fred8033

Argh ... I just re-read my writing ... Wow did I blow it. ... I should never connect and try to say something meaningful when I'm extremely tired. I add, edit, etc until I'm too tired to make sure it's really written well. So much for trying to be insightful. My point is simple. Times have changed. Fifty years ago people would often say "let's be realistic" about what was really expected. Today, it is all in the words. Words matter. The written word can be used against you and often will be used against you far beyond anything you ever intended. COs should NOT sign documents that contain words they are not willing to own and follow. Even without this large liability case, this is very true. Times have changed. The idea of a "CO" that is not really an owner and not really in charge is a bad idea. If COs are to really sign on as a CO, ... if a church ... the CO needs to spend church funds to pay their business administrators and youth pastors to help run the scouting programs. Make sure training is current. Make sure plans are safe per safe scouting rules. Make sure background checks work. Scouting is either an internal program owned and run by the CO, or they should NOT sign saying they are doing those activities.

Even without the latest lawsuit and insurance issues, charter orgs should sign the agreement. Signatures mean something. Words on the paper set expectations. If you don't plan to fulfill the words, don't sign! COs need to do-what-they-say and say-what-they-do. Encourage training (lack of training is fault). Maintain membership (unregisterd adults / youth is admitting it's out of control). Follow BSA program, GTSS, etc (not following indicates rouge program) ... etc ... Review unit leader apps. Make follow-up inquires to confirm moral, educational and emotional qualities. It's not just about after-the-fact libability. It's about doing hat you say you will do. If you don't plan to actually do what is in the agreement, don't sign. It's not an honorific documents. It's an "agreement". Our charter org is absolutely glad to provide space. I suspect they'd even donate fund or materials. The real issue is their signing this agreement says they want to take responsibility they don't want. I hugely agree they should not sign. Churches and public facilities will continue to support community organizations like the scouts. Even without the current COs, units can find space. Even cheaply rent space. This is about making the CO agreement match the current reality. Most COs agree to provide space. Very few actively oversee teh scouting program. "WHAT IF" ... Latest registration costs are skyrocketing. What if current unit leaders decide to help families that are tight on funds, by not registering their scout. Scout can participate, but BSA won't know about cub's advancement ... except AOL does t really matter? Slso, adults will be minimized to save pack cost. ... So some adults and scouts are not fully registered. Would the CO know? Would the CO know they are taking responsibility for that?

100% understandable. Similar to or same as proceeds from camp sales only go to claims from that council. Well intentioned by individuals who want to help their council's victims. Also, probably some legal basis (no real knowledge in fact) that they want to see their local victims compensated as part of upholding the validity of being shielded against future claims. Complexity ... This case is complex enough. Yet another painful twist in how complex to manage. Can't isolate costs ... Some are shared by settlement off-the-top. Some of the funds go for trust admin, victim lawyer profit sharing, etc. OR is everyone only paid after a specific victim is reimbursed. It seems that this only works if no-one gets any fund from the settlement except on a victim-by-victim payment basis. Not even off the top settlement profit sharing. Not even trust administration. ... Otherwise, there is a spend rate and profit sharing independent of the victim's council. Here is my SE nightmare scenario. I'm in a 3 shades of grey state. We contribute 75% or more of reserves to a settlement. Only .01% of my funds go to our local victims. In next decade, state re-opens SOL. Victims now claim that they were not compensated because it was not worth revisiting the damage for pennies on the dollar. Or claim they were not compensated fairly now that the window is open. I could see the concrete settlement shield begin to crack. As a scout exec, I'd want to see most of my contributions to go local to build up that future shield. ... Seriously ... it would be hard to claim you already paid your victims if none of the local victims were compensated fairly or similar to victims in other states. If I was a SE in a 3 shades of grey state, I'd think hard about recommending to NOT be part of the settlement. If the SE is in an open state, I'd jump at the settlement.

Well said. Many of your comments hit home. (deleted rest of my post ... it was nothing new)

The answer per how my favorite SM worked.

Interesting article. I've just never been a fan of taking cheap shots to prove your points. "lose their way" ... "unhappy ending" BSA has had 20 years of people taking cheap shots. This is yet just another one. It's not very Christian. It's not an example want my kids to follow.

Absolutely true. SM should be doing lots of friendly coaching to help scouts develop and foster the right environment ... if the SM even knows to do that. Reflection and mentorship should always be part of the program. Heck, it's the reason we have the SM moment.

The design is scouts working with scouts in the outdoors doing things. By doing that, leadership is fostered. SM can do minor reflects and suggestions as part of helping the troop function and scouts grow. But, there is no need for a constant focus on "leadership development". Sure, do an annual leadership course in the troop. Let ASPLs build experience to become the next SPL. Share roles and jobs. ... BUT, explicit focus on leadership is often more destructive than helpful.

LEADERSHIP IS AN IMAGE. I'm okay with saying scouts become good leaders. I'm saying volunteer adults are really bad at teaching leadership. Scouts were chosen during WWII because they could do well in adverse conditions. A strong rain storm is a better leadership teacher than any adult.

