Eagledad

I developed and taught a patrol method class. I found the struggle for many adults is just believing that patrol method does work. I gave some examples to the class of what Scouts can achieve with independence. One scouter stood up and called me on letting Scouts go on a 5 mile hike without adults. I asked him what scared him about the hike. He mentioned the obvious concerns like getting lost, or hurt, or even confronting strangers. I explained all adults have fears that hold them back from giving Scouts independence. I showed him how to remove those fears by teaching map and compas and using GPS. I suggested letting the Scouts hike in town in a familiar route so they couldn’t get lost this first time out. I explained teaching first aid and dealing with strangers in a scout like manner. The objective, I explained, was to use training to ease the adult fears. The skeptical scouter sat down without saying thing, but he approached me two years later at another course to tell me that he did exactly what I suggested and it worked. He apologized for being rude that day, but thanked me for patiently showing him how to run a patrol method program. So I agree with your suggestion of teaching patrol method. But it is a challenging concept for adults to consider, much less accept. Truth is just about every troop of adults feel they are using patrol method because they have patrols. What defines the different troops are the limits they place on the Scouts independence because they fear the worst. What adults need to learn is how to get past their fears. I showed them how to do that with training. But all I was really doing was getting them to understand Scouts are only limited by the adults and the adults can do something about it. How they get out of way isn’t as important as understanding the need to do it. This forum does pretty good sometimes explaining true patrol method and showing scouters how to get past their fears. But I don’t know how much adults want true patrol method anymore, the Patrol Method forum used to be one of the most active forums, now it’s hardly even touched. I’m not even sure what adults want from scouting anymore. Barry

I agree, with everything you said, but it’s outdoor and patrol basics like picking leaders, standing in formation, flag ceremonies and so forth that are difficult for new scouters. Most troops are pretty standard in those areas and that is huge benefit for new troops. The DE in another district called once for advice on dealing with a new troop of 40 new Scouts and 5 adults with zero scouting experience. The adults had not let their scouts lead an assembly after three months because they didn’t feel comfortable to let the scouts take that responsibility. The troop was run like a Webelos den. Patrol methed is a very difficult concept even for experienced scouters. Rarely do those of us hardcore Patrol Method experienced Gurus on this forum always agree. Inexperienced adults are so far behind in running a troop program, they typically focus on advancement by default because it’s the easiest method teach and measure. Troops with experienced adults are about 3 years ahead because they know how to use the other 7 Methods from the beginning. Sadly the Unit Commissioner Corp is used like they could be. Patrol methed is very difficult to teach. Consistent guidance works really well when a good UC is matched with a willing troop staff. But that is very rare. Barry Barry

I’m not sure what you are seeing, but one or two experienced scouters in a group 8 were always farther ahead than the group of 8 with no experienced scouters in our outdoor basic courses. They were so far behind that we made sure at least one experienced scouter was in an adult patrol. We observed that new troops with adults of no experience were 3 years behind new troops with some experienced leaders. The most challenging adults are the Cub Scout leaders that had no youth experience. They were know it alls in training that wouldn’t listen to the instructions. Then they couldn’t stop telling scouts what to do in the troops. We absolutely did not let Adult Cub crossovers help with the new scouts. They had to observe at least past summer camp. Barry

Most training in anything is designed around the student having some knowledge of the subject. That worked fine for the BSA until the membership change in 1990. The percentage of adults joining the bsa before that change was more than 50%, closer to 70%. Then the number jumped below 50%, dropping below 40% in just a few years. So you can imagine the shift of students with ZERO knowledge of the scouting program, at both vision and skills. You can respect the challenge National has in developing a training program that teaches an adult with zero knowledge of scouting, while not driving away the adults who have been there and done that. However, I believe the new membership changes wil result in recruiting less than 20% experienced adults. That kind of number will invite a training program designed to develop adults with zero knowledge of scouting. That goal will require considerable personal time, so the other 20% will have to consider watching from the sidelines. Or testing out. How ever it goes, the program will adapt to the average performance of trained adults without previous experience. I’m not exactly sure what qwazse is suggesting because this is basically how training ran before the training changes in 2000. And that model worked fine until the adult membership changes in 1990. After 1990, Scouts started complaining the adults were driving them to mimic their adult training program experiences. That was part of the motivation for the new training philosophy of 2000 of putting more emphasis on the scouting vision and building an adult team to build a program toward the vision. As result of the recent membership changes, scouting is going to have to change for the new inexperienced adults. I personally don’t see how training can take up the slack to get adults functioning at today’s program, so the program will have to change to meet their abilities. It will have to dumb down. At least from the perspective of us old-timers. Barry

