fighting at summer camp

[acco40 95]

I'm slightly biased but the Scoutmaster should be perceived as God on these matters - omnipotent and never publically challenged.

 

All SAs (Assistant Scoutmasters) should be backing up the Scoutmaster, not second guessing their actions. The committee members should support the program not sit as judge and jury for the actions the SM. If a certain Scout or Scouter is an issue with repetitive behavior issues during outings, the committe may get involved as the request of the Scoutmaster.

 

Scouting is not a democracy. Many folks seem to forget that.

[bacchus 10]

It sounds to me like it was handled correctly. I wouldn't get the committee involved.

 

Personally, if I was the dad I would have done something until the SM stepped in. Maybe that's the real problem...

[moosetracker 132]

The committee I would guess would back the scoutmaster. And probably inform the rest of the ASM's and Adults who attended that that is what they would expect from them.

 

I would be suprised if a committee discussion was anything more then backing the SM. If they don't this type of disagreement would become frequent. It is still good to have their backing when it disolved into the SM and ASM all disagreeing with each other.

[Engineer61 19]

Acco wrote:

 

"Scouting is not a democracy. Many folks seem to forget that. "

 

Here! Here! And the adults are in charge!

[CalicoPenn 729]

Acco wrote:

 

"Scouting is not a democracy. Many folks seem to forget that. "

 

Engineer61 responded: "Here! Here! And the adults are in charge!"

 

Both are wrong.

 

Folks may like to think Scouts's aren't a democracy and that the adults are in charge but ultimately, it's the Scouts and their parents that determine if a unit exists by voting with their feet. Ask around of the old-timers at District and/or Council and I'm sure you'll hear stories of units that folded after the majority of the Scouts up and walked away either to other units or out of Scouting completely.

 

 

[Eagle92 110]

Please remember, some troops do talk to their parents and tell them that on scout functions, they are a bystander, let the troop leadership handle problems. So he may have been following protocol.

[Beavah 205]

Scouting is not a democracy. Many folks seem to forget that.

 

I reckon I forgot it. Actually, I don't think I ever learned it.

 

Da Scouting program for kids is supposed to teach them good citizenship in a democratic republic, and as such scouting experienced by the kids is supposed to be a democracy.

 

Yeh vote for your representative to the PLC (patrol leader); yeh vote for your president (SPL). Your representatives decide what yeh spend your money on, your activities, da rules and expectations.

 

Adults guide and advise to help the lads learn how to do representative democracy well. But they're not "in charge."

 

Beavah

 

[CalicoPenn 729]

Got to say that Beavah said it better than I did.

[acco40 95]

The boys don't get to make the "laws" - rank requirements, merit badge requirements, etc. The adults are not supposed to pick cafeteria style what part of the program they want to implement - hmm, I like advancement but not uniform, and instead of adult association, lets use computerized training etc. Units don't get to choose their preferences about "God", "Gays" and "Girls." From that perspective it is not a democracy. That was the point I was tryin to make. Units should not have the opportunity to "decide" that they don't want to require a scout to tie a bowline and would rather have them tie a hangman's noose even if the "vote" was unanimous. Too many times, when a Scoutmaster or Committee Chair make the "correct" but unpopular call, the adults (rarely the boys) think that because most of the adults disagree that the call should be changed.

[Beavah 205]

Yah, hmmmm...

 

When did rank requirements become "laws"? I always thought they were the criteria for receiving a recognition or award. The criteria for receiving an award is always set by the folks who are giving the award, eh? So for a BSA award, da criteria is set by the BSA. For a unit award, da criteria is set by the unit. If the kids want to make up an award for da loudest farts, they get to set the criteria . No law says yeh have to pursue any award.

 

I think you're mixing up a bunch of different things, eh? For some things, even many things, in a democracy we delegate or trust da decision to officials with expertise. We don't vote on the best way to lay a road, we let da city engineer decide that. Same in Scouting. Some decisions are best left to the PL, or SPL, or SM. Most, in fact. Other types of decisions are best handled by the decision of a group of representatives, like a PLC or TC. Still others, like da selection of the SPL are something that everybody has a vote in.

 

That is democracy in a republic.

 

Beavah

[Twocubdad 665]

We may get to vote for our judges, sheriff or DA, but really doesn't matter when you get arrested.

 

The problem is that once the SM had handled the situation, that the other adults got into an argument over what protocol should be. At that point the protocol is you either respect the decisions of the guy appointed to make them, or you apply for job yourself. Now I don't really know the nature of the "argument." Maybe it was an academic discussion over how they would have handled it IF they were SM. But if it sounded anything like second-guessing the SM, they were out of line.

 

I'm not saying that an instructive critique at the next committee meeting is out of line, and the committee should give the SM -- especially a new one -- feedback as to their expectations for dealing with such things. But in the middle of a firefight, 600 miles from home isn't the place to do it.

 

Frankly, the SM got it about right. The father was pretty cool to defer the the SM. But as SM, with the father right there, I would have handled the immediate situation and turned it over to the father fairly quickly. Had the father not been on the trip, I would have involved him or the mom as soon as we returned home.

[Gary_Miller 10]

acco40, "The boys don't get to make the "laws""

 

Say what? When it comes to the troop program the boys make all the "laws" under the guidance of an advisor the SM.

[ScoutDad68 10]

I am all for the Boys making the "Laws", but what about the consequences for not following the laws?

[Gary_Miller 10]

The boys make the consequences also, its all about buy in if the boys make the rules and consequence they are more likely to follow them. You will probably find out that the boy make harder laws and consequences than you would.

 

A boy lead boy ran troop means the boys make all the decisions and do all the work. It make the adult leaders job a whole lot easier, that is if the adult is willing to let the SPL Drive the car.

[Beavah 205]

Yah, ScoutDad68, welcome to da forums!

 

Yep, in a good troop, the boys will handle the consequences for almost everything. Usually, just the patrol leader will take care of it. Don't help with dinner, no dessert. Stay up late keeping everybody up, get assigned to early-rise breakfast duty the rest of the week.

 

If the PL can't handle it, the SPL does. I've seen good SPLs call up a boy's parent to tell him to come pick up his son because the SPL was sending him home for misbehavior. Sometimes, da whole patrol will have a discussion/intervention and let a boy know he has to shape up.

 

Typically, as Gary Miller says, da youth are more strict than adults are. That's because some adults tend to be pushovers. But it's also because teenagers are a lot more in tune with fairness and justice than they are with mercy. So a Scoutmaster may occasionally offer suggestions or tone down a response to give the lads perspective.

 

But let me tell yah, having the cool older boy PL or SPL tell yeh to shape up is about 100 times more effective than having an adult lecture a boy.

 

Beavah