Incident at Summer Camp

[CA_Scouter 11]

Clays, balls, sticks, rocks, small rodents, whatever... that matters not where they found them or why.

 

What matters is the reaction of the parties involved. The knife throwing matters a little more than the clays. Ganging up on one kid matters a little more than the clays. I'm not missing the point, I'm focusing on the most egregious of their actions.

 

I am meeting with everyone tonight. I'll try to provide an update tomorrow.

 

[evmori 11]

It does make a difference how & where they got the clays. These things aren't just laying around waiting to be found! Either someone removed them from the range & these boys found them in which case they shoulda been returned to the range or they removed them from the range.

 

A Scout is trustworthy.

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[packsaddle 753]

I think I see CA_Scouter's point regarding the clays. We don't know the source of the clays and it isn't necessary. The speculations, assumptions, and suppositions are not helpful. If they stole them then that is another issue for which the response is simple and obvious. Let's not get side-tracked on that issue when the more important one (and a bit more difficult) is the subsequent behavior that could have erupted, for that matter, over a box of doughnuts. Concentrate on the hard problem...the easy one doesn't need us.

[BrotherhoodWWW 10]

I agree that the clay targets is not the issue here. It may or may not matter depending on the camp's set-up and rules, but that is a seperate issue IMO. The facts as presented are a problem and should be addressed. The testimony that S held a knife to another's throat is a very serious matter and removal from scouting would be the very least I think should be done, depending on witnesses. In the adult world that is assualt. Charges in a juvenile court would not be too severe in this case. The throwing of a knife is almost as serious. requiring parental supervision for every Scouting event for at least two years seems to be at least prudent. I'd strongly consider telling the Scout that he is no longer welcome. The safety of the whole is more important than the individual.

 

As for the instigators of this there should be some serious counciling of these boys. Everyone envolved needs to understand how every action has a consequence and sometimes it is not intended.

[Vicki 11]

B-WWW wrote, "As for the instigators of this there should be some serious counseling of these boys. Everyone involved needs to understand how every action has a consequence and sometimes it is not intended."

 

Absolutely! I believe one of the key problems today is the tendency of folks to say, "Oh, I didn't mean to do (fill in the blank)" and expect the problem caused by their action to go away just because they didn't mean to do it, or they lost their temper, or they were too drunk. It would be too easy to allow the "boys will be boys" mentality to prevail.

 

SM conference, maybe a BOR, some anger management counseling - not necessarily professional, anyone who has had serious anger issues as a kid and grown through them (that would be me) is in a position to help others. Learning the physical cues associated with anger and how to handle them, the social consequences, it's all incredibly important.

 

Maybe S does need to be removed from the troop, at least for a bit, just to let some time go by. Might not hurt to have ongoing meetings with the other boys involved (once a month, 15 minutes before or after the meeting to talk about what has made them mad in the last month and how they worked through it?).

 

This sort of thing can have a really meaningful, positive impact or it can go completely south if retribution is the only outcome. Not saying it will be, just hoping not.

 

Look forward to seeing how the meeting turned out.

 

Vicki

 

 

[Gunny2862 11]

It's not my post, but it looks to me like CA_Scouter has the source of the clays as a side issue, because he knows more about their source than we do.And knows what to do about that part of it.

 

My take on it is that the investigation should have been done there and then, no time for collaboration and for the events to get set in each participant/witnesses mind. Once someone is given a certain amount of time to revisit an issue they get the facts lost a little in their attempt to make sense of what happened and their version of the story changes as they reconcile what DID happen with what makes sense in their experience.

 

Since that didn't happen, A lot of what remains has to do with the specifics of the past actions(revealed character) of the boys in the incident.

I don't know them and without that info - - I think the knife wielder"S" needs a "no sharps" policy and either a trusted adult - not necessarily a parent for some one-on-one counseling/guidance. Does he also need a minder?And other than to put some pain on the parent I don't know if it should be the parent who is the minder. I don't know, how big and off-kilter is this kid? Is he of average or smaller size and the other boys can handle any emergency stops if he goes off again? I don't know these things.

"P" needs some discussion about how to communicate about issues with his peers rather than communicating by locking people in bathrooms.

The entire troop may need some guidance about when it is appropriate to bring issues to the attention of the adults rather than handling things themselves, especially if physically ganging up on each other is how they resolve things.

 

That is how I see things from the cheap seats with the info I have.

Good luck CA, I'll be looking for your update.

[CA_Scouter 11]

UPDATE

 

Interviewed all the parties involved last night. Our campsite was very close to the shotgun range, the clays were found outside the roped off area behind the berm that encloses the range. The boys were looking for items to decorate the gateway they had built for the campsite. These items weren't 'stolen' but looks like they were 'misses' that flew outside the boundry of the range.

 

After evaluating the interviews, we narrowed down the responsible parties to S, P and one other scout J who participated in the bathroom incident. ASM's and I met to discuss appropriate discipline, taking into account that S has an extensive history of annoying behavior ( pushing, grabbing, sticks, rocks and general mischevious behavior done in bad taste ) along with an incident 2 years ago where he threw a can of repellent and hit another scout.

 

We then convened the PLC, presented the facts to them, and left them alone so they could hash it out. The PLC came back with the recommendation to expel S, put P on a three month probation with no rank advancement during that time, and J will get an official warning and three month probation. In our troop, probation means that any further behavior problem will result in an immediate suspension.

