qwazse

I divided 84K by 110M and got 0.07%. It’s imprecise for many obvious reasons, not the least of which being false claims on one hand and victims who would not be party to the TCC on the other. It also may be unfair to compare that to the 9.6% estimate. The hours a youth would spend in school vs. an extracurricular would be a factor. That said, my boots-on-the-ground experience is with victims abused by family, peers, and clergy. Outside of these forums, I’ve never met someone who was victimized by a scouter. But, if using rough calculations similar to those in fighting contagion, BSA’s abuse-prevention strategy over the past century seems to have been 99% effective.

Have a really nice B&G, pay for summer camp, and be done with it.

First, we aren't all that anonymous. I've had people, after meeting me IRL, say "Hey, You're Qwazse!" Some of us meet IRL if we're passing through one another's council or are at Jambo. There are lot's of reasons for using a handle. For me, first and foremost, I want people who may know me to feel free to type their mind online. It prepares me for meeting people in the trenches. But, if someone spills details that are truly confidential, their identity will soon follow. I have no reason to doubt people here are reporting things from the way they see it themselves. BSA, TCC, or any other three-lettered entity would not waste time trying to sway readers here. The BSA pro's who do report here, seem to be doing so out of a desire to spare us or our scouts trauma. Second, recruitment will get harder as the cost of registration increases. As camps are sold, it gets even harder. A scout whose summer camp moves more than two hours away is less likely to attend. A potential CO is less likely to start a new unit. Those of us who love sinking $ into hiking and camping and watching boys grow strong and good in the span of 7 years will continue to do so. We will just have to figure out the plan B to make it happen.

Are you kidding me? Gravity, angular momentum, and slip knots! Yo-yo = scouting + STEM encapsulated in a toy.

Nor is failing to acknowledge the success in reducing rates of sexual abuse of minors ... Nor is failing to show that there was an alternative that has succeed in reducing those rates by another order of magnitude ... Nor is showing how this will be a net benefit to youth going forward ... Proposing that 0.07% of all scouts ever and their attorneys are worthy of orders of magnitude more than a billion dollars by virtue of their victimization ... Proposing further, without evidence, that nobody will be put at increased risk in the process. That victims somehow better know what to do with those resources because, well, at least they aren't scout execs ... Maybe that is kind in somebody's neck of the woods. But that sentiment is far from universal.

Is it really? Or is it about scout leaders who observe a victimization rate of 0.07% and look anywhere else besides BSA ... that rate is 100 fold? Could it be that BSA believes that if it is liquidated -- followed by the targeting of every organization that hosts youth, and school districts, and even the institution of family itself -- that the next five decades will be one of even greater sexual predation on our youth?

Not being in the pack, I don’t have a strong opinion. But I could tell that the curriculum was getting bloated and it was time to prune.

File: no good deed goes unpunished.

I hope some sponsors will come forward — especially among Americans who immigrated from Georgia. I can certainly imagine scouts putting this on their agendas.

“Scouting” is all that. No pretending. It’s just doing that without Scouts BSA. How many adults does it take to grab a tarp go into some woods and spend the evening? To walk to the nearest museum? To visit a municipal building? To do some good in the world. (Answer: it’s a nonnegative number less than 1.) Scouting will continue as long as there are boys, girls, and woods. It just won’t be distributed fairly to all youth. It will have increased safety risks. If National averages are correct, it will be twice to ten times more likely to expose a youth to sexual and physical abuse as youth in BSA. But, it will continue ... with or without the BSA.

You mean http://www.usscouts.org/databases/camp/ocd.cgi The TCC is probably using that for their machinations.

Let's be clear about my stumping for the two-week post 2nd dose rule. I am not saying that a scouter needs to be more cautious than he/she was last year. Simply stay the course. Wave #1 was flattened yet some camps, IMHO, closed unnecessarily. The unintended consequence of that was folks traveled further to the few open camp which probably offset risk mitigation. But in general, if you were able to go camping last year, you should be able to do the same this year. Better yet, most of your scouts have their own masks and understand protocol. On the flip side, they will have access to more in-person activity over the next couple of months. Obviously the disease (and subsequent hospitalization and mortality) rates will vary, and that will impact decisions. Still, scoutmaster conferences in the open air remain far less risky than in-person anything else (including ordering that brisket at a really good BBQ). I have never let up on encouraging that sort of thing. Just be aware that there is a real biological clock that has to run before you are 20x less likely to get disease than an unvaccinated person. This should not change your scouts' responsibilities. In fact, he/she might face more social distancing responsibilities no that camps have their game on. And if your troop is generally less active, encourage your youth leaders to touch base with each scout directly in their charge.

Last month I was giving condolences to the family of a neighbor who only got his 1st dose, so if I sound paranoid it's because the math is adding up in a boots-on-the ground fashion. We're all playing an odds game, and success is more likely if others around you have been vaccinated. Still, we're talking being exposed to uninfected youth who, if infected, tend to be asymptomatic. We're a cut above folks in E-Rs and respiratory clinics, and that comprises the folks who I know got sick 7-14 days after second dose. But then again most of the folks who had second doses last month were in those fields. An Israeli matched case-control study gives us a more real-world understanding, and it seems to indicate that the Pfizer vaccine is 90% effective 7 or more days days after 2nd dose in men. But that's not 95%, and when we get to large-scale distribution, those differences matter. On their charts, new cases of infection, hospitalization, and death seem to stop sometime after about 10 days post-2nd dose while they keep climbing among unvaccinated. (Aside: I would have done a different analysis given the huge dataset available to them, but I think I would find roughly the same conclusions, just a little more precision in the analysis.) Kicking a pandemic's butt is what we're after. So that means making sure we "respect the wildlife pathogen." My guess is that for every person who gets sick after their jab, 5 people will conclude that the vaccine won't work. If your scouts see you being cautious during that window, they will understand that and be more likely to make sound judgements if/when the vaccine is approved for them.