It’s worse than that, the quality of the average unit program is directly related to the quality of training. True, a few units can ignore training because their adult staff is sufficiently skilled, but adult turnover eventually catches up to where the unit is relying on the training for their program. Barry

I guess. I worked with a lot of female ASMs who were mostly excited about learning scout skills. I pacified them as much as I could, but I mostly tried to teach them the fine art of sitting around the campfire all day long. Really! All I want from adults is for them to understand the Vision of helping scouts become moral and ethical decision makers. The scouts' Scout Handbook and Leaders Handbooks have enough information for them to do the other scouting stuff. You said it a few days ago, scouting really doesn't require very many adults. Just one really. But, adults want to reinvent the wheel when they feel power. They want to use their new found power to be relevant. That patch on their shoulder seems to be a battery pack for that power. Get ready for the new wave of inexperienced adult leaders. I remember when we spent most of our time in the Patrol Method forum. Ah! Those were the good-ol days. Barry

Your cultural defensiveness is showing your ignorance. Many times we are talking about issues that are the result of adult leaders who don't have any previous scouting experience. The fact is the vast majority of inexperienced adult leaders are women. And, hold on to your seat ParkMan, but the vast vast majority of adult leaders without any camping experience are women. And over the years I've been working this issue, I also found that while a lot of mothers are willing to learn camping skills, the great majority don't. We even had one female SM bragging how good her scouts were with crafts because she just didn't like camping all that much. In fact, I have worked with several female Scoutmasters and I can say none of them really cared for the Patrol Method. It's too chaotic letting scouts run the show. That being said, we have had a couple really good female Patrol Method Scoutmasters on this forum. I just never work with one personally. The BSA has been working with that issue since 1990 when they brought women leaders into the troop programs. The big training changes you saw around 2000 were the result of better training for unexperienced adults, that was motivated the surge of inexperienced adult leaders in 1990. I spent a lot of time working in the Webelos area that suffers from huge membership drop out numbers. We found that female bear leaders who were burning out had no desire to camp and teach outdoor skills. As a result, they either quit or put on a very boring program. There are many areas of the scouting program that is struggling as a result of unexperienced scout leaders. As soon as you can get past your bias toward traditional scouters, you can help work the problem. Barry

I think it's how our wives have trained us. Barry

This was predicted on the forum back when the discussion of girls started. Sexism has been used on this forum lately when the discussion of females comes up. I don't think it's malicious either, I think they really believe it. The traditional program is so foreign to their perspective, the opposition must be personal. As the larger numbers of strong personalities with no youth scouting experience join, programs will change toward the vision of those leaders instead of the goals and vision of the BSA. It's a natural result. In the past, the BSA had enough experienced scouters to resist most of these types of adults. But it is quickly shifting. Barry

I think mourning describes exactly the response by many of us. Scouting has, or had, a purpose that wasn't just a marketing slogan. We experienced the true effects of growth from our scouting experiences both as youth, and as adults. Those who belittle others for not embracing the new program are naive to understanding the power of the traditional program in helping boys develop lifelong habits of character. Those who show frustration with opposing opinions can't seem to rationalize how many of us consider their condescending tone to be un-scout-like. We don't just believe the power of practicing oath and law has on developing the noble character, we embrace it. Barry

This has also been brought with homosexuality several years ago. One study was about female college students experimenting with lesbianism because it was a fad. Not because they felt that was their preferred sexual desire. My high school teacher son said he doesn't tell me a lot of stuff in this area about his students because I wouldn't believe him. But, peer pressure makes their lives very complicated. I am so glad my kids are grown up. However, they are firing grand kids at me like a machine gun. The worrying never stops. Barry

