Controversial ASM appointment

[crv-66 10]

I'm the Committee Chair of our troop who has recently accepted and submitted the application of a young man who has aged out of our troop. He recently earned Eagle. He'd like to become an ASM in the troop.

 

Some background first. He's son of the SM. He has Asperger's syndrome. He's had numerous behavioral / anger management issues as a scout, but I've seen improvement with age (I've known him over 5 years). I've had some very blunt discussions with him to make clear that any physical contact with scouts is strictly forbidden - playful or not.

 

Reaction to this appointment has been almost universally negative. Reactions from other ASM's has been stuff like "I don't want to have to babysit him on trips" (meaning they don't trust him), to reactions from other committee members that they feel he is a safety threat to the other scouts (due to past episodes of violence between him and other scouts).

 

I honestly don't feel he is a threat to the boys, but I've told him that I and other adult leaders will be keeping a close eye on him. I feel the worst that could happen is him grabbing a boy out of frustration. If anything like that did happen, I'd remove him.

 

It's been my understanding that it is my responsibility to vet and accept adult leaders. Is this correct, or does the committee as a whole have the final say?

 

This young man has a lot of enthusiasm for the position, and certainly has the qualifications. Does past violence as a Scout disqualify him? I get the feeling I've made a mistake accepting him, and would like advice on how to proceed.

[Apache Bob 10]

No real clear answer here, crv.

Your COR had to sign his application also.

If he came to you from outside the Troop and you had knowledge of his past behavior would you have made him an ASM?

ASM have a lot to do working with the Scouts without worrying about keeping their eye on an adult.

 

[shortridge 184]

Your adult leaders shouldn't have to spend even a fraction of their time keeping an eye on other adults. If you have concerns, call the council and change your mind.

[click23 66]

Your signature on the application is the first of a few, but you are the only approval needed at the unit level. The IH, institutional head, has the final say, but may delegate this authority to the COR, chartered organization representative, at the chartered organization level. The Scout executive or designee has the final say at the council level, but a rejection here is usually for something that came up on a background check.

 

The committee as a whole has no authority on the matter.

 

If I were you I would personally present the application the the IH or COR, and let them know the issues that the other have with him, and your side too, and let the CO decide if they want this person in their troop.

[Bob White 20]

If anyone should need to keep an eye on the ASM it is the Scoutmaster, whether he is the ASM's father or not. So as long as the SM can help develop him, as he should do with any new ASM, then I see no reason to reverse your course.

 

I would hope by now that the other adults have had some instruction and information shared with them about Aspergers and know how to work with the young man since he was a scout in the unit.

 

Perhaps they are in need of additional communications and counseling from you to explain why you made this decision and how you feel the unit and the young man can benefiot from his participation in this new role.

 

 

 

 

[crv-66 10]

Apache Bob: "If he came to you from outside the Troop and you had knowledge of his past behavior would you have made him an ASM?"

 

Clearly no. That's the argument people who oppose this appointment use. I don't disagree with that either.

 

Click23: "The committee as a whole has no authority on the matter"

 

Do you have a source for this? I'm trying to determine what the Committee can/should do.

 

Bob White: "If anyone should need to keep an eye on the ASM it is the Scoutmaster, whether he is the ASM's father or not."

 

We've had several instances in the past where, as a scout, he had behavior problems, the SM saw it or was aware of it, and did not always take action. With that history, I don't have confidence he would take corrective action in the future with him as ASM.

 

"I would hope by now that the other adults have had some instruction and information shared with them about Aspergers and know how to work with the young man since he was a scout in the unit."

 

I feel the troop is quite aware of this. We have other special-needs boys in the troop. Several scouts have earned Disability Awareness merit badge. The troop had been accomodating to him as a Scout. It's now that he's making the transition to adult leader where "accomodation" takes a new meaning.

 

"Perhaps they are in need of additional communications and counseling from you to explain why you made this decision and how you feel the unit and the young man can benefiot from his participation in this new role."