Our PLCs have always focused on what's next. Often for the next two months or longer. Next campout. Next activity. Next planning session. Next mtg. SM would work with SPL for a few minutes so SPL had a plan. SPL would then go into a room / area with the PLs and do their planning. SPL would share back to the troop committee what was needed or other comments. SPL runs all "troop" activities unless he's not there or assigns it to another scout. PL runs all patrol activities unless he's not there. Elections were scheduled during annual planning. The troop did run (until last two years) an annual training session for new scout leaders. (don't run now as we don't have any new scouts). That training session used BSA 1980s VHS tapes that ran for five / ten minutes and then paused. It was an extremely good training program. Run tape for five minutes. Watch PL kneel on ground reviewing what the scout put in his hiking pack. Then pause and reflect. Then a challenge game such as blind folded lifting a bucket with elastic cords tied to a small circle. Perhaps, I should get back to my original reason for treating this as a hot topic. I've been involved in four / five troops now. I still love the first troop the most and the original scoutmaster was an absolute great example. My challenge is I've seen too many times where the scouts are harped on by the adults for how they should be running things. PLCs with many adults injecting. Patrol meetings with almost every parent present. Heck, PLC should have one adult present AT MOST and that adult (the SM) sitting outside the circle, a little back and mostly quiet unless asked. The patrol meetings also should not have any adults. I consider it a successful PLC if they have agendas for the next immediate meetings and ideas for next months mtg. Success if they know who's bringing the food; have menus; know the gear and have an idea of what to do during the camp out / activity. I should be forthright here. We're a small troop at this point. We're just trying to have adventures. Many of my comments are based on when we were larger 40/50 scout troop for decades.

And the PLC would do what with the method "leadership development"? The closest I can see is making sure each scout gets a chance at shopping for food for the scouts or taking their turn in another area. BUT, that can be easily explained in oath and law. A scout is helpful. It's also about being part of a team. There is zero need to have the PLC talk about leadership. PLC should be talking about activities and doing cool things. Sadly, that's a marketing problem. At some point, BSA started selling scouting as more than it was. Scouting is an absolutely great way to encourage / develop leadership. It's the absolute best environment. But "teaching" it is the problem. Let the mom see it in the "AIMs", but not in the methods.

Leadership development will naturally happen. What needs to be taken out is the "METHOD". Leadership development. We can use methods such as ideals, patrol, advancement, uniforming, etc. Adult volunteer leaders can do something there while still focusing on the heart of scouting. GETTING THE SCOUTS OUTSIDE BEING ACTIVE. Run a program that gives the scout's adventures and they will will naturally learn leadership. ... If anything, add a "method" called "adventure". The issue is having adult volunteer leaders explicitly try to teach leadership. It damages the program. I've been in decades of MBA courses and high performance team training and similar sessions. From what I've seen ... Leadership is not something that can easily be taught. In fact, I'd question whether it can be taught. What you can do is create situations where leadership is necessary and individuals will naturally learn. I even fear saying "create situations" because then you have someone who runs patrol lines four/five times over the same area and drop a small amount of trash after the 2nd pass "to teach a lesson". "Creating situations" is about helping the scouts go bike, hike, cook, etc. Artificially injecting special obstacles to teach leadership is a bad idea.

We can deal with the individual without inferring BSA's challenges with societal change. Arrests, charges, crimes, etc ... Yeah, this is absolutely a path that will get you removed by BSA. We can debate this incident, but this should not be surprising. I'm betting the council does not want someone facing a felony jail time to be sitting in an Eagle Court of Honor. Best way to avoid arguments about requirements and having earned Eagle is to remove the scout. SADLY !!!! ... In this case, it could well be warranted.

Great comments. I think about the great scoutmasters I've known. When they brag, it's not about number of Eagle scouts or how they ran their troops. They brag about trips to the rockies or bike trips or camping at the state fair grounds or summer camp storms or ... It's never about how effective or well organized the troop was.

Yep agreed. I was disagreeing with it being a female leader issue. It's absolutely an new-leader training / learning issue. I think what you wrote and I wrote are same / similar.

Good point. I was being sarcastic. This whole thing has smelled. Definitely some well meaning lawyers, but how this has gone down has always smelled of middle-men seeing a gravy train and not wanting to miss out. Victims always deserve to be made whole (if possible), but what's happening will help few.

Recognize that this set of threads and posts are highly one sided. One person's "conceal" is another person's view that BSA did far more than other organizations. BSA had an exclusion system in place to try to block volunteers before background checks, before computer systems, before the current understanding of CSA and before the current laws existed. Strongly debatable whether abuse happened at higher levels than other programs or rest of society. I know of no cases directly in scouting, but know of multiple cases / incidents in our local music programs, school programs, sports, church, etc. Over the last 100 years, BSA has easily had 100+ million scouts. When divided by math and incident rates in other programs, I question whether BSA is different enough to be uniquely called out. BSA could not have "concealed" cases on their own. Many cases had COs and other groups. When I read the files, you will often find police reports and other records. Demonizing BSA over this is not as clear cut. Yes, BSA could have done more, but society as a whole failed and did not understand CSA well until the last twenty years.