I can't find the phrase on the page, so is this what you intend the topic to be? Oh, thanks @CynicalScouter. In any case, the solution is "Increase Skill Mastery." A pandemic is no excuse. Basically, more time in open air is also our solution. We met in a park through the warm months last year, and it really helped our boys practice and master skills. Even as we are looking at lower restrictions now that most of our adults have jabs and virus-laden kids pose 1/20th the risk, we plan on repeating that practice. We were fortunate that our district made efforts to keep things rolling, literally. Even though Klondike had to be postponed and it was a little weird mounting tires on those sledges, two of our patrols participated. Funny thing, in the climb to be best patrol, our scouts learned stuff, and we were pretty busy with BoR's over the past few months. None of this lot asked to perform a virtual campout, and fortunately we had the depth of adult leadership to fill in when someone was sick. On the other hand, we only succeeded in providing about half as many weekends as normal. Oh @69RoadRunner, keep up the social distancing. Less then two weeks is too soon to let your guard down. I'm not trying to discourage you (or anyone else) from camping with your scouts. Just keep things ventilated (windows down or burkas on). The charts from the clinical trials are clear: the 20x advantage really does require 14 days, not 10. Before 14 days after last dose, the margin of difference between vaccine and placebo is not all that great.

Gas prices were lower this last drive south, but Mrs. Q and I made up for it. If we bought any more d/o’s, I could have mounted matching hubcaps on all four wheels.

Well, obviously, the victims who are convinced that filing suit does them no good would not be among the 8 in 10,000 scouts/alumni who have joined this class action. The totality of victims who’ve ever opened up to me were abused outside of scouting. Nevertheless “disease of the soul” is apt.

Society has made propositioning for this thing not fall under "sexual activity/discourse." This might be unacceptable in your your scouter-verse, and for good reason. But if a complaint went up the chain, this guy probably argued a "I didn't realize that's what they meant ..." clash-of-culture defense. Bottom line: if youth didn't observe it, you'll be hard-pressed to call it a YP issue.

@Armymutt, unfortunately, as clear cut as this is to you and me, this is not necessarily a YP issue. As my cousin Robbie has stumped for decades, adopting a permissive sexual ethic opens the gate for acceptance of polyamory and, consequently, adult-adult interactions involving proposals along those lines. So, you are wise to check with council, in your right to select leaders who will put youth ahead of liaisons, and in your right to have a low opinion of someone else’s ethics. But, worrying about what folks at a district level or in another unit give you ulcers needlessly.

That’s not “creeped out.” It’s patently offensive (even among sexually permissive circles) to assume that a single mom would be amenable to polygamy. Stick up for your moms. Reject this guy.

Of course, that calculus is impossible because families aren’t obliged to report any abuses that happen while their children are not In scouting. But based on our current understanding of the pathology, it is a reasonable guess that youth are at much greater risk when an uncle, sibling, or friend takes them camping. 84,000 is a drop in the bucket compared to the estimated millions who have been sexually abused as minors over the past 50 years. Remove BSA and its various methods of accountability, break the budget of every CO and remove them as contributors to youth programs, and we merely increase the isolation of vulnerable youth. We could create tenfold more victims than we compensate.

@ThenNow, I wouldn’t be surprised if someone would beat your dad to the punch. But think on this: if you didn’t want your corrupted troop to die then, why would you want the many wholesome troops to dissolve now? ETA: To be clear ... this is not an attack. This is an attempt to understand how what happened before influences the negotiations now.

So, I think the best way to implement your ticket is to lean into the patrol method and MB counseling. How about this for a goal: Develop and market patrol-oriented MB instruction. Develop an invite along the lines of “Mr/Miss Leader of the —— Patrol, You and the youth you lead are invited to schedule a weekend or set of evenings for my —— MB challenge.” Promote your program to the troop(s) you serve. In other words, think of the MB’s you teach. Go over the requirements. Identify those that might best be performed as a patrol activity — especially if there is a convenient resource in your community where that activity could be done. Explain that you will only handle one patrol at a time. Ideally, there will be one patrol who will take the bait. But, if not, at least scouts will have met one adult who takes them as a patrol seriously.

I would suggest that an intransigent attitude has nothing to do with tenure. I’ve seen this with leaders who’ve only had a couple of years under their belts and their kids are still in their unit.

Kool. It could monitor how systems are abusing our kids, and hold them accountable. Heck, it could go straight to the source ... families. It could provide re-education camps for wayward parents. It’s a recipe for success. I’m sure predators would never corrupt such an oversight entity.

Being one such leader, and a scout who has benefited from such leaders, and a father of scouts who have benefited from such leaders, I see nothing but good. The method is adult association, not parent association. Tenure has nothing to do with perilous leaders. Or, if it does, nobody is publishing stats on it.