Adults without kids in the program?

[Lisabob 13]

I too know some wonderful scouters who no longer have, or never had, sons in the program. Some of them weren't even scouts themselves in their youth.

 

But then again, I've met those folks that fotoscout describes too! They're the ones who seem to stay because they don't know what else to do with themselves in life (?) and they can become a real stumbling block. They're the ones who are forever grumbling about how it wasn't like this back in the good old days! They're the ones who still can't wrap their head around certain fundamental changes in society (like the fact that women can be scout leaders too). They're the ones that are always yelling at the kids, and that sow trouble among adults. They're the ones who monopolize committee meetings with endless harangues. And sometimes they're the ones who hold themselves to be the world's greatest authority on absolutely everything, yet can't be bothered to learn to use new technology, which is apparently beneath them, as is the idea of going to training, or refreshing one's training. They're easily offended, have a tendency to strike back when they perceive they've been slighted, and are more exhausting to manage than a group of hormonal 13 year olds.

 

Yeah, I think anybody who has been in scouting long enough has met a few of these folks. Getting them to leave is almost as tough as getting them to be productive team members!

 

But, to be fair, I've met some of these types who DO have kids in the program, too. The only good news there is, these folks usually leave when their kid leaves.

[croushorn 10]

Neil I only trust an Eagle with one of my daughters a *little* bit more than any other boy (Im an Eagle and I still was a teenage boy. ) But I must say soon-to-be-Eagle son is dating a girl that has two Eagle brothers, good Scouting family just with a different community troop! Its funny now that I think about it how many of kids of my fellow Scouters are dating/engaged/married. Common values apparently, so that is a good thing!

 

LisaBob on the head once again, weve got some stodgy District folks that need to find a new hobby. It gets to be a real problem after a while.

 

[Eagle69 46]

Interesting thread. I am 55 have no kids and was SM for 28 years and now serving as ASM with another troop. I was recruited to be SM at the ripe young age of 26 because they wanted someone closer in age to the boys. I always made sure to have parents of the kids involved with the program to help bridge the age gap as well as to supplement my thoughts/knowledge on dealing with kids with theirs from the parent side. With the number of units that are struggling for leaders, getting rid of one because he has no kids involved because his grew up and left the program years ago is a bad idea.

[emb021 16]

"Just how old was BP when he dreamed up this concept????? I think it's time to back off us old guys. There are some of us who are in touch with how today's youth think and are more than willing to add excitement to the program."

 

It's not just B-P.

 

You have Ernest Thompson Seton, who established his Woodcraft Indians in 1902 or so, in his mid-40s. He never had child (tho would much later adopt).

 

You have Daniel Carter Beard, who established his Sons of Daniel Boone in his mid-50s. No idea if he had any children.

 

And don't forget Green Bar Bill. He came out of retirement to write the 9th edition in his late 70s. No children either.

 

 

Being 'old' or having no children doesn't mean one is 'out of touch with youth'. Am sure there are many younger adults and some with children who are more out of touch with youth then those older and with no children.

 

[ASM59 10]

Adults who leave Scouting when their sons leave had only one reason to be there. In my experience, those who stick around have caught a vision of how Scouting can help to mold a young life and they want to help. They have a true Scout Spirit within them that drives them to stay involved.

 

I know that there are those, like Lisa, talked about who are real sticks in the mud, but in my experience most are really trying to do a good job.

 

As has been pointed out, there are those with boys in the program who can be real pains also. So I think it is fairer to say that it comes down to a matter of an individuals personality, not whether they have a boy in the program or not. It is about having a servant attitude; giving without expecting anything in return. If we could all have that attitude, wed be trying to out give each other. With that happening I believe wed see all the adult politics and bickering within a Troop come to an end.

 

If we could only live in a perfect world, or find that perfect Troop in the BSA training films

 

Just another 2 cents

ASM59

 

[Gold Winger 9]

"LisaBob on the head once again, weve got some stodgy District folks that need to find a new hobby. It gets to be a real problem after a while."

 

I'd like a concrete example of how one of your stodgy guys is causing problems.

 

You see, I'm pretty stodgy about things like letting the boys make mistakes while learning to make decisions, mastery of a skill vs. just one time for show, Scout-like behavior even away from Scout meetings, and physical activities that challenge them.

 

I'm not hip with things like assuming that kids can't do something so we have to do it for them, the need for cell phones at every moment, the current fear of dirt and germs, and the attitudes that most modern parents are willing to tolerate from their children.

 

Yep, I'm stodgy.

[croushorn 10]

Ohhhh GW hit a nerve there? Hee

Ok heres a couple off the top of my head: How about arguing against adding a camporee to the district calendar because weve never done that before. Or like refusing to offer more than two Eagle BORs per year, thereby making those two Saturdays marathons for the Scoutmasters. Or like starting arguments that Webelos should only cross over into their parent Troop. Or like refusing to accept we need more merit badge counselors. Or like falling asleep in meetings and when awaking realizing they missed a topic and want to rehash the whole agenda so they can rant about back in my day. Or complain about things without making a constructive point or without providing alternatives. Our poor DC always having to reign them in, if it werent so sad itd be comical.

 

I hope those dont fit into your stodginess.

 

[Gold Winger 9]

The only thing that I'd call stodgy would be the one about Camporees but you find that with folks of all ages in any organization.

 

" Or like refusing to offer more than two Eagle BORs per year, thereby making those two Saturdays marathons for the Scoutmasters"

 

Before I took over advancements for my son's troop, our un-stodgy troop only held four BORs a year because the advancements chair didn't like disrupting her life and they were all held during troop meetings.

 

Old stodgy me said, "this ain't right. boys should advance as soon as possible after the meet the requirements." So I set up BORs for every other Sunday. It won't work, I was told by the un-stodgy adults, you'll never get committee members to give up a Sunday afternoon. So I recruited committee members just to sit on BORs and stodgy old me insisted that they be trained before sitting on a BOR. The system worked very well, we'd even do the unthinkable and hold BORs on campouts and at summer camp. Fortunately, most of those un-stodgy people quite and the stodgy ones worked had to develop a boy lead troop.

 

Stodgy isn't a bad thing. The simple solution is that if they are being counter-productive, to not accept their registration next year.