 

The ASM's and I discussed expelling S also, but we settled on a suspension from all troop activities for the remainder of 2007, and parental supervision for all troop meetings, activities and campouts for the calendar year 2008. Before S is permitted back to the troop, he will have to present himself to the committee for reinstatement and explain/show what actions he and his family have taken to correct the behavior issues and guarantee the safety of his fellow scouts. He will forfeit his Chaplains Aide position ( yea, I know ), his Totin' Chip and Firemn' Chit. Mom is single with the Dad not involved, so she asked if a friend or church member could fill in for her on campouts. We are considering it, but I would require YPT and G2SS at a minimum.

 

We agreed on the discipline with P and J. We spoke to the PLC about going along with the suspension instead of expulsion, and they eventually agreed ( if they were adamant on the expulsion, we would have done that, but they were a little wishywashy). One of the issues with S is that nobody on the PLC likes him, and some of the members just wanted to get rid of him.

 

Presented this to the Committee and they voted 11-3 in favor ( yes, its the SM's decision, but I still wanted the backing of the Committee ).

 

This of course will be documented, letters sent to the families, copies put in their 'file', etc.etc. I put in a call to my scout exec yesterday to discuss but he has not returned my call yet.

 

Regarding the troop going to the adults ... yea we pound that into them pretty regularly, but they still neglect to do so at times. Also, based on the timeline of this incident, it looks like the bulk of it occurred in a matter of minutes, so that may have been a factor.

 

Troop will also be addressed next week regarding the 'courteous and kind' aspects of the Scout Law with regard to people one doesn't particularly care for. We did have one scout who stopped another scout from retaliating on S, so we recognized him for his calm under pressure.

 

S's Mom did not object to the suspension and thanked us for our lienency.

 

A very trying week.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[evmori 11]

CA_Scouter,

 

Handled exceptionally well! Kudos to the PLC and all involved with this difficult decision.

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[Its Me 10]

 

I respect what you are up against I faced a similar incident about 8 months ago. We did not kick out the cub then either.

 

However, I think in this case I would have defaulted to what the PLC decided and expel the boy. A true "gang of boy" should be able to have their leaders come together and expel a troublesome kid. Who will want this boy in their patrol, as a swim buddy, as a tent partner? The adults just say "shake hands and now go play nice." Fine for the adults to say but we don't have to live with the demon child. In our case the boy pulled the knife on kids from another pack. He was well liked within his den.

 

On the other hand, I believe and support your decision. In all it is the right decision for this incident. I know there are more facts and circumstances involved in this issue than can be conveyed within a couple of posts. I am sure you have weighed them all. Good luck with turning this boy around and with redirecting this troop to more positive activities.

 

[Gunny2862 11]

What Its Me says is true, that the boys should be able to expel someone that they are not willing to be around. However the ability to deal civilly with people we don't particularly care for is an extremely valuable skill.

 

I'm glad that (it looks like) CA_Scouter has been able to come to a resolution that will work for the troop.

 

One thing that I might mention to the boys is that it is when things are in a crisis that I might want to be brought in, if only to see how they deal with it. Rather than end in a situation like this one where more than one person winds up in the (adult intervention) soup.

[theysawyoucomin' 10]

Make each of the parents go to walmart and buy their kid a box of clay birds.

 

Meet with all the boys in question and say, "Now each of you have a gross of these things. Was what you did worth a truckload of these things? Assault, and a host of other real crime. Boys take stock of what you are so upset about. Is this some carry over from a previuos incident?"

 

The kid that held the knife to anothers throat needs a vacation along with the kidnapper and the knife thrower. I get confused in reading the original post.

[local1400 10]

It is too bad S had to be expelled. "Single Mom and Dad is not involved." Here is a boy who needs what Scouts has to offer. I think an appropriate punishment is sweating out some time performing service projects to the Camp plus double secret probation.

[Stosh 3452]

I'm with Local1400 on this one. It doesn't quite make sense to remove the boy who needs it most from the scouting program. But then it's always easier to "make it go away" than to deal with the challenge it imposes on the troop.

 

Someday I'm going to have a troop of nothing but the cream of the crop. Until then I am "saddled" with the ADD/ADHD, diabetic, short-fused, home-sick, sleep-walker, trouble-maker, mean spiritied, etc. boys. While it doesn't make my job easy, it does make it challenging.

 

Stosh

[BrentAllen 10]

I know an old 4-bead SM who would never send a boy home from camp, and he wasn't just dealing with angels all the time, either. Once you send them home, you can't work with them.

 

Instead, he would have the trouble Scout cleaning the latrines and shower house every day. Changing out trash bags around camp and hauling trash. He figured the boy would have it easy, if he was just sent home, whereas that week at camp might be one of the toughest he had been through. The Scout might decide he didn't want to be in Scouts at the end of the week, and that was his choice, but he sure wasn't going to act up again in that Troop.

 

And no, it wasn't just "hard labor" the Scout received as punishment - he also received plenty of mentoring and coaching about what he had done, why it was wrong, and what he should have done.

 

Just another thought.

[packsaddle 753]

Heck, I dish out punishment freely and often. I sing to them every opportunity. Sounds like things worked out as well as could be expected.