qwazse

If the boys are both passionate about the church, encourage that. But if they haven’t even started writing a proposal, I’d take it as a sign that they aren’t all that passionate. Encourage them be aware of what the other members of the church — not just one other scout — are doing. If you have any association with the church let the clerk of session know that these boys are probably some months away from implementing any service project and that whatever each comes up should be somewhat independent of the other. Then walk away. These are Life scouts. It’s for them to sort out with their mutual beneficiary. P.S. - this could be a win-win. With projects these days requiring two-deep adult supervision, a larger adult pool should translate into more time when the scouts could be adequately supervised.

It’s taken our community’s parents almost a decade (and I think four spun-off troops) to realize that. That said, I feel bad that the latest troop needed to merge back with us. (The only problem as far as I could tell was that their adult leadership had not fostered replacements.) They met on a different night from us (as opposed to spin-offs 1, 2, and 3), and filled a niche for boys who would be otherwise occupied on our night. I do think that’s the other formula for growth. Find niches. Unfortunately that kind of insight has to come from the outside. But, with districts as big as they are, nobody is really positioned to tell to troops how to adjust their schedules to attract different youth.

My childhood troop had been started a few years earlier with help from the loan (donation?) of an SPL of the troop my SM was assigned to start as a member of the CO. So, instead of going to training. Training came to him. I didn’t appreciate it then. But now … Look at your top scout. Think of going to him/her and saying, “It’s time for you to finish your tenure in a unit of newbies down the road.”

I’ve seen everything done. My ventures once ditched an area event that they had been dying to go to for year — all for some last minute party conjured by the popular kid. The other adult and I went and had a great time counseling other venturers. That and other events gave me these lessons learned: Do it for you. Yeah, sure we’re in this for the kids. Whatever. But if it’s not something that gives you joy even if one parent and kid show up, you’ll add to your misery. Aim for the event to be top-notch on your scouts’ criteria — nobody else’s. That way they will brag about it when they get home. At last nights CoH there were the usual advancements, followed by two very moving Eagle awards, but the highlight were the “fun awards” where the ASPL and SPL thanked a few key scouts for the spice that they added to activities. (Hint: none involved anything that would be listed in he Insignia Guide.) We are scouters in the culture we live in. Not the one we want to live in. Especially at the Cub level, boys and girls are still learning what’s important to them and their parents. They don’t communicate it well. That will be reflected in their participation. Teach youth that they will get out what they put in. Eagles aren’t recognized because they earned some badge. They are recognized as people who dive in and get everything they can out of it. When you do have parents who unanimously put scouting up high on priority it’s great, but when a number don’t it’s important to stay in the proper head space.

The reason why you can't find any is because there is none. The Lion and Tiger program are, however, very focused on the relationship between parent/guardian and child. The scout would not be getting the full benefit of the program without them. Wolf through AoL programs center around the den leaders, so parent's (aside from a 2nd registered 21+year old of requisite gender) aren't really needed for den meetings. Pack-meetings, let's be honest, are really about showing off to the parents and other dens. So, you definitely want them around then. If the scouts are traveling any distance, having a parent in the room definitely helps in the handling of emergencies.

Camp (not the council’s crown jewel, an older — maybe oldest — land trust) was full this weekend. Our neighbors, about 200 yards off, were new girls’ troop. The usual female who camped with them was not available so the SM’s spouse came along. She was no fan of camping and this was a brutal weather even for those of us who were. It wasn’t warm enough to stay thawed, nor cold enough to keep the precipitation from crawling through your clothes. I praised her effusively for coming along with her scouts. However I’d write, it would have to include high praise for such people. Related to that, I would ask leaders to walk a mile in their scouts’ boots. Go through the Handbook and try to earn 1st class, getting signed off by their senior scout along the way.

@InquisitiveScouter, in causal modeling, it is irresponsible to suggest that variables that have not been measured would take precedence without identifying exactly what hasn’t been measured and how much hasn’t been explained. So, for example, if you say the changes in some species could be explained by some non-climate related variable. The argument only holds water if the de-tractor names the causal variable (e.g. vampire zombies) and the degree to which it impacts the outcome (e.g. they sucked the brains of 10 of the 15000 birds examined, although interesting, does not make it a causal factor). In other words, saying ornithologists are taking cheap shots is exactly what someone who can only make cheap shots would say. Anybody with something credible to say would propose a mediator, its magnitude, and any assumptions underlying its proposition.

@Armymutt, unfortunately, we lack data on the probability that abuse would ensue given x nights of camping. In my troop very few parents join us, so it’s a non-issue. The parent who camps more than once is given an application if they aren’t registered already. @MattR, Assuming that any of elder or deacon might serve youth, my church had all of us on the board get the PA clearances. I like the notion of a good old Interpol check. But that is just a part of the equation.

A parent may attend multiple weekend camp outs without being registered, but there comes a point where they do more than keep an eye on their scout. They effectively volunteer with the program. In PA, that would justify background clearances. Our IH and COR make sure we’re on our toes with that. I like parents to go through YPT. It’s far easier for me if they know the rules than if I have to explain the buddy system repeatedly. Registration would be gravy. But it’s incidental to what I need to secure a youth’s well-being.

However, were you going to a friend’s farm or relative’s camp (the more frequent scenario facing most scouts) that check would not be required. Were you to go there for more than three days, BSA would require a registration and (presumably) background check while the friend or relative may not. So depending on the specific activity, Canada will come off more or less strict than BSA’s 72 hour policy. When taking a crew to Seabase Bahamas, I needed a notarized statement from the parent of everyone under 18. This was more to address human trafficking than CSA. The parents being registered was a big help to me on that front. That was for reasons other than screening for CSArs. The fact that we all knew how to hold each other accountable was very helpful. PA’s mandatory reporter training has been helpful in coordinating volunteers across multiple organizations.

