Adding an Eagle requirement

[MollieDuke 10]

While I love this idea in theory, if we used it in practice in our troop then we'd never have any Eagle Scouts for quite awhile. Let me give you the cliff's notes as to why: We've had some discipline problems, some alcohol problems, and some major differences with boys lately (past couple of years). SM has been part of the problem, so it's continued. Finally got a new SM last year and it's turning around, but using this as a basis---only parents that were NUTS would allow this group out alone. They are getting a little better, but it was touch and go for awhile. Hope to be able to say that eventually we can do exactly this type of thing. It's a good ideal to shoot for, I think.

[Eagle63 10]

Hello everyone,

 

I am sorry to say I disagree. The Leadership requirement states serve activly in a Leadership position for 6 months. Those that serve as Librian, Historian, Bugler, etc qualify. If you want to rewrite the requirements why don't you require for Eagle Leadership requirements only Patrol leader and Senior Patrol Count.

 

Eagle 63

[NeilLup 13]

I would never want to be too dogmatic, but I believe there is very little chance that this would ever be accepted as an Eagle Scout requirement. Some of the reasons have been stated:

 

1) Parents would not permit their sons to participate

2) Some Scoutmasters would be uncomfortable

3) Some states might have rules or laws making this difficult

4) The "standard of care" for parenting and child care has become much more strict. Parents seem much less willing to let their sons do things alone or without intense adult supervision and participation.

5) Not every boy is that kind of leader

 

I could modify Voyager's requirements to make them more palatable (for example, making it Troop or Patrol campout), but going the Eagle requirement route could be very difficult.

 

What could be done is make it a voluntary challenge. Establish some local council or supracouncil badge with requirements similar to those listed. When a boy leader meets those requirements, he gets the badge and certificate. If that were done and were successful in several councils, then the justification to National would be a lot more strong.(This message has been edited by NeilLup)

[LongHaul 10]

Eagle63,

Perhaps you missed the intent of this addition. This has nothing to do with the POR req. It addresses being in Command. If you want to fly you must solo, if you want to skipper a ship you have to take the Command.

NeilLup,

I agree this little pipe dream of ours would never make it past National, even though it is part of the current Sea Scout Program. I dont think it would be for any of the reasons you suggested though. I think National would realize that this would reduce the number of boys being awarded the Eagle Rank and that just wouldnt be acceptable.

Addressing your five points, just how close does an adult have to be to a youth to make it acceptable? Unless we have a one to one ratio and we mentally handcuff adult and youth, there will always be a degree of separation. In the Sea Scout req. there are two adults, assumably capable of taking Command, on board ship during the exercise. In our troop we draw a white line down the middle of the campsite, adults on one side youth on the other. This could achieve the same result as the Sea Scout scenario. How much separation is too much becomes the issue and again that is already in place on every campout with less than a one to one ratio. Scoutmasters either accept the boy run concept or dont. Those that do wont have a problem making this req. work. As for point five my answer would be Not all boys are Eagle scout material. We are discussing and additional Eagle Rank requirement.

LongHaul

(This message has been edited by LongHaul)