Discipline Issue - Need opinions

[johndaigler 10]

CA - good luck with this.

 

I have questions more than answers about all this. As a Cub Scouter, I'm underexperienced in situations like this; as a teacher and School Administrator, I'm over experienced -- sadly, sadly, over experienced.

 

Anyway, . . .

 

Was there any discussion of compensation for the Scout whose equipment was damaged?

 

Were the parents of the injured Scout involved in the decision-making?

 

Is there a clear plan for the boy to work his way back to respectibility. Often, we're good at punishment and less focused on corrective details. You mentioned probation, etc. Does everyone understand (the same thing when it comes to) what it will take for the boy to successfully complete his probation?

 

Were the parents of the harassed girl informed and/or involved in the decision-making?

 

What kind of answers did you get from the Scout when you asked, "Why?" Does he recognize that hs anger spirals his behavior downward and the severity of the consequences upward?

 

Even though the Committee said and did the wrong things in your eyes, given what you said they said, doesn't a parent have to attend meetings with the Scout? Is this enough?

 

I suggest to you, and all CCs and SMs, that decisions made by Committees should be shared with SMs and other Leaders before they become public knowledge. It serves as a built-in check and balance. Not that it's not the Committee's right to make the decision, but we're all volunteers, the human impact is much more important than if the situation included the Committee issuing pay checks.

 

BTW, the girl WAS sexually harassed. I'm surprised there were several posters who thought it was "less than that". What was it, flirting? Ask the mother of a teenage girl if it was sexual harassment; ask a lawyer or a judge. Ask a working woman who still gets called, "babe" or "honey" by men compared to whom she is over-educated, over-talented, over-experienced, under-paid, under-titled, etc, etc.

 

jd

[SemperParatus 1]

CAS,

 

Having sat through scores of committee meetings, it is very easy to see how well-intentioned, but bad decisions can sometimes be made. I would not let this one instance sour the strong working relationship you and the CC have developed in service to our youth. I am certain the committee was not of the mind-set of 'let's undermine the authority of our SM' but rather to try and provide some glimmer of a scouting outlet for this boy. Their hearts were probably in the right place, while their minds may have, in your opinion, been on vacation. Overall, I think the disciplinary action taken was reasonable. The fact that the committee lessened one of your recommended actions should not be construed as undermining your authority, especially given that they accepted all of the others. I suspect their thought process was that they did not want to completely shut down the possibility of scouting in this boy's life. Even so, the odds are very good that this boy's scouting career is done. His actions were publicly criticized, his parents are probably intensely embarassed, his punishment is relatively severe and the work that will be required of him to earn the confidence of his fellow scouts and adult leaders will make things very difficult for him. No, he won't be back. But, if he does return, the scrutiny that he will feel will ultimately force him out. My advise to you is to accept the committee's decision and move on. Put this behind you as quickly as possible and focus on your program. Release the feelings of resentment you have for the committee and its decision and allow yourself some peace.

[CA_Scouter 11]

Thanks All for your support.

 

Oren - yes, I've considered that, but the Committee Chair supports me, so I think this will ultimately be resolved in our favor. She's already sent out an email telling the committee that the SM's will not accept their decision.

 

BW - excellent advice, I will not threaten.

 

Ev - Thanks, I could use 'em.

 

and John's comments, with mine in line..

 

 

"Was there any discussion of compensation for the Scout whose equipment was damaged? "

 

Yes, parents said the damage was insignificant, it was the action that compelled it that they were concerned about.

 

"Were the parents of the injured Scout involved in the decision-making? "

 

Yes, they fully supported our ( the SM's ) discipline recommendations.

 

"Is there a clear plan for the boy to work his way back to respectibility. Often, we're good at punishment and less focused on corrective details. You mentioned probation, etc. Does everyone understand (the same thing when it comes to) what it will take for the boy to successfully complete his probation? "

 

Yes, we specified that some proof of anger management treatment must be provided prior to him re-joining the troop, and that he must address the Committee and the SM's with some sort of statement apologizing and ensuring no repeat of the behavior. I must have some guarantee for the safety of my other scouts. Reinstatement to full status is entirely dependent upon SM approval.

 

"Were the parents of the harassed girl informed and/or involved in the decision-making? "

 

No, we did not track her down.

 

"What kind of answers did you get from the Scout when you asked, "Why?" Does he recognize that hs anger spirals his behavior downward and the severity of the consequences upward? "

 

The scout is one of those who gets angry when he is called on his actions, so he just clams up and will not give eye contact. His anger seems deep seated, and far too complicated for my staff and I to figure out. His mother also has no idea why he gets so angry, and that concerns us as well. Denial is not just a river in Egypt.

 

 

 

"Even though the Committee said and did the wrong things in your eyes, given what you said they said, doesn't a parent have to attend meetings with the Scout? Is this enough? "

 

We don't require parents to attend every meeting. We haven't found that neccessary. We do, however, require the parent to attend should there be a discipline situation. The mother is our Membership Chair, so she was definitely well informed of the situation.