Their advocates will have us believe that not all victims of childhood sexual assault are litigants. So, no, by their own argument, we are not blaming survivors, or even a majority of them. If the current body of CSA litigants do comprise the majority of survivors, then BSA would be statistically 10 times as safe as the general population. It can't be both ways ... either yours are the minority of a sea of victims or, were we to investigate an organization with a similar number of youth, we would find 10 nightmares for every one of yours. As I testified elsewhere, my lived experience has been among survivors whose abusers had no part in scouting. So I do see a palpable risk that the diminution of national youth organizations could have serious unintended consequences -- not the least of which being under-served children's increased contact with potential abusers. Tossing around rhetoric about "blaming survivors" does nothing to allay that. As has been pointed out, not all litigants are CSA survivors, so yours may be the case of the day, but on these forums are other reports of claims against the organization. I find them helpful, because they do provoke thought. So, you are welcome to brag about how litigation makes an organization better, how the non-monetary terms will do wonders in making it even more trusted and it's youth safer -- if indeed, you can show some evidence that the process is doing that. But some of us are concerned about all the youth of the nation. Prove a net good for them.

Welcome to the forum. Tell your guide that some strangers on the internet think he/she is making an inappropriate suggestion. It might be appropriate if, while working your ticket, a patrol of scouts pitched in and they invited you personally to get your beads at their CoH. Troops should be youth lead, and any troop that lets any adult pile on their agenda is not a troop, and therefore not one where a reasonable scouter would want to be recognized. You're a district volunteer. Get beaded at a roundtable, an adult cracker-barrel at a camporee, or some other activity geared towards scouters.

Like @MattR, in mine or my kid's units, I have never experienced an absentee COR as you described. (As a youth, my COR introduced me to my Eagle project.) I think every COR who I worked with had a sense that among us might be a ne'er-do-well (let alone pedophile), so due diligence was in order. The word "liability" may not have even been uttered, but "keep our kids safe and leave the building tidy" motivated in the same direction. The most egregious thing about UMC's action seems to me that diligent COs are bearing the brunt of those professionals who knew slack charter's were being signed, but pushed their DE's to generate quantity over quality (also a familiar theme here). Blind rage is only that. If CO engagement really reduces liability, then we need real survey results with real numbers to back it up. It's too easy look at the blogged complaints of scouters here and generalize to the nation. But, supposing that's true. Then the worst thing litigants could do for our nation's youth is to discourage duly diligent CO's from engaging with them. P.S. - I'm still friends with the kids of the DE at the time when I was a youth. It warms my heart to see their pictures of him and his wife.

By that logic … if you were a CO … would you have a youth program AT ALL?

Okay. Answer me this. How does ending a charter agreement absolve a CO of liability? Is there any victims’ attorney out there who said they will take a CO off their list of intended targets if they drop a charter?

Chatting with a scout dad last night … ”I only made it to 1st class, or was it star?” ”Did you have fun?” ”Oh, yeah!”

First the titles are pure doublespeak. BSA has often formed these under different names. A recent was the information technology group. They made a big show of wanting to recruit volunteers throughout the nation. I have the “don’t call us, we’ll call you” on that one. I don’t know how many there are or were.

Or, possibly there was potential for worse abuse in band, and your son was needed there to prevent that. God’s grace has it’s quirks … I’m wondering if this is related to a similar story we were following a few years back. I’ll have to dig.

Let me ease your mind. There will be no global resolution at the CO level. A victim might have a chance of forcing a CO with a large number of accumulated assets to the table. The odds increase with the number of victims. So, I would give you high odds with your Catholic CO of exacting something because the diocese will most likely hold the liability. Going after a volunteer fire department in a distressed community? A few now-impoverished friends who hosted a scouting group for a few years then disbanded? With no liability coverage? A victim might get more with a tin cup. Think of it this way: if COs were estimated to have had consolidated wealth much larger than BSA's, where do you think legal action would have started in the first place.

Son #2's best friend, as he advanced into adulthood, made the conscious decision to no longer be considered as having Asperger's Syndrome. It's not been easy for the young man. But, for him, "fighting that label" gave him a lot of courage. I don't know if, as a scout, I would have been willing to be an Arab American "object of study." I might have been able to say, "Come over for dinner." It wasn't until college (and even after) that I realized that it's sometimes helpful to be a foil against which people could sound out their experience of being discriminated against (or a discriminator). I do know that these conversations among adults sometimes disappoint because nobody is a perfect metaphor for someone else's troubles, but it's really easy to come of like you're trying to be just that. If you're going to counsel this badge, you're going to have to accept that you can only do so much to prepare a scout for it.

My relatives in FL put wheels on their patrol’s Klondike derby sled. Most district events at the troop level should encourage patrol competitions, IMHO.

Regarding obtuse references: This is an open forum. As long as it’s not ad hominem, a poster can be pretty free with their style. Other concepts are elaborated in Forum Support. If something is unclear, ask, and the first one to provide an answer might get an upvote. (Some folks desire them.) About yachts and other expensive hobbies, I daresay that some victims have them, or have friends who do. If Mr. Kosnoff thinks that a night on the water is such an insult to a lawyer’s clients, he could take it up with the Bar Association.

@Eagle94-A1, consider how many EMTs are in an ambulance. It’s not for youth protection. We’ve always sent two adults to transport a scout to clinic.

One man’s loophole = another man’s knot. “No one-on-one contact” is not a loophole so much as it’s the means by which scouts can corroborate evidence of sexual abuse should it occur.

Interesting article on cannabis vaping among youth … https://text.npr.org/1049127183 If you’re recruiting evenly in your community it’s likely that one in 12 of your youth are dealing with this.