Thank God for Youth Protection Standards

[eisely]

In reading about the Penn State scandal, one is forced to the conclusion that BSA's YP standards have not only protected by and large both youth and adult members, but have also served the institution very well. The fact that Sandusky was able to set up his own charitable organization to serve youth and use it to serve his own perverse goals shows just how vulnerable youth serving organizations can be to ill intended pedophiles seeking to identify and exploit targets of opportunity.

 

It is too bad that Joe Paterno and others have fallen from grace in this scandal, but they all had numerous opportunities over the years to do the right thing and failed. Maintaining the illusion of Penn State was more important to them. From everything I have read, Paterno is likely to escape criminal liability, but some of those above him in the university hierarchy may not be so fortunate. Too bad. They brought it on themselves.

[AvidSM]

Amen.

[Beavah]

Yah, when yeh look at what went on at Penn State all yeh can do is shake your head in sadness.

 

Don't let that fool yeh into believing that YP standards are about anything more than institutional protection, though. Jerry Sandusky would have passed a BSA background check. He would have received glowing reviews if anyone had checked his references. He would have been welcome as a speaker at Scouting functions and working with kids. From what I have read in da reports, almost none of the abuse took place at regular events at his charitable organization or at the university, where two-deep or no one-on-one would have applied. Nuthin' in YP would have prevented this.

 

Like most predators, he befriended boys and their parents and became a regular, trusted person in their lives. Like any trusted person, he was allowed access to youth outside of institutional events where "YP" rules don't apply. Just as any of da many scouters here who are trusted by parents and youth are afforded such access. That's a good thing, eh? Kids need lots of trusted, caring adults in their lives - coaches and scouters and teachers and relatives and friends and ministers and parents.

 

Bad men like this succeed because they mimic the actions of good men, eh? They listen to kids. They act like mentors and friends. Except unlike good men, they try to isolate the boy from others. Da more loving, interested, listening individuals a boy has involved in his life the more confidence he has and the less susceptible he is to da sort of isolation that a predator needs to succeed.

 

We can wish that Joe Pa and da other cast of characters had been able to do the right thing, but da fact seems to be that no matter what the institution, includin' the BSA, folks in those positions are faced with a conflict of interest between their institution/job, their colleague, and their fundamental ethics. Da sad result of such conflicts is that people often choose poorly in such situations. That's why it's important for kids to have lots of individuals involved in their lives, because those individuals who know and care about the boy don't have that conflict of interest. They're the ones who see their way through to doin' the right thing most frequently.

 

Ain't a policy in the world that can prevent evil. That requires the courage and sacrifice of good men and women.

 

Beavah

 

[eisely]

Beavah,

 

I think that YP standards are about more than just protecting the institution and have benefited youth who might otherwise have been targeted. The mere existence of such standards would discourage many pedophiles from even attempting anything. I also have always advocated that every parent should sit through the YP training which is now accessible on line, even if that parent is unwilling or unable to volunteer in any capacity to support the organization. All parents should be aware of the standards at all times. This will help them understand and identify situations that are questionable.

 

The existence of YP standards has not prevented all abuse within scouting and never will. The organization is just too big and there are too many situations that arise that create potential openings to a determined pedophile. But the standards have operated to protect just more than the institution.

[HICO_Eagle]

Sorry, I'm with Beavah on this. I don't think YPT or YP standards discourage or prevent pedophiles; if they did, we should have had ZERO cases since YPT was instituted. These people are sick, pure and simple. Sandusky got away with what he did for as long as he did because people were willing to turn a blind eye, not because some rule or other does or doesn't exist. YP standards mean I have to meet with Scouts to work on merit badges at the public library instead of my house and I no longer get asked to drop them off at their homes after the meeting or campout but I have yet to see any proof that they really have done anything to protect the boys.

[Engineer61]

I suppose it is a rarity when Beav and I agree 100% on anything, but this is one time where I will gladly march in lockstep with Beav!

 

YP strictly about protecting BSA, with possibly some minor residual of warding off a few of the less experienced pedophiles in the process...

 

If BSA was about protecting the kids, the "files" would have never been started. And every "file" would have been turned over to law enforcement for prosecution long ago, but those files are still locked up...even after the Oregon case. Even the "files" are about protecting BSA, not the boys.

 

Maybe the BSA intent of YP is more about getting naive parents to go into Ostrich mode rather than pay attention as to what goes on in the troops. "BSA has YP, I don't have to worry if Johnny is going to get fondled at Camp now."

 

 

[John-in-KC]

Our standards are nothing more than than a long sheet of plastic film. They're designed to provide transparency.

 

It's us: The volunteers, working with the professionals, who package the sheets into smaller, resilient windows and window frames. Like any man-made object, some of those frames will fail now and again.

 

Constant awareness, constant vigilance are the only true answers.

 

Thanks for your thoughts, B

[Twocubdad]

If you want to be cynical about it you can make a case. Of course BSA has a fiduciary responsibility to pretect the assets and reputation of the corporation. But you have to be pretty cold to think the individuals within the BSA don't have a further interest in protecting the youth and adults within its program.