 

No, simply having a parent attend the meeting is not enough, in our opinion. There have been multiple incidents with this scout, relatively minor in comparison to this incident, but the commulative total requires direct and strong consequences.

 

 

 

 

"I suggest to you, and all CCs and SMs, that decisions made by Committees should be shared with SMs and other Leaders before they become public knowledge. It serves as a built-in check and balance. Not that it's not the Committee's right to make the decision, but we're all volunteers, the human impact is much more important than if the situation included the Committee issuing pay checks. "

 

This has been done, all the ASM's have been filled in and we have informed the Committee Chair of our displeasure. We are asking them to reinstate the full suspension.

 

 

"BTW, the girl WAS sexually harassed. I'm surprised there were several posters who thought it was "less than that". What was it, flirting? Ask the mother of a teenage girl if it was sexual harassment; ask a lawyer or a judge. Ask a working woman who still gets called, "babe" or "honey" by men compared to whom she is over-educated, over-talented, over-experienced, under-paid, under-titled, etc, etc. "

 

I agree.

 

 

 

 

Thanks All!

 

[madkins007 10]

re: the 'sexual harassment' bit.

 

"Sexual harassment is one of many forms of illegal sexual discrimination. It arises out of an unfair use of influence, power, or authority by one person over another, or a lack of respect for another person." (a representative example from the University of Mass.)

 

A 14 year-old boy uttering a single stupid and vulgar sentence to a complete stranger in a relatively public setting with no follow-up events is certainly un-Scoutlike, anti-social, potentially indicitive of other problems, and so on... but I still have a hard time with the idea that it qualifies as sexual harassment except in a very esoteric way.

 

 

[Bob White 20]

While I do not condone the boys behavior in the least this was not sexual harrassment. (had he touched her in any way she would probably had cause for assault).

 

Madkins unfortunately chose to only include the first small portion of the legal definition of sexual harrassment as used by U-Mass and which is a common definition. Had she completed the quote (shown below) it would be clear that the conditions require the use of intimidation in a work, academic, or residential setting. None of which apply in this case.

 

 

The rest of the quote...

"Even in subtle forms, it creates confusion because the normal boundary between professional or social roles and personal relationships is blurred.

 

Sexual Harassment can involve persons in authority such as faculty, administrators, staff or TA's, or can also involve fellow workers or students by subjecting one person or group of persons to unwanted sexual attention. It is sexual harassment when:

 

submission to the behavior is made or implied to be a condition of your employment, class attendance, living in residence, or academic progress;

 

submission to or rejection of the behavior is used as a basis for decisions related to employment or academic performance and progress;

 

the behavior has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with work or academic performance, or the effect of creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work, residential or academic environment."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[CA_Scouter 11]

Resolution to the incident:

 

I just got off the phone with my Committee Chair. After informing the committee of my and my staff's objection to the modified suspension, she asked for a re-vote, and the vote was 8-3 in favor of the full suspension.

 

This is the correct course of action to take. Thank you all for your opinions, advice, and insight, it really did help me to come up with the appropriate disciplinary action for this scout. If and when he returns, we'll have a long heart to heart and get things back on the right track.

 

Thanks again!

 

 

 

 

[SeattlePioneer 144]

Interesting thread.

 

The Scoutmaster here should realize that if you ask other people for input, you may get input you'll disagree with. That goes for the Troop Committee and this post.

 

Based on the facts related, my inclination would have been for the Scoutmaster to decide to suspend the Scout.

 

Before reinstating the Scout to the program, I'd want to have a conference with the parents to decide what's going on with the boy and what additional steps they might consider appropriate.

 

I'd also want to talk to the Scout and decide whether I was satisfied that it was safe and appropriate to return him to the troop. Talking to the Troop Committee Chair would also be essential.

 

It might also be appropriate to consult with the District Executive and District Committee chair to get input on appropriate actions to take.

 

My own bias would be for suspending the boy for 30 days, with no requirement for anger management. Depending on the information and advice I received from the Scout, parents, Troop Committee Chair, DE and District Chair, a longer suspension, other requirements or even a revocation of Scout membership might be appropriate.

 

In short, I'd act right away to remove the boy, but consult more widely to determine suitable ways to resolve the issues involved. The Scoutmaster acknowledges he doesn't have a lot of experience in dealing with this situation, and neither do I. That argues for ending any immediate hazard and consulting widely on possible actions until the best course of action becomes clear.

 

 

 

Seattle Pioneer

 

[johndaigler 10]

Thank you for the "legal" definitions of "sexual harassment". Silly me, I just combined the sexual nature of the comment and the harassment of the girl in the residential setting of a campout and came up with "sexual harassment". My apologies to all you lawyers and judges (armchair, and otherwise!).

 

Let's assume the comment was unasked for, and unappreciated. I'd guess the comment helped the girl feel uncomfortable about camping in a setting where BOY SCOUTS can comfortably make threatening sexual comments.

 

If one scout made this comment to another scout, I don't think we'd be searching for legal definitions to lessen the perceived severity of the behavior. But, then again, maybe she was asking for it . . .

