No Young Adult Leaders?

[Beavah 205]

Personally, if I was the COR and I was going to allow ASM's under the age of 21, I would definitely want some limitations on what they could do. They could not drive other scouts, for example.

 

Yah, hmmm...

 

We seem to have had a run on this attitude lately, eh?

 

No non-parent scouters, no young scouters, (no fat scouters, no skinny scouters, no female scouters, no...)

 

I know I'm buckin' da trend of da Baby Boom demographic, the folks who once shouted "Don't trust anyone over 30!" who now shout "Don't trust anyone under 30!". Probably also buckin' da American Culture of Fear (don't trust anybody with your child!!!) But da notion of prohibiting our young adults from serving in scoutin' I think is the final death-rattle of da Scouting Movement in the U.S.

 

In much of da world, it's the Rovers who are the backbone of Scouting. Those young late-teen college students and early 20-somethings are real role models for the teens and pre-teens. No old parent or grandparent will ever really be a role-model for a kid, eh?

 

College-aged kids are da bulk of our best summer camp staff, and seven years of investing in their trainin' just to replace 'em with a dad who took "This is Scouting!" online and IOLS in a weekend seems borderline criminal.

 

I don't buy the judgin' people by their demographic averages either. We're not da insurance company. We know the person and have seen their driving directly so we don't have to use averages. If we're goin' to exclude people because of the risk of their demographic group then we'd have to ban all male scouters, because people who molest boys are 20 times as likely to be male adults (over da age of 25 to boot!). Where does it end?

 

Me, I encourage troops to sign up their 18- and 19-year old college students as ASMs. I think they're fools not to.

 

What do you think?

 

Beavah

 

[Eagle732 27]

Our last 2 Eagles turned 18 about the time they earned Eagle. They both asked for, and became ASM's. I'm glad to have them, the boys look up to them and they set a good example. I did talk with them both about how there roll changes when the hit 18. They're now adult leaders, they need to set the example, they need to take and follow YP (you mean I can't bunk with my buddy , the SPL?). Both transitioned well.

[fleetfootedfox 10]

Hey. I didn't say not to sign them up. Just need to understand the 19 year old has still got some maturing to do.

 

Actually, I'm generation X, not baby boom, and I'm not too old to remember what my driving was like when I was under 21. I think I was actually a pretty good driver. However, my car insurance was expensive for a reason, and I don't think there's anything wrong with taking such things into account when setting troop policy.

 

It would be a lot easier to make a rule that applies to all leaders under 21 than to single out one that you think is a bad driver. How are you going to know they are bad driver until something happens?

 

Here's the thing. The troop and all the decisions of the adults in the troop have to be made with the welfare of the boys in mind. Once a boy becomes an adult, he has to understand that the program is not there for him. It's there for those who are still boys. If he wants to still be part of the program, he has to demonstrate responsibility and be willing to work with the CO and parents.

 

In the previous thread, I think the poster admitted that he and others refused to cooperate with the COR and with other problems in the past probably being taken into account, the CO decided to eject some leaders and take a very hard stance on who could be an leader in the future. I'm not saying I would support the rule that they came up with, but I am not in that troop either. After they had an adult in the troop arrested, I am sort of amazed the troop even still exists.

[Eagle92 110]

As a former "Gray Area" Scouter (GAS), i.e. Adult for BS purposes but a youth for OA and Exploring now Venturing purposes, I know how difficult it is to get the respect of older leaders. Heck even after I turned 21, and was recruited to serve on the district committee as OA Chapter Adviser, I still had problems. So these sentiments tick me off.

 

In my experience some of the most knowledgeable, dedicated, and motivated Scouters are the 18-21 year-olds who remain active despite going to college or what their peers think. Because they spent x number of years in the program, they know how it's supposed to be run, have the knowledge, skills, and experience of working with the youth already. Yes there may be some challenges with the older scouts not respecting the GAS, but the younger scouts will look up to him, try to emulate himn and have all around hero worship for him. Any unit that doesn't want that group of leaders are shooting themselves in the foot.

 

As for 18-21 yo driving driving, from the G2SS

The driver must be currently licensed and at least 18 years of age. Youth member exception: When traveling to and from an area, regional, or national Boy Scout activity or any Venturing event under the leadership of an adult (at least 21 years of age) tour leader, a youth member at least 16 years of age may be a driver, subject to the following conditions:

 

1. Six months' driving experience as a licensed driver (time on a learner's permit or equivalent is not to be counted)

2. No record of accidents or moving violations

3. Parental permission granted to the leader, driver, and riders

 

So if national doesn't have a problem with a 16 y.o. driving, why would anyone have problems with a 19 y.o driving?

[Stosh 3452]

If a 17 yo PL can lead his boys on an adult-less activity, why all of a sudden once he turns 18 does it mean he can't?

 

I train my boys to eventually be SM's in any troop they wish. Only myopic people around them will keep them from doing so.

 

Stosh

[Twocubdad 665]

I actively go out and try to hire college freshmen and sophomores. I like to get them while they still know everything!