The article is about freedom of speech, but the subject of the debate is a study of why youth are changing the gender identity. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/08/30/brown-u-pulls-gender-dysphoria-study-worried-that-findings-might-invalidate-perspectives-transgender-community.html ""“The onset of gender dysphoria seemed to occur in the context of belonging to a peer group where one, multiple, or even all of the friends have become gender dysphoric and transgender-identified during the same timeframe,” she added."" ......... ""Parents said teens “exhibited an increase in social media/internet use prior to disclosure of a transgender identity,” which led to the conclusion that “friends and online sources could spread certain beliefs.”" If scout leaders encourage youth follow today's fad, aren't they part of the problem? Barry

NO, not an allegory, just words that define our disagreement. Around here, the normal rational response to the OPs question is contact the parents. The world you describe is not normal. It's quite different. Barry

Out! LOL At least the parent would have more preparation than the unprepared volunteer scout leader. As I said in the post that you have taken personal offence, I balance my responses based from my life experiences. Parents are rarely part of the problem that you seem to suggest is normal. BUT, they are always part of the conclusion, what ever that turns out to be. If the child can't approach the parents first, there is a much bigger problem for the family than who learns first. As I said, one way or the other, their envolvement will be major toward the rest of the youths life. You are using an extreme example for a very rare case. So to suggest a major policy for all situations based on a rare case is ignoring the big picture. I'm sorry you are offended. But normal and rational are terms I feel are important to define the context of how the situation should be handled, or how it's being mishandled. Making the parents the last to know is extreme. I also used the terms compassionate and harmful. When the whole of the family is ignored without knowing the complexity of the situation, volunteers are put at risk of making the situation worse and putting the youth in more harm. No matter how much the parents are taken out of the equation, they are very much a big part of the solution. I except that my words are not convincing for you and I am not offended. I hope one day you can learn how to disagree agreeably. Barry

I'm sure that works best for you. I balance information with real life experiences. By the way, two of my kids are high school teachers. They have a completely different take from their training on this specific issue. They also admit the challenge of weeding out political bias from the information they are given. Much of the training my teacher kids get is how to prevent litigation. As I said, I can't believe normal people would believe that not contacting the parents is a rational response. Barry

Maybe it was an over exaggeration, but a recommendation to follow the scout's wishes as a first step is not, IMO , a reasonable response. In fact, I think gender identification at this age is so serious that it requires full immediate involvement of the parents. I can't believe calling the parents first wasn't even considered. I also agree with you that the parents are likely already aware of the situation, which is why they would get a few strong words from me for not working and preparing the volunteers of their sons troop for what they are about to experience. I've had that discussion with parents who felt the troop was a safe place to experiment with ADD medication on Troop camp outs without telling the troop. If the parents didn't know their son was considering this change, then that is a different, but just as complicated situation that requires special attention by experts that are likely not in the troop. I believe this is such a political hot potato in our culture at this time that the quick reaction by some folks is more to support and protect the political side of the situation than doing what is best for the scout and his family. That is neither compassionate nor safe for the scout as far as I'm concerned. Barry

No, I'm not a mental health professional. I was not focusing specifically on gender situations. However, once an adult starts down the road of supporting children in their emotions, I believe that support can be abuse. Barry

Yep, this is exactly right. Council would really rather the units figure it out. BUT, still make the call if for no other reason than to protect yourself. What I learned over the years is that you learn who to trust on these kinds of issues. They are old timers who have been around for a while. In our case, he was the District Commissioner. But, it could be anybody. And, if it goes far enough, call the police. But as was said, one you go that rabbit hole, everyone's lives takes a turn. I learned that once family issues raise to a level of community concern, the parents will act. Either by stepping back or finding help. We once had a parent drive scouts to an event drunk. When we approached him, he was so ashamed that he went strait to rehab for three weeks. A very active ASM we confronted for issues left the program and went to therapy. He never got involved again. One family packed their bags and left town, But, kids play their parents too. I have witnessed dozens of scouters (mostly Scoutmasters) get in trouble because they became part of the games between the scout and parents. The SM thought they were building a close trusting relationship, but the scouts saw the relationship as an alliance to use against the parents. Then there the scouts who are truly suffering from mental illness. Each case is different, and each one is unpredictable. The hard ones are the parents who don't give much information because they are embarrassed about it. But, they still expect the unit to treat their son normal. I see many of these kids today as adults and they are still struggling with life. I have a close family member who has experienced a lot in her life, including different roles of gender as well as volunteered homelessness. Which is a very dark life for a women. I believe today's new family scouting BSA would risk her more harm. I wish the BSA could train scouters of the behaviors and signs for struggling scouts and families, but looking back, each case was so different that I struggle to even generalize. What I can say is that even in abusive situations, the parents have to be brought in sooner than later. They have to be part of the solution. And in most cases, they will drive everyone involved (including the unit) toward the best possible solution. Not always, sometimes a higher authority is required, but even then you want to hand it over to the experts and get out of the way. We are just volunteers of a youth scouting organization. Nothing more. Beary