 

In case I wasn't clear --- IMHO, this was a classic case of teen sexual harassment. I've seen it dozens of times, and seen the impact on the victim -- and the sense of victory by the harasser and celebration by his peer group.

 

Just my angry $.02 . . .

 

jd

 

 

 

[madkins007 10]

John-

 

I wasn't trying to minimize his remarks. They were dead wrong and deserved an appropriate corrective response.

 

As the father of three girls, I an infuriated when I hear about kids doing stuff like this, but to use a term that instantly labels the Scout as a criminal, the girl as a helpless victim, and the incident as a prosecuteable crime, in my mind is moving away from a helpful direction.

 

But- I also did not intend to start anything here, either. Sorry for that.

 

So- I guess altogether, we have 4 cents between us ;-)

[johndaigler 10]

Sorry if my post seemed more of a rant than a contribution to discussion. I wasn't trying to throw the situation into a legal setting, nor suggest that this was a case for criminal prosecution. However, other than age, I see little difference between adults and children who use power (sex, money, position, physical strength) to manipulate the actions/emotions of others. Given what we know about the situation, I think there's little doubt that the boys' comment used sex as a weapon to de-humanize and "victimize" the girl - whether he intended that, or was merely having a "teen moment".

 

When we adults react "softly" to this behavior it leads to the sense that it's really OK (at least on some level). That's too close to the kind of "looking the other way" that leads teen athletes to think they rule their school setting and can abuse others at little risk to themselves.

 

I just think we need to be careful; we react strongly to physical harm, but less so to emotional harm -- when it's clear emotional harm is every bit as dramatic and often more painful and long-lasting because of its insidiously invisible nature. No blood, no foul?

 

It's not a simple question - who is more harmed: the boy who was poked, or the girl who was verbally abused?

 

Are we disciplining the Scout for all of his behavior or really just focusing on the physical safety issue, and whistling as we walk past the girl?

 

I know, . . . I'm well past my $.02! Like that surprises anyone, anymore. . .

 

jd

[Bob White 20]

I did not read where anyone condoned his obscene behavior toward the young woman. But what if what he did was illegal the law he broke was not sexual harrassmemnt, which is a specific legal term with specific conditions that did not exist in this situation.

 

To say that he sexually harrassed her is not legally correct.

[johndaigler 10]

I did not read where anyone condoned his obscene behavior toward the young woman. But what if what he did was illegal the law he broke was not sexual harrassmemnt, which is a specific legal term with specific conditions that did not exist in this situation.

 

To say that he sexually harrassed her is not legally correct.

 

 

BW and everyone else,

 

The fact that "sexual harassment" has a legal definition does not keep it from having colloquial denotations and/or connotations. Every time we use a word we do not necessarily use it the way legislators, lawyers and judges interpret it. I have never suggested that the boy's behavior sunk to the criminal level. However, unchecked and uncorrected, this Scout's behavior is short steps from legally meeting the definition. Let's get past the semantics.

 

My point is merely to urge all of us to be aware of the harm being done verbally. Sure, no one has condoned the Scouts' behavior, but neither did anyone (suggest that someone should have) check on the girl, offer her an apology, or check in with her parents. I don't mean to hammer CA because I believe his Unit's response would be fairly typical -- and that's the problem! We blow a fuse because the Scout physically injured another boy, but how many times do our Scout's injure in unseen ways? How many times to we softsell the damage done to the victims because we can't see it? How does falling back on legal definitions help the Scout, the girl, the Unit, the Scout's future personal relationships, etc.

 

jd

[Oak Tree 15]

Ok, IANAL, but based on the definition above, I'd say this could easily be "sexual harassment". The definition given above included this phrase (extra words deleted): "the behavior has the effect of creating an offensive environment." If the girl was offended, then the behavior created an offensive environment.

 

Certainly any major company that has a sexual harassment policy would consider this behavior to be sexual harassment and would want to put a stop to it immediately.

 

But to play devil's advocate on my own position, I'll say that just because it might count as harassment doesn't mean it is (or should be) illegal. I don't think people have a right never to be offended. Some people are jerks and will offend you from time to time. Probably best to just learn to deal with it. Different levels of offense might apply to different situations. Work environments are generally pretty free of anything like this, but in social environments, I'd hope the girl could roll her eyes and walk away.

 

Oak Tree

[JoeJansen 10]

The behavior of the boy was wrong. The destructive behavior with regard to the camping equipment is of special concern. All the discussion about the punishment and procedures does not address the point that the boy needs help and how he may be helped. Some professional counselling may identify positive steps that, if taken, can help this boy get straightened out. What sometimes helps is to focus on the positive behaviors of the boy and to encourage him to build on and develop his good qualities. If all that is done is to parse the punishment options you are missing the important point that this boy needs help to see that his life unfolds in the direction of positive behaviors. Not simple but you should try something that will be helpful to the boy. He will notice and, hopefully, it will make a positive difference. Good luck.