 

Any Scout in our troop who is still active at 18 is almost automatically registered as an ASM. It's no big deal and almost an honorary thing. Rarely do we ever get much help out of them, usually because they tend to head off to college in a few months.

 

Right now I have one 19-year-old ASM who is just now finishing high school. He's a year behind his age group, so he was around a full year after going turning 18. He even took SM/ASM training last. Unfortunately, he also got a job which pulled him away troop meeting night and most weekends. I really haven't seen much of him. I have another recent Eagle who turns 18 in a couple weeks, but is a rising high school senior so he will be around for another year. But other than helping his best friend make Eagle, I don't really expect to see much of him either.

 

[Beavah 205]

However, my car insurance was expensive for a reason, and I don't think there's anything wrong with taking such things into account when setting troop policy.

 

Yah, I might be missin' somethin'. Does your troop pay for da car insurance of adult leaders so that this would be an issue?

 

I still don't buy da demographic risk argument. Large cars are almost twice as safe as small cars. Dat's a bigger difference than the difference between young and middle-aged drivers. Should we only allow minivans and SUVs on our trips? If we're willin' to accept one demographically higher risk (like male leaders or smaller cars) for practical reasons why not da other?

 

It would be a lot easier to make a rule that applies to all leaders under 21 than to single out one that you think is a bad driver. How are you going to know they are bad driver until something happens?

 

Don't yeh know da drivers on your trip? I don't know any troop with an ounce of sense that doesn't quietly "not invite" adult drivers of any age whom they have observed to be a problem. Most often is parents who aren't comfortable with highway or nighttime driving because they don't do much of it.

 

Remember, though da actuarial risk for young drivers is slightly higher, your troop has a lot more old drivers, eh? So da real risk for a troop is in da older drivers because there's more of 'em, and therefore a greater chance to get a "bad" one.

 

Once a boy becomes an adult, he has to understand that the program is not there for him. It's there for those who are still boys. If he wants to still be part of the program, he has to demonstrate responsibility and be willing to work with the CO and parents.

 

And if after seven years in a troop, makin' it to Eagle Scout, servin' as SPL and JASM and as OA Rep to da Lodge, if a lad hasn't demonstrated responsibility, an ability to work with others, and puttin' service to da younger fellows ahead of himself then I reckon there's somethin' very seriously wrong with that troop's program.

 

What's tougher in my mind is knowin' that about a new parent, eh? Unlike da young adult who we've had seven years with, we don't really know whether a new parent is goin' to be responsible, be willing to work with da adult leaders and CO, or put other kids ahead of his/her own. Addin' an older adult ASM should be a far scarier proposition because we know so little about 'em.

 

Gen X, eh? Now I'm really startin' to worry that Lisabob may be right. We're progressively creatin' a culture that infantilizes our young people. Did yeh ever think that da reason you're a capable adult is that us old farts kept our worries and our fears to ourselves and trusted you enough to give yeh the space to grow?

 

I'm sorry, I'm probably bein' more argumentative and curmudgeonly than I should, eh? I understand where folks who think this are comin' from, and it is very much part of modern American culture. Just like many troops don't trust their boys to hike and camp on their own or run adult-free patrol outings. It's not irrational, it's just somethin' that makes my fur stand on end. To my mind, an 18 year old is an adult, and should be treated like one. If he can be handed an M-16 and sent to drive a Humvee in a war zone, I reckon we shouldn't make a fuss about him drivin' an hour to a campout.

 

I'll at least offer this: I'm happy to help any 18- 19- or 20-year old adult find a troop that will be delighted to make full use of 'em as adults if their home troop won't. Send 'em on to da district or council if you aren't goin' to treat 'em as equals, and we'll run 'em through NCS or have 'em leadin' NYLT.

 

Beavah

 

[scoutldr 732]

Just to correct a mis-statement in the other thread...I just refreshed my memory and the Adult Application states that all leaders must be 21 or older, EXCEPT...ASM, ACM, ADL, AWDL. (but I saw another place on scouting.org that stated AWDL must be 21) Perhaps a good reason to sign up GAS (I like that term), is to allow them to remain active in the OA providing cheerful service (if they are not Venturers). You can't belong to a Lodge if you're not a registered Scout(er). Another opportunity for service would be on the District Teams, such as Camping Promotion, Training, Advancement (EBOR), membership, FOS presenter, etc. (again, would have to be registered in a unit).

[sandspur 10]

I guess I see both sides here. I think young adult leaders are great, and a troop should be proud to have them. I cant see any more risk than a new dad you know nothing about.

Driving a car full of younger scouts though? I know this is touchy Eagle92, but there is a difference in experience between an 18 year old driver and a 30 year old, no matter how level headed they both are. Same reason I feel safer with a pilot that has 1000 hours vs. 100 hours. Driving a car full of other folks kids is a big responsibility and always gives me pause when I do so. After all, an 18 year old is more likely to be in a conversation with 16 year old passengers and distracted than an old fogy that the youth is talking around rather than to. There are a lot of studies that show youth drivers accident rates go way up when there is another youth in the car due to distraction. So if a troop wants to restrict drivers to older adults (and even eliminate very old adults to Beavahs point) I wouldnt argue. I cant think of anything else I might feel the need to restrict 18 year old leaders on though.