 

The reaction from others is that it's not a "right" to be an adult leader, but a privilege. Meaning it doesn't really matter how this position would benefit him, but the troop instead. That's where people are having a hard time determining how he is or could be a benefit to the troop, given his special needs. I definately see it as a benefit to him.(This message has been edited by crv-66)

[OldGreyEagle 5]

I am not a Lawyer, nor have I played one on TV nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn last night. How is that for a disclaimer?

 

I have always heard real legal experts talk about the concept of "every dog gets one bite". A docile dog doesnt have to be chained up until he bites one person and then its chained up or the owner is responsible for the pets behavior. You have had your one bite it appears by the hisotry of the adult with the troop. You know his behavior. If he somehow loses control and harms another, what is your defense? It can't be "we didnt know", because clearly you do know. Saying he has Asperger's syndrome doesnt tell us much, its like saying he is tall. How tall? Compared to who? How does the tallness manifest itself? Is the tallness a danger to others, to the person? Asperger's covers so much territory it by itself doesnt mean much other than if its diagnosed, you know the behavior pattern.

[Bob White 20]

Please remember that you are making the accomodation for the illness not the person. To say that it was ok to accomodate him as a youth but not as an adult suggests that you feel that the now he is 18 the illness should just go away.

 

He is just older, he still has the need for accomodation. If you have an ASM.

 

You are correct it is a priviledge to be a scout leader. A priviledge that YOU granted him. A priviledge that you seem to suggest he understands. Unless he has done something since the time you approved him to change your mind then I would see no reason to reverse your decision based on the fears of others over his illness.

 

I remember as a Cub Scout we had a boy in our den that was blind. No other Den leader would take him because he was going to need "too much attention". We all learned to separate him from his disability. Perhaps this will be a good growth experience for your other leaders also.

 

 

 

[crv-66 10]

OldGreyEagle: "I have always heard real legal experts talk about the concept of "every dog gets one bite". A docile dog doesnt have to be chained up until he bites one person and then its chained up or the owner is responsible for the pets behavior. You have had your one bite it appears by the hisotry of the adult with the troop. You know his behavior. If he somehow loses control and harms another, what is your defense? It can't be "we didnt know", because clearly you do know."

 

Valid point. This young man's mother wants us not to consider past behavior - "clearing the slate" so to speak. She agrees with my non-contact/non-violence stand. What liability do I, the troop, the committee, etc. have if something should happen?

 

As far as Asperger's... I'm not sure. I don't know other people with it, so nothing to compare against. If I had to guess, I'd say it's a mild form. His problems have consisted of disproportionate responses. For example, a boy threw a snowball at him, and he grabbed the boy by the neck and threw the boy to the ground. Several instances similar to that. I'm not aware of him provoking, only reacting disproportionately. He also has a tendency to make threatening statements, which I think is his way of joking around with people - however others don't take it that way.

[Beavah 205]

Yah, crv-66, welcome to da forums, eh?

 

The proper way to view the CC position is that you are like da chair of the troop's board of directors. As Board Chair, you have a lot of influence, can set the agenda, help lead and direct discussions.

 

But you are not da COR, eh? You do not have the authority as an individual to override the Committee. When you sign an application, your signature represents the approval of the committee. They can, should, and must have a say in the vetting process.

 

The committee, not the chair alone, vets and approves unit leaders (or if not the committee, some other subcommittee set up by da COR). Check out da supplementary trainin' module on selecting unit leaders.

 

What's happened is you've gotten ahead of your committee, and are behavin' like a King. Their reservations are legitimate, eh? If the lad is ever going to be effective as an ASM, he needs the support of the committee, not just you.

 

Take a step back, regroup, apologize to the committee for gettin' ahead of things, and work the process right. Always best if there is consensus among all the adult leaders on a direct-contact leader appointment, because SMs and ASMs are so vitally important to the program. The process of screening and selecting them should be a full and complete one, not da quick sign off of one guy.

 

In that process, your responsibility is not to this boy, it's to the Chartered Organization, includin' being mindful of liability for adult leader actions, bad PR, and the amount having to watch over this "adult" takes other adults time and therefore affects the quality of program for all the boys. That is a responsibility you share with the committee, because different committee members have insights and skills, and all are approved by da CO to act as the "troop's board of directors." Thank goodness! You do not want to have that responsibility alone!

