leader with a criminal background.

Our CO runs background checks every three years on every adult registered with the pack. It doesn't matter how long you have been there or who you are.

One of their members is a criminal investigator with the local police dept. They simply run everyone every three years. New adults are told this before they turn in their registration.

 

But you have little choice but to remove this family from your unit. There is no gray area here

hard line black and white.(This message has been edited by Lynda J)

[madkins007 10]

FScouter has the best overall info for you in this:

1.) Keep things in persepctive

2.) Report to the appropriate people

3.) Ask for support

 

As for removing the family, we did it before with a simple letter. The letter laid out the situation as we saw it, was non-accusatory, and offered a full reimbursement of unused dues, etc. It also stated that the decision was final and if she had any questions, she could talk to the COR or DE (both of whom had already been brought up to speed and had agreed to this).

 

We feared retaliation as well, but they just faded into the sunset.(This message has been edited by madkins007)

[frogger921 10]

Madkins 007 - in regards to the letter, was it sent certified? That sounds like the best plan. I spoke w/ our UC and they are going to handle this situation with a meeting involving them and the committee which I would like to avoid if at all possible. I want to thank you all for your thoughts and prayers w/this situation. It has weighed on me like a ton of bricks. The thought of a child being harmed in any way is heart breaking to me.

[madkins007 10]

We did not certify the letter, but figured that if she claimed ignorance of it or it was misdelivered, we would deal with that when it happened.

 

We aimed for a low-key, 'saddened but firm' tone. We felt that certified or other choices would have felt more aggressive- but that was just our thinking.

[FScouter 24]

Letters are for wimps. If your decision is to remove an individual from the unit, do it in person. Follow up with a confirming letter if you want a permanent record.

[madkins007 10]

Letter vs. face to face...

 

Letter lets us stay impersonal, calm, professional. A dozen people can review it, but it speaks one-to-one. It happens in the reader's home territory and allows them to contemplate their response before delivering it.

 

Face to face can get ugly quick- and not always started by the 'other person'. Most such meetings would be set up on the unit's home turf, with multiple members of the unit attending- 'ganging up' on the other person and putting them in a very defensive position. Face to face almost demands immediate resolution with no cooling off opportunities or second thoughts period.

 

I think there is a time and a place for both methods- but if dealing with someone I am worried about retribution from- I want to keep things at arm's length if at all possible.

 

 

[Prairie_Scouter 10]

In this case, if the family is aware of the situation, I think a letter might be the appropriate way to go. You can edit to make sure the letter is clear and to the point, and give them the opportunity to request a meeting if they'd like further discussion. This, in effect, puts the ball in their court. Rather than being for wimps, a well worded letter lets you control the situation, which can be more difficult in a face-to-face situation where someone with a "bully" mentality can gain control of the discussion.

[FScouter 24]

"...someone with a "bully" mentality can gain control of the discussion."

 

Once you have decided to remove someone, there is no discussion. Two individuals from the unit inform the individual what has been decided. The decision is final. You may not attend unit functions or participate in any way. Sorry we weren't able to work things out, but as of now the unit will be moving forward without you. Have a nice day, goodbye.

 

Done.

[Prairie_Scouter 10]

FScouter,

 

I agree with what you're saying. I guess what I was referring to was that with a letter, you are pretty much guaranteed to control the "mechanics" of the notification (rather than "discussion", let's say). In a face to face meeting, the outcome won't change, but a forceful (in a physical way) presence could potentially hijack the meeting to become a personal rant. A letter, in effect, lets you control the emotions of the event. I think this is something you play by ear. In some cases, a face to face meeting is the best way, in some cases, some other method.

 

Regardless of method, I think it's always best to follow up with a letter, copied to the Council/District, to get everything on record.