 

Fortunately this is an area where the institutional interests have a good deal of overlap with the individuals' interests. YP does a good job of protecting youth from abuse, adults from false accusations and the corporation from liability. No, the BSA YP program isn't perfect, but it's pretty good. It's purpose is to create barriers to abuse, make it difficult for abuse to occur or at least make the perverts go somewhere else. If somehow BSA had a program which could eliminate child abuse from humanity, I feel certain we would share.

 

It's sort of like home security. I can't prevent all home break-ins, but I can secure my home so that at least the burglers go elsewhere.

[Engineer61]

"If you want to be cynical about it you can make a case."

 

That's my point precisely...

 

If you are a parent you have to be cynical about those charged with taking care of your children...be it at daycare, school, church, sports or Scouts ... because is you aren't mindful as a parent, the predators will find your child eventually.

[packsaddle]

I just took the YP course for the umpteenth time. It is required that I repeat this exercise so I do. My having taken that course did absolutely nothing to add to the safety of the boys. I could take that course another dozen times and it will add nothing to the safety of the boys.

I know what you're thinking...I'm stupid and forgetful so I need to be reminded...or else I'm careless and need to be reminded...or perhaps convinced...again and again and again.

 

However, each time I comply with the BSA self-protection/promotion strategy and allow them to check off the fact that I did take it (for the umpteenth time), BSA derived benefit by being able to demonstrate that I have been duly trained. It evidently means something to someone, somewhere. Right?

Someone in Irving must be convinced that they will achieve some small increment of protection or else some small increment of being able to CLAIM they are protected...by my taking that online course. Again and again and again.

And knowing that, I sleep just so much better at night.

[Stosh]

I was aware of this problem 40 years ago and didn't need YP training to figure it out. It was just plain common sense many moons ago. Now YP has formalized it for those who don't have common sense.

 

Remember, it's a two-edged sword. Yes, it protects the youth, but it does wonders protecting adults from vindictive children as well.

 

As a professional counselor, it always bothered female parishioners that as pastor I always left the door open to my office when they were in counseling. They sometimes felt uncomfortable about confidentiality. Well, that was nothing I felt about getting dragged into court by a disgruntled parishioner who yelled "Wolf". If they felt that uncomfortable about it, I always recommended and provided a list of female counselors.

 

As one who has 40+ years of working with kids in private, religious, and scouting environments, I've never had a problem. Have the police showed up at my door with accusations? Yep, but a second, third and fourth adult witnesses have always been a welcomed support system for the innocent.

 

Being overly vigilant isn't always a bad idea.

 

Stosh

[Beavah]

YP does a good job of protecting youth from abuse, adults from false accusations and the corporation from liability.

 

And the evidence for this is what, exactly?

 

My news feed pretty much drops a scouting-related abuse case on my virtual doorstep every couple of weeks, or I get word of one through other channels. Da corporation has been hammered with liability actions and substantial judgments. There aren't any stats on false accusations, but I'm not sure da report-anything-and-everything approach hasn't led to more, rather than less.

 

I just don't think there's any reliable evidence that YPT or any of the guidelines have actually reduced incidents. Leastways, I haven't seen any. Maybe, perhaps they've created some small barriers to abuse during unit outings, but just as with Sandusky, that's not normally where such abuse occurs. It occurs in private contact outside of scouting time.

 

I'm not bashing the training at all. I'm all in favor of training. Education is a good thing. I reckon we could do a better job of it, but then that's true of most things. I just think we'd be nothing but fooling ourselves if we actually thought stuff like da G2SS YP rules prevented abuse. And on an important issue like this, we shouldn't fool ourselves.

 

Beavah

 

[Twocubdad]

I think we're arguing semantics.

 

Using my home security analogy, if my dog, flood light or security system causes a burgler go to down the street and break into your house, have I prevented a break-in? No, not in net terms. Can you cynically say I've just saved my own butt? Yes. But I did prevent A break-in, just not all of them. But who knows, without my precautions the burgler may have broken into both our houses. And I'll be glad to give you one of my pups and the name of my alarm company.

 

Same with pedophiles. Maybe BSA YP rules just cause a perv to sign up to coach a sports team, teach a Sunday School class or form his own non-profit youth organization. Sure, if I could I'd like to put the sonnofa***** in jail (or worse), but if I can prevent him from doing harm to the boys on my watch, I'll take it.

[OldGreyEagle]

Just a thought about JoePa and how the court of public opinion sentenced him because he should have done more.

 

When a rape of a boy was repoted to him, he was abjectly appalled, he had never heard or thought of such a thing. He told the people he knew were supposed to take care if things like this. He never followed up because he didnt want to have his actions taken as either pressure from him to ease up on Sandusky or to railroad him. If he spoke in favor of Sandusky, he could be seen as wanting to cover things up and gloss over the incident. If he wanted something done about it, then he could be seen as exerting influence and possibly railroading an innocent man.

 

So, JoePa becomes a victim of his own success/noteriety, no doubt no matter what he did he would be cast as the bad guy as in "Show me a Hero and I will write you a tragedy"

 

We as a people do love tragedies, even if we create them

 

[shortridge]

In the discussion about standards and rules, we may lose sight of the other part of YP - education of the youth. I know the videos and sessions are incredibly awkward and amateurish, but they can help youngsters understand how a predator operates. Could a bit of education have helped some of the youth Sandusky allegedly preyed upon? Maybe. Let's hope it's working for our kids - and that they trust us enough to tell us if something happens to them.