Both the scouts and parents knew when they joined the troop that there would be no secrets between the scout leaders and parents. Scouting is not a safe place when any Scout Leader puts themselves above the parents. Such self-righteous arrogance only leads to trouble and possible harm. observing hundreds of difficult struggles over the years, I can't think of a single one that was better when the parents where the last ones to know. But I can think of many that would not have raised to level it did if the parents were brought in sooner. That being said, our troop experienced many abuse situations, so lets not assume naivety on the subject. I have been called by the local police in the middle of the night to help with family abuse issues. I also have observed a lot of mental illness issues over the years and to just push off these things as simple life choices is naive and dangerous. Adults should have more compassion for youth. Barry

So we are on the verge of debating whether or not to call the parents. This is exactly why I am against the BSA accepting transgender and gay youth. Volunteers now feel licensed and privileged to encourage youth toward a lifestyle that may only be a phase or a mental health condition, and possibly without the parents knowledge. That is child abuse as far as I’m concerned, and at the very least, not friendly. A side note: We had behavior concerns with a 12 year old scout, so we called the parents to inform them of the behavior, and ask for their help dealing with the it. Our SM at the time explained that that their son had been displaying the behavior for two months. Against the advice of the previous SM, the new SM was trying to deal with the behavior without including the parents because he didn’t want the scout to get in trouble. The parents left meeting without saying much, but the CC got a call from their lawyer that night threatening litigation. They didn’t sue, but the reason is another sad story for the scout. I taught in the SM courses to Always, Always Always tell the parents everything. Not because they might sue, but because they are the parents and have the right to know. Barry

I don't care what politically correct experts say, this is a very unusual and sensitive situation that will likely have huge long term implications on the whole family. That is way above most scouters' pay grade. Does he even know what bathroom he will use? Youth protection? I have a family member that identifies her gender differently on different days. Call the parents. Barry

My first reaction is talk to the parents. Barry

What is a reasonable amount of time before it's not adding time? Three weeks, two weeks, two days? There are a lot of troops that hold only one BOR night each month because the troop doesn't have the resources for more. Rarely does the forum get upset with that policy. If the scouts' know the policies a head of time, they can manage their agendas and schedules. So, I have trouble with this adding requirements and time thing. For me, the question is why. If the SM is forcing attendance because of the much bigger problem of program driving away scouts (and we really don't know that to be true), then the SM needs to shift the focus for the sake of all the scouts, not just the older scouts or scouts wanting a conference. Barry

Exactly. But, typically the fix is not so easy. I've said here several times on this forum that the older scout program is the troops primary indicator of the health of the whole program. If the older scouts aren't coming, the whole program needs some adjusting. Barry

Adding a requirement? Please don’t mention that in your polite chat. Unit policies on conferences and BORs don’t surprise me anymore. Until I got active on forums, I thought everybody did them like us; Any time any day. But I was put in my place several times. I was even scolded on this forum for awarding my Webelos their activity pins at every den meeting. Every unit seems to have their own policies that work for them. So, while I agree you need to have a chat, I wouldn’t use the “everyone else does it different” cliche, because everyone else does do it different...from everyone else. Instead, approach the SM with your understanding of the BSA policy followed with your interpretation of the reasoning for policy instructions. Don’t start by putting your SM on the defensive because I, lol, silly me, I mean some SMs don’t handle hostile conversations well without sometime to consider the presented points. Considering some of the policies from other scouters on this forum, your SM isn’t that far off the track. And I’m sure he is thinking the same way. So, you need to present your interpretations pretty convincingly and warmly. Then move because this is not a hill to die on. I recommend supporting your interpretations with as much published documentation as you can do that your points aren’t just your theories. But instead long time traditional reasoning that has been in scouting for many generations. Then allow him to time to consider your points. Who knows, the policy might change after a few weeks , or even a few days. Barry