Making Judgment Calls

[Beavah 205]

Just for the sake of clarity, how would you make the call if the SM or scouter in charge of the outing felt the river was too high/fast and the situation was more risk than he felt warranted, but another scouter with years of BWCA and river experience felt it was OK? If the SM still cant be convinced?

 

Sandspur raises a bigger question here, eh?

 

How do we all make judgment calls? How should we?

 

Unlike in da corporate or military world where there's a stricter hierarchy, Scoutin' by and large is a collegial volunteer endeavor. Even in troops that are "hierarchical", the SM or SPL might not be present on a given outing, or might not have the most experience with that area or skill. Folks who have da most experience might not know the kids' abilities as well as someone else.

 

Let's keep da discussion to outing/cancel decisions at least to start. Though of course da same question applies to other program decisions like allowing cell phones or what tents to buy .

 

Beavah

 

[JoeBob 606]

Hi Beavah,

 

Go/NoGo decisions should be based on a realistically evaluated worst case scenario.

 

Weather:

Rain and thuderstorms will get you wet. Lightening strikes are a more remote danger.

Hail can shred your tents, and perhaps bruise your body.

Tornados and straight line winds will start dropping trees on you!

You check the forecast and decide if it's worth your time to dry all your gear the next week.

Not a bad worse case scenario.

 

Climbing:

In the east most rock is granite and not prone to become seriously dangerous if it gets wet. If you're caught in a rainstorm, good technique will still enable you to get off the mountain. You may have to sacrifice a chock to rappell off of a multi-pitch route, but you'll be safe on the ground.

Again, not a bad worse case scenario.

 

Paddling:

I think this is the most dangerous activity that scouts participate in. Water is not static. Current is dangerous and deceptive, but it looks smooth and controlable on the surface. Rivers rise hours or days after the weather has cleared. A bad choice can result in death or multiple deaths. (The James River group lived, but they probably lost a few boats, huh?)

 

The Go/NoGo decision will be made by the ranking scouter present, but we always hope that that person has enough common sense to heed the consel of those with the most experience. In the river scenarios we spun off from, I could have told enough horror stories about body recovery to sway any reasonable person to call off the trip. Failing that, I'd have refused to go myself and worked on the other individuals to convince them.

 

Nitche: 'That which does not kill you, makes you stronger.'

 

Water will kil you, and that's a worse case scenario I want to avoid.

 

Whitewater is too much fun when done safely to ruin it all by pushing the limits.

 

(This message has been edited by JoeBob)

[Stosh 3452]

1) With my #1 priority in any situation, safety, that consideration is considered first for all participants especially the weakest link.

 

2) Then I re-filter the decision as to whether or not I have the personnel and resources to maximize that safety. Are all my bases covered for the obvious?

 

3) Then I re-filter again to see of there are any other "what-if's" out there that could cause more grief that I can handle. What possibly could go wrong?

 

4) Then I ask myself on what criteria am I making my decisions. Am I adding the wrong values into the formula, the boys won't have fun, the boys will hate me, etc?

 

5) Then I second guess myself. Maybe more than once.

 

6) Then I ask input from others.

 

7) Then I do a gut check. Is there any nagging doubts that haven't floated by my consideration.

 

8) Then I make a choice and pray it is best for the welfare of those I am responsible for keeping safe.

 

If at any time along the process I get the least bit nervous, I bail out and cancel.

 

And yes, I'm the guy that puts raw gunpowder in the hands of juveniles and expect them to walk around in a field where large bore cannons belch 50' blasts of flames while horses run around at full gallop. But I'm the same guy who will not be allowing 3 boys in my crew to stand quietly and fire a gun salute with blanks for Memorial Day with me standing 2' behind them, because they haven't demonstrated to me they can handle the situation properly and safely.

 

Stosh

 

 

[Eamonn 61]

A little while back I started a thread about "The Leader or the boss".

In a case like the one you outlined.

The SM is the boss. The buck will always stop with him or her.

I sure as heck would hate to be the guy who allowed myself to be persuaded and then God forbid, something went wrong.

I'm happy to go with my gut feeling and willing to face the consequences for doing so.

If I'm not happy that everything is good, it makes no difference what anyone else says.

Of course this might just me being a mule headed Irishman?

Eamonn.

[Beavah 205]

Interestin'. Lots of folks puttin' it on da SM.

 

I know some organizations (shooting sports being one) where anybody can call a safety hold.

 

Would any troop do that, I wonder?

 

I can see some troop havin' a fellow like Le Voyageur who really should be makin' water safety decisions, eh? What if your 21-year-old ASM is a NCS-trained BSA Aquatics Director and da SM isn't?

Scoutmasters can't be everything.

 

Seems like da James River troop could have been "the SM decides", but I wonder if anyone with more savvy raised questions?

 

And what if the SM isn't there? Has to go to his niece's wedding. Now yeh just have two ASMs who don't see eye to eye.

