Push Ups

[acco40 95]

What about assigning work details as punishment? For example, many units assign latrine clean-up duty to Scouts who have not acted in an appropriate manner. What are your thoughts on that?

 

At the National Jamboree push-ups were used as a task to gain a benefit (SEAL t-shirt, scuba pin, etc.) The boys loved the challenge!

 

Personally, I don't like positive things used as punishment. It gives the wrong connotation to the activities. How many know judges who "sentence" someone to community service? How do you think this warps the perception of performing community service? The same goes for different forms of exercise.

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Good point Acco. Last saturday I participated in a service project cleaning and landscaping a vacant lot in the downtown area. As it was done on short notice, it was mainly adults, as people walked by the site, I started thinking I wonder if they all think we are DUI's doing our community time.

 

There is the Adopt a Highway program, but if you see a group of kids cleaning up s roadside, Juvy work detail is the first thing I see

(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

[CubScoutJo 10]

Wow.

 

I talked with a scout while in Gettysburg last week (they were on their way to Jamboree), and I was impressed that he called me ma'am. Now I wonder if that was just something he's forced to do in his troop for fear of pushups!

 

Is it common for troops to require scouts to call adults "Sir" and "Ma'am"? Just wondering.

 

Jo

 

[SeattlePioneer 144]

The Guide to safe Scouting clearly prohibits "corporal punishment." By implication, other forms of punishment are permitted

 

My dictionary defines "corporal punishment as "punishment inflicted directly on the body, as flogging."

 

I'll agree that flogging is frowned upon, but I see nothing to prohibit a few push ups.

 

On the subject of punishment, the G2SS:

 

Youth Member Behavior Guidelines

The Boy Scouts of America is a values-based youth development organization that helps young people learn positive attributes of character, citizenship, and personal fitness. The BSA has the expectation that all participants in the Scouting program will relate to each other in accord with the principles embodied in the Scout Oath and Law.

 

One of the developmental tasks of childhood is to learn appropriate behavior. Children are not born with an innate sense of propriety and they need guidance and direction. The example set by positive adult role models is a powerful tool for shaping behavior and a tool that is stressed in Scouting.

 

Misbehavior by a single youth member in a Scouting unit may constitute a threat to the safety of the individual who misbehaves as well as to the safety of other unit members. Such misbehavior constitutes an unreasonable burden on a Scout unit and cannot be ignored.

 

Member Responsibilities

All members of the Boy Scouts of America are expected to conduct themselves in accordance with the principles set forth in the Scout Oath and Law. Physical violence, hazing, bullying, theft, verbal insults, and drugs and alcohol have no place in the Scouting program and may result in the revocation of a Scout's membership in the unit.

 

If confronted by threats of violence or other forms of bullying from other youth members, Scouts should seek help from their unit leaders or parents.

 

Unit Responsibilities

Adult leaders of Scouting units are responsible for monitoring the behavior of youth members and interceding when necessary. Parents of youth members who misbehave should be informed and asked for assistance in dealing with it.

 

The BSA does not permit the use of corporal punishment by unit leaders when disciplining youth members.

 

The unit committee should review repetitive or serious incidents of misbehavior in consultation with the parents of the child to determine a course of corrective action including possible revocation of the youth's membership in the unit.

 

If problem behavior persists, units may revoke a Scout's membership in that unit. When a unit revokes a Scout's membership, it should promptly notify the council of the action.

 

The unit should inform the Scout executive about all incidents that result in a physical injury or involve allegations of sexual misconduct by a youth member with another youth member.

 

----------------------------------------------

 

I see nothing that would prohibit a few pushups as long as it doesn't become oppressive. It might even do some good once in a while. I encountered an Art Merit badge counsellor at summer camp giving two scouts I'd brought to camp some pushups for cussing and being disrespectful. I'm sure they were richly deserved. I took the time to walk along with the group to be sure that the boys behaved better.

 

And if boys refused to do pushups as requested, I'd refer them to the Scoutmaster or the Troop Committee to decide what action might be suitable. Those powers could decide whether "punishment" was suitable or not, and decide what counsel to offer the Scout.

 

 

 

Seattle Pioneer

 

 

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Please define oppressive?

[scoutldr 732]

In a troop where no one misbehaves, the latrines must get really funky! I would be sure to recruit at least one or two bad kids so that the unpleasant work gets done.

[madkins007 10]

I think push-ups as a punishmnet show a certain lack of real thinking in the process. Whether they are permitted or not, I think it is a poor punishment AND a poor consequence.

 

Consequences for behaviors should be as natural as possible. Youth not in uniform may not be permitted to partake in some element of the program for the night (flag ceremony, contests, treats, whatever) based on a previously-known standard. OR you reward the Scouts IN uniform in some way that those out of uniform want to participate in.

 

As far as using unpleasant duties- I think this is better handled by a simple and fair rotation- maybe we could even call it somethig catchy, like the Patrol Method.

 

On the other hand, chores CAN be good consequences if handled right- http://www.loveandlogic.com/Pages/0401generic.html.

 

I LOVE the 'Love and Logic' approach- while the website stuff is kinda skimpy it is still worth a look.

 

 

[madkins007 10]

It DOES occur to me that you can create a good consequnce for uniforming glitches by making it known that "Scouts in full uniforms will be excused from [clean-up detail] after the meeting."

 

This of course assumes that the leadership or some other group will do the cleaning if there is 100% uniforming. You can replace the phrase in [brackets] with whatever makes sense for your group. For us, it was putting away tables and chairs when there were several non-uniformed Scouts. It morphed to 'sweeping' when more Scouts wore uniforms.