 

[Eagle92 110]

If parents are uncomfortable with a GAS driving, they can make their feelings known, just like if they are uncomfortable with having an over 21 Scouter driving. Nothing states a parent can't restict who their child can drive with. But making a blanket policy is wrong.

 

Me personally I always rode with someone as I had an old car that only a poor college student could afford to drive. It was nicknamed the BONDOMOBILE for a reason. Only times I would willing take it out of city limits was for Ordeals. Now once I got my Geo Metro at 21, I was OK with the drives. and YES you can fit a ceremony team, the chapter adviser, and all the regalia in a Metro!

[sandspur 10]

Yes Eagle 92, but arent they making their feelings known if the Troop Committee votes to restrict drivers to over 21? As far as no blanket policies, how else do you do it? We cant give a driving test under adverse conditions (night, rain, ice) to every driver.

I know there are a lot of 19 year old drivers out there that are better than some 35 year olds. But experience is gained one hour at a time.

Look at the NTSB investigation of the tragic plane crash in Buffalo. Both licensed commercial pilots but:

1. Both inexperienced.

2. Neither experienced in flying in icing conditions

3. Both poorly trained/inexperienced in the stall warning system (thus trying to climb and gain altitude when the stall warning went off rather than the proper action of diving and gaining speed).

4. Distracted in the approach by idle conversation with each other rather than paying attention to deteriorating conditions.

The conclusion being that a more experienced pilot could easily have recovered. And 50 people would have lived.

OK, I know a car is different, but the experience equation is not. When we load a half dozen scouts in the car and take off into the rainy night we are not so different from a commuter pilot.

 

[fleetfootedfox 10]

"... I know how difficult it is to get the respect of older leaders. Heck even after I turned 21, and was recruited to serve on the district committee as OA Chapter Adviser, I still had problems. So these sentiments tick me off."

 

No need to get ticked off.

 

"So if national doesn't have a problem with a 16 y.o. driving, why would anyone have problems with a 19 y.o driving?"

 

So, you agree with everything national says? If you do, you're the only one I've ever met who does. Anyway, your quote also says "...under the leadership of an adult (at least 21 years of age) tour leader..." By the arguments of many of the people here, the line about "at least 21 years of age" is totally out of line. Maybe a 16 year old can drive, but a 20 year old can't be a tour leader.

 

Somebody else quoted a rule that says "all leaders must be 21 or older, EXCEPT...ASM, ACM, ADL, AWDL". So, again, by national rules, a 20 year old cannot do everything a 21 year old can do.

 

"Because they spent x number of years in the program, they know how it's supposed to be run, have the knowledge, skills, and experience of working with the youth already."

 

I think that is a big assumption. Scouts see one side of things. They see how their Scoutmaster and troop does things mainly. They probably don't know if their troop has been doing things the wrong way. Yeah, they know a lot and that's great, and I'm not saying to exclude them.

[Eagle92 110]

What I get upset about is people doubting the abilities of 18-21 y.o., especially if they have been in the program. They have the KSA already. yes a troop may not be doing things by the book, but that is what training is for. Also let's think about it, if you have a 18, 19, or 20 still involved in scouting, I bet they have also done JLT, NLS, or some other type of training as a youth that will tell them how a troop should properly run.

 

You are right under 21 can only serve in certain responsibilities, That's due to legal issues I'm willing to bet. As for driving and what not, didn't I already say that COs can make stricter requirements if they want. So if they say no under 21 drivers, that's fine. But I hate to think what may happen IF they may be a driver short and the 18 YO ASM is the only one old enough and has a car to drive. I forgot about that one backpacking trip I borrowed mom's car. Not many adults wanted to go backpacking, let alone in the rain. So I had to drive a few guys and gear.

 

one of the things i've been taught is to USE YOUR RESOURCES, and I see GASs as a leadership to be utilized to the fullest. If a CO doesn't want to utilize them to the fullest, or not use them at all, they are shooting themselves in the foot.

[fleetfootedfox 10]

"But making a blanket policy is wrong."

 

Maybe there should be a blanket policy against blanket policies.

 

Anyway, you are arguing with yourself. First you say blanket policies are wrong then you say "COs can make stricter requirements if they want". So, which is it? Are they wrong for setting stricter requirements or not?

 

"What I get upset about is people doubting the abilities of 18-21 y.o., especially if they have been in the program."

 

Yeah, but I'm not sure anybody said that, so I think you're getting upset over an imagined controversy created by you and Beavah reading between the lines. I don't think anybody whose ever watched the Olympics is going to be under the delusion that an 18 year old does not have the same abilities as an older adult. Maturity may be another issue, but abilities are not what's being questioned.

 

"Any unit that doesn't want that group of leaders are shooting themselves in the foot."

 

Yeah, I agree.

[GernBlansten 10]

Shouldn't all leaders be judged on their individual characteristics instead of global stereotype?

 

I've met 40 year old adults I would never allow my children to ride with. I've met 18 year olds I'd trust them with. Why not judge the individual instead of the group?