 

Or the SM is new this year, but there's a 16-year-old scout who has done the river 8 times before with da troop, holds Canoe and Whitewater MB, and is a BSA Lifeguard.

 

Da safety stuff that hurts boys really has very little to do with clear cut G2SS rules, eh? It has everything to do with experience, skill, and judgment. I'm just curious how (and if!) troops think through these things in advance as part of being prepared.

 

Beavah

 

[HobcawChaos 10]

The buck seems to stop with the SM or leader in charge. But hopefully that individual will pull from the experience of anyone present to make the best decision. Last cabin camping trip we had to cancel our planned hike up "Big Boy" mountain. It had been raining for days but was only a light drizzle that morning. The forecast called for straight line winds, thunderstorms, and possible tornados. We had no idea of the trail condition after ice storms during the winter. The only ones who had hiked the trail before were 2 11-year old Juniors. They weighed in that the last part of the hike was very steep where you had to basically crawl even in the dry summer and that the trail was narrow with steep drop offs for times. Scrapped the big hike, did a little hike around camp (most had not been to this one before) and letterboxed in the rain the rest of the day. As was mentioned in the spun thread, it's a bummer when a planned and prepared for trip goes down the drain. But both example troop were able to salvage the overall trip in a fun and safe manner.

[sandspur 10]

I tend to like the idea of a safety hold. If you are SM or not is less important that your feeling on the safety of the situation.

 

So my vote is if you are SM, ASM, Scouter, or anyone in a position of leadership and you truly think that the situation is not safe, even if the others do

 

Throw yourself in front of the juggernaught! Dont be talked into something you think is wrong. How will you live with yourself later?

 

If you are on the other side and you just cant convince the holdout. Maybe time to take a deep breath and ask if he is right.

 

 

[CalicoPenn 729]

No matter what, there needs to be one person who makes the ultimate call when it comes to safety matters - and that should be the Adult in Charge (be it the Scoutmaster, or a his/her designated agent).

 

All we can do is train the Adult Leaders about how their responsibilities are not to the planned trip at hand but to the unit community as a whole, then hope for the best. The parents are entrusting the safety and well-being of their children to the adults on the trip, and most expect that there will be one who makes that ultimate call.

 

It shouldn't matter if the adult in charge is an expert on the activity or not - his/her role goes way beyond the activity. The role is to ensure the safety and well-being of ALL of the people on the trip. If there is any reasonable doubt, then that person, expert or not, should be making the call to cancel.

 

We should hope that the PIC (person in charge) would avail of themselves the advice of folks with more expertise and experience in some activities (and we increase the chances of this happening by training) and that they don't overrule an expert saying "Don't do it - its not safe". At the same time, I have no problem with the PIC overruling an expert who says "it's fine, let's go" and say's no because they've considered things the expert may not have. We should also hope that if the PIC is the expert, that they take into account that what may be perfectly ok for them may not be perfectly ok for the bunch of amateurs standing in front of him/her and be able to say "nope - sorry - we're not taking that trip this time", or that the PIC take into account the feelings of the other adults who may be telling him/her that the trip shouldn't happen if that is coming from serious reservations and not just "because I want to hang around in camp".

 

Maybe it's because of my degree program in just this kind of trip planning and executing but we spent much of our time going over "Go - No Go" situations where we had to learn that while we may be good to go, the group may be good to go. Perhaps training could be enhanced by a few roundtable discussions throughout the year running a few "Go - No Go" scenarios.

 

 

[Beavah 205]

Perhaps we're talkin' about two different "experts" here?

 

Some seem to be referring to "expert" as someone who knows the skill set (an "expert" paddler), but does not know the group, or how to work with kids. That might happen, for example, when contracting with a guide service.

 

I was thinkin' more in terms of "expert" as someone who knows both da skill set and the group, eh? I'd assume any scouter or patrol leader would know the capabilities of his troop/patrol.

 

Another interestin' question is whether someone who is not an expert in da skill set can honestly or accurately assess the capabilities of the group? Can a SM who is not a proficient paddler really assess the readiness of a group for a paddling endeavor?

 

Scoutin' is funny, eh? We're a bit different than the rec sports industry where there's an institutional approach and advancement path based on experience and trainin'. We're a bit more of a pick-up-sport, where da SM may just be the guy who had some time to give and a truck to haul gear. That might require a different approach.

 

B

 

[Stosh 3452]

When considering #6 in my list, that means anyone can call a cancelation if they feel it necessary.

 

Back in 2000 I was in Philmont on top of Baldy. A t-storm was rolling in and I (ASM) announced I was seeking cover and all the boys that felt it necessary were to follow me down to the tree line. About half the boys did. The SM and 2 other ASM's blew me off and laughed. I hussled down to the tree line, had the boys drop pack and assume the lightning position. There were three groups on the top when I left. The other two troops marched through my little group and laughed at my over-reaction to the situation. After a while the rest of my troop arrived. They were all standing there with their packs on making fun when a lightning bolt hit a tree about 25' away. Everyone standing hit the ground (including the SM), but it was a day late and a dollar short. I had my group quickly pack up and head deeper into woods before the storm had enough time to recharge itself for another strike. Remarkably, once the rest got up out of the mud, they hussled themselves along too.