Absolutely agree. Unless the church chooses to actively run, MANAGE AND CONTROL the scouting program, it should be a council charter. ... Imagine, church elders monthly reviewing PLC notes; approving the troop annual plan; approving camp plans; approving financial spending; keeping event permission slips; etc. Heck, our church's paid business manager would need to spend significant time on this. This might be the only viable option for Catholic charters. Otherwise, non-Catholic leaders in Catholic charters have a hard time being leaders. Heck, even active Catholics have a hard time being leaders in a Catholic charter org where they are not members in that specific church. Our charter org is changing to a facility use agreement and chartering via the council.

Ya know ... many of us ... at the request of other here ... have toned down our comments about the motivations of those diving these cases. How much they charge. Potential profits. etc. But yes ... Something is rotten in the state of Denmark. It ain't just the fish.

Absolutely true !!!! My oldest was a Tiger in 2000 and wore an orange T-shirt. You could tell the pack program was more mature than Tigers could do. They were more a "friend" of the pack and not really full cubs. I'm don't think it was even a full rank right then. Maybe first year. Now, 20 years later ... the maturity of the pack is much lower and the cub activities are much less mature. Lower maturity has definitely increased the adult workload. Lion and Tiger dens require more adults and more interaction. At those ages, the boys just are not ready to be independent. Parents burn out on cubs well before finishing Tiger. I remember that cub activities with my sons in 2nd and 3rd grade. The dads got to cruise thru it because the kids start socializing and hanging with each other. It's an excuse for the dad's to hang together and claim parenting credit with the wives. If I could start over again, I'd start my son's in scouting in 3rd grade. Right when they start using knives and fire. Then add shooting and fishing. 2nd grade maybe. Kindergarten NEVER !!!!! 1st grade? No. Maybe big cub events. Visiting the zoo. 1st grade advancement? No. No. I don't accept that as an issue. There's a reason the term was den mother. Den mothers existed from the 1950s. ... The real issue is in the next section. Absolutely agree. Now that I'm in the tail end of my scouting career, too many adult leaders think their role is to always look for their next chance to teach a lesson or step in. Too few are comfortable just sitting by their tent with a cup of coffee. Every moment does not need to be a forced lesson. Scouts don't need to be efficient or productive every second. And yes, too many adults using their scouting positions to get stature. Too many SMs / ASMs getting their thrill being up front. The best adult leaders are the ones that stay in the back of the room and don't say much. Or better yet, be in the room across the hall listening to the scouts, but not involved. ... You do need the adult oversight to prevent "The Lord Of The Flies" mentality ... but even that can be done by friendly words and subtle mentoring. ... 4th method of leadership? ... PC? ... Clueless? ... Greed and political sway? BSA has clearly made mistakes. Clearly. Heck, BSA has swallowed a bit too much of it's own marketing. BUT ... Society has changed big time over the last twenty years. BSA had to change. YPT. Lawsuits. Politics.

@Eagledad's analysis is pretty good. It's not the 2013 membership change. It's picking a fight and enabling BSA vs Dale. BSA should have immediately said they were about program and structure and that the charter org chose the membership. That way, those on each side could have claimed victory and BSA could have stayed out of the battle ... as much as possible ... My oldest son joined during BSA v Dale. Where the BSA's position on BSA v Dale was not controversial when it started in 1998/1999, now society is aghast at BSA's old position. Same thing on female scouts. Same thing on faith and scouting. Same thing on many different areas. ... What's next? Guns? BSA can teach timeless values and provide strong character lessons. Trustworthy. Loyal. Helpful. Friendly. Courteous. Kind. Obedient. Cheerful. Thrifty. Brave. Clean. Reverent. The mistake was taking a position in current events and getting between groups that wanted to bash heads and leave destruction behind. Might as well have BSA commenting on the welfare state and recommending tax policies. That mistake created 20 years of PC damage.

Huh ... Go figure. I always thought it was because so many outside organizations keep taking pot shots at BSA to promote their own agenda. And this article is in a Christian magazine?

Fascinating. Large amount written on this. I just did a little (and I mean a little) searching and reading on this. I had no idea so much was written on the problems of mass tort litigation (MDL), bankruptcy and using bankruptcy to manage/survive MDL. Something is broken with MDL/bankruptcy. It's a catch 22. If BSA doesn't file bankruptcy, the MDL individual actions will drive it into bankruptcy. "Actions" as no guarantee that it becomes a single class action. It could be many individual claims over time. No end of liability or suits. So, bankruptcy first to preserve as much for MDL as possible? Or large MDLs (if possible) resulting in bankruptcy. Only positive I see is bankruptcy first allows an easier acknowledgement of the liability debt. I doubt either path saves cost.

Wow. I'd like to know if this is real? A settlement motivated by loans coming due and hedge funds wanting results. Nice write up @Muttsy

Very well written. ... I've seen that exact thing repeatedly ... And it drives me crazy. Presenting to youth the reasons adults want them in scouting and then overly focusing on why adults want them in scouting. ... Then, forgetting the whole reason so many youth loved scouting. It does feel like a lot of ego stroking while ignoring the promise to youth why they want to be there.