[packsaddle 753]

I would consider the push-ups to be hazing. No different from making him sing for his lost (and found) handbook.

[evmori 11]

Push ups aren't hazing unless they are required for membership.

 

The only thing push ups would teach is there are consequences for your actions.

 

I have always been of the school "the punishment fits the crime". Creative ways of dealing with misbehavior are usually effective.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Aardvark 10]

Is it common for troops to require scouts to call adults "Sir" and "Ma'am"?

 

 

Not required in my Troop, but most of the Scouts do refer to us adults by Mr or Ms. (I'm "Mr Art").

 

Might be a Southern thing, though (I'm a "transplant"). HAve noticed that your elders are adressed with A Mr or Miss and the first name.

 

My partners kids refer to me as "Uncle Art"; he wanted me to be treated with a tad of respect.

 

 

As for the push-ups for being late; was it the Scouts fault-or where his parents late in getting him to the meeting? If so, Mom or Dad should get the push-ups!

 

[madkins007 10]

Hazing: "To persecute or harass with meaningless, difficult, or humiliating tasks." (Dictionary.com)

 

Hazing can happen in an initiation (and is the 2nd definition), but it can happen at other times.

 

I think push-ups for lack of uniforming clearly counts in this defition. The task is meaningless (insofar as it teaches no new skills and is not a natural consequence of the infraction), difficult, and humiliating when done before the other Scouts.

 

By the way, 'to persecute' means "1. To oppress or harass with ill-treatment, especially because of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or beliefs. 2. To annoy persistently; bother." Which seems to apply well here as well.

 

 

 

Now, let's ask ourselves WHERE this practice came from. Schools? Work sites?

 

The military seems to be the source of the idea. Why does the military do it? Are they trying to produce "young men of character"? Not during basic training. They do it to humiliate, break down, teach blind obedience, and solidify the absolute superiority of the leadership.

 

 

If your unit uses this sort of activity, you better have a real killer program- otherwise you'll just teach Scouts running late or with a sock in the wash to just stay away instead of suffering the punishment.

 

I also wonder... which part of the Scout Law, Scout Oath, Aims and Methods, or other elements of the program covers or permits punishing Scouts?(This message has been edited by madkins007)

[SeattlePioneer 144]

Sorry, Madkins. I don't think minor forms of punishment to enforce rules is meaningless at all.

 

Indeed, in my view, the beginning of good character is discovering that actions have consequences.

 

Suppose a boy leaves his raingear at home and it rains. Do we need to supply him with raingear to avoid having him be "punished by nature? Are we humiliating him if we offer him a garbage sack as protection, with another garbage sack as a hat to wear?

 

Sorry, I'd have to say that your attempt to use Scout rules to prove that punishment isn't allowed is unproven in my opinion. I again note that "corporal" punishment e.g. flogging is clearly prohibited, but other forms of punishment are not, although they are limited in ways you describe.

 

I've never heard that the rules were to be interpreted in the way you describe at any training I've encountered, and pushups and kybo cleaning and other such punishments are used by some troops.

 

Furthermore, my dictionary defines hazing in the way you describe, with a purpose to "oppress, punish or harass," as being a specialized nautical usage. The more general definition given is " to initiate or discipline (fellow students) by means of horseplay, practical jokes and tricks, often in the nature of humiliating or painful ordeals." So I again suggest your use of hazing in the context of this discussion is misplaced.

 

 

That said, I don't generally use punishments like these myself. I prefer to remind misbehaving Scouts of our obligations to live the Scout Law. Repeated problems may earn someone a more formal meeting with the Scoutmaster to discuss appropriate behavior, and bad enough behavior resulted in one boy being suspended from Troop activities for a month in June. (stealing money from a tent mate, pushing a much larger boy in a way that sent him sprawling, and spraying a Cub Scout with deoderant).

 

Since then, he hasn't repeated these kinds of serious problems, leaving us to concentrate on less serious kinds of misbehavior, such as the cussing that earned him the pushups from a merit badge counselor at summercamp.

 

Still, if other Troops find such punishments useful, I see nothing in the rules that prohibit them from doing so, although there are limits to such things in Guide to Safe Scouting.

 

 

Seattle Pioneer

[KoreaScouter 13]

You can argue all day whether or not pushups constitute corporal punishment. The G2SS doesn't specifically define pushups as corporal punishment, so I'd say ask your unit's SM. If you ask me, they are, but that's not the reason I don't use pushups, running laps, jumping jacks, or other similar nonsense for disciplinary infractions.

 

First, doing so relieves leaders of the requirement to use their brains. Pushups are a "one size fits all" response to behavior that leaves a leader feeling they handled it, whatever "it" was. It's quick and easy for a leader to quickly dish out pushups for infractions, while creative solutions that actually address the problem take more time and grey matter.

 

Second, such punishments can too easily lead to abuse, especially if adults and youth leaders are expected to use the same methods of problem resolution. Young PLs can quickly turn into mini-DIs when they know they can dish out pushups for infractions.

 

Third, such responses to infractions do absolutely nothing to prepare Scouts or youth leaders for the real world. Outside of a military environment, workplace infractions aren't dealt with by physical punishment. Adults are expected to think creatively and find constructive solutions to behavior problems. Why not start getting them accustomed to that now?

 

I just don't buy the physical fitness argument as an excuse for doing this. If you're concerned that your Scouts aren't fit enough, do more hiking or plan pre-opening and interpatrol activities that emphasize physical movement and strength.

 

KS

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Please define Oppressive