 

Needless to say the subject was never brought up again, but when I over-reacted any time after that, everyone always followed.

 

Don't cha just love it when nature gives an excellent lesson with visual aids? To this day I can still feel my stomach churn every time I think about that day and what could have happened. Being lucky isn't the same thing as being prepared.

 

Stosh

[Eagle69 46]

If the SM is present then it falls on him to make the call and he is ultimately responsible for the decision. I would hope he would consult with the other adults present and any youth leaders who might be more knowledgeable than he about certain things.

 

If majority feel that what they are about to do isn't safe and SM disagrees, then someone in the majority needs to step up and do what is right.

 

I started as SM at the ripe old age of 26 and was always happy to have older adults around me. Sometimes they didn't know any more about things than I did, but it was always good to sound them out and see if their gut feeling is the same as mine.

[True Believer 10]

As Scoutmaster (and an attorney), i know that if anything goes wrong, I am the one that people will accuse of being the cause. It doesn't matter if that is not reality, it's just the way it is. I like my house, and my reputation, so, if I have any question in my mind about safety or procedure, I need to make a decision. This does not preclude anyone else from contacting me and demonstrating, but that has rarely happened.

 

In the past, I have consulted with my assistant scoutmasters, just to get their points of view (not for a vote or consensus building). By then, I am able to make a decision. I then have an immediate conversation with the Troop Committee Chair, so I am on record.

 

If I did have someone urging me to cancel a trip due to safety reasons, and I disagreed, I would involve the troop chair and/or committee. Reality is, that everyone would look to me to make the decision, even the person with whom i had disagreed. I know the Scouts and their capabilities.

 

I am "blessed" with a parent who happens also to be a DR. She is a trouble maker in the best sense of the word, and a busy-body. Once, a new family crossed over to our troop, and they were in the middle of a nasty divorce. DR told me about it and asked what I was going to do about the husband?

I told her "nothing"; I will have to wait and see.

 

A month later, she showed up at my work office, to tell me that the husband has guns and everyone in town is afraid of him. Then, she told me that he had threatened to take his son camping with us, and was going to kill his son and himself at the campout. I asked her how she knew this, and she said, "I just know."

 

Given what she is, and how she operates, I was very suspicious of her. I also knew the husband from his visits with our troop with the cub scouts. A very nice, outgoing guy, who knew a lot about plants and trees and was willing to share. I discussed the issue with two very experienced ASMs and a former scoutmaster who knew the accusing woman. All agreed that it was probably more of the same from her, trying to cause trouble. I discussed it with the Committee Chair and decided to do nothing. The 3 ASMs and I watched this guy all weekend. He was the nicest guy, and the older scouts took a liking to him. Not any indication of anger or firearms at all. He is now one of our super ASMs, despite his personal problems with his now, ex-spouse.

[sandspur 10]

I was about to opine that I could not see a SM or adult in charge going forward when another leader was adamant that it was unsafe. Unless the guy had a reputation as unreasonable. Then I read Jblakes post.

Now I just think I hope I am not one of those with the cavalier attitude and hope no one else in our troop is.

To True Believers point, He is an attorney and I am not, but I guess if you did decide to over rule another leaders objections and proceed that inviting the opinion of other leaders present might at least demonstrate that the SMs actions were not unreasonable.

 

[BrentAllen 10]

I think there are a couple of ways to look at who the "leader" is on an outing.

 

Is it the SM, if he is on the trip?

 

Is it the person listed on the Tour Permit as the leader?

 

For water events, is it the person who provides the qualified supervision in the safety sandwich?

 

If those happen to all be different persons on a trip, I would want the input of all in making the decision. For our Troop, I'm usually the one filling those roles. I'm in a good position where all the leaders and adults that camp with us get along great, and trust each other. I can't imagine ever getting taken to task by another parent for making a no-go call due to safety concerns (as was mentioned in the other thread). If that ever did happen, it would be the only time. When we started this Troop, I made it very clear that I wanted it to be like one big family. I know we are still a young, small Troop of 25, but so far, this effort has paid big dividends.

[Stosh 3452]

I took my troop out on a whitewater canoe trip last summer. I was the only one who had experience on the fast water, so I took along another experienced canoeist/kayaker to back me up. She was not a registered leader. When we got to the headwaters, I announced to the boy's that in spite of the fact that we are boy-led, patrol-method, her word is LAW on the water. No discussions, just follow her instructions to the letter without question. Although we had all novices, we had no problem and when she gave directions on how to run rapids, what to do when the boys spilled, etc. they did exactly what she said and we all had a great time.

 

I did not feel secure with the people I had as registered leaders so I brought in an expert to back me up. Without her, I would not have suggested the activity to the boys.

 

After the trip she asked me to stop by her house and give the same "pep talk" to her kids.

 

Stosh