 

Now, if you're tryin' just to do somethin' to help the lad, here are a few other options for yeh:

 

1) It may be possible for him to continue as a scout, past the age of 18. That is often done for youth with disabilities. Check with your DE for the procedure.

 

2) The lad can join a Venturing program as a youth member at age 18, then continue to work with the troop as a Venturer who assists with instruction. Of course, a Venturing crew might be a better place for him to spend his time overall, away from dad and on his own a bit.

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[crv-66 10]

Bob White: "Please remember that you are making the accomodation for the illness not the person. To say that it was ok to accomodate him as a youth but not as an adult suggests that you feel that the now he is 18 the illness should just go away."

 

For the record, I am all for making the accomodation for him. I am clearly in the minority, though. We have two special needs kids in the troop right now, and they are both pleasant and agreeable boys. It is impossible not to like them. Our ASM candidate does not fall into that category. He has a very in-your-face personality that clearly rubs some people the wrong way. I get the impression that other adult leaders felt we "had to" accomodate him as a scout, but we no longer do as an adult leader.

[click23 66]

From the adult application: "Unit committee chairman approves all adult personnel except the chartered organization representative and committee chairman."

 

and

 

"Following approval by the unit committee chairman, all other adult unit personnel must be approved by the head of the chartered organization or the chartered organization representative."

 

No where does it say that the application must be approved by the units committee.

 

 

But, it also says: "The process set forth in the publication Selecting Quality Leaders, No. 18-981, must be completed for all positions of Scoutmaster, assistant Scoutmaster, ...."

 

I doubt that you used "Selecting Quality Leaders" with this ASM, if so the steering committee probably would not have selected him. Since the steering committee(probably the units committee, the COR, and even a few others) did not vet him in the selection process, I would say it boils down to you making the decision for the troop.

[Docrwm 10]

As the CC YOU are the only one at the unit level needed to approve the Adult Volunteer. The IH of the Charter Organization approves AFTER you have passed the name along. Sorry, its NOT a committee issue and its not a vote - its the personal responsibility of the CC.

 

My two cents. As for the accommodating disabilities issue and you accommodated him as a kid so now you have to as an adult - sorry - WRONG. I work with Autism and Aspergers every day of my professional life as the director of an Autism Clinic. There are roles that are ok for disabled people to do and then there are those they are not yet ready for now. Just because he was able, with supports, to fulfill the role of Scout and achieve Eagle does NOT mean he's ready to be an Adult Volunteer. Frankly, if he were not disabled you would probably not hear any crazy arguments about accommodating him as an adult. Not every adult is appropriate as an ASM. Some might be fine Committee Members but not Direct Contact personnel. Others are great working with the kids and not any use on a Committee. Everyone is different and to argue that because you accommodated him as a kid you MUST as an adult is a one-size fits all approach that is not practical nor is it required.

 

Good luck but from what you've written you have serious reservations about him as an ASM. If it were me, I'd say no. Just my opinion.

[GKlose 24]

Since nothing has happened yet with him as an adult leader (or did I miss this in your post?), why not head things off at the pass? Get him a copy of GTSS, and have him do the online training (Fast Start and Youth Protection). Then get him into more district and council-level training. See if he's really serious about being an adult leader (and if he shirks training, he probably isn't ready). Follow it up with periodic talks with him, about the importance of putting scout and unit safety first. This may be his first big chance to really mature as an adult.

 

As far as other committee members go, I'd say placate them for now ("he's on a short leash") to see whether or not the new ASM really steps up.

 

Guy

[Bob White 20]

Doc, no one said they had to accomodate, I said that turning 18 doesn't mean they do not need to. If they accomodate a blind scout there is no reson to believe that once he turns 18 if they approve him as an ASM that he will no longer be blind or need accomodations.

 

If crv's concern is the ability of the individual to do the job then he should not approve him, but he should not change his mind soley on the pressure from others.