Beavah

It really isn't that hard Beavah, at a minimum Part A will suffice for a camping trip. Yah, I reckon yeh need to read a bit more closely, SMT244. This was a trip down the Grand Canyon to da Havasupai reservation at the bottom. That's a Part B (physician physical & signoff) required trip, eh? The nature of the trip is more strenuous and demanding than car campin', and the availability of medical help is limited, with evacuation times to definitive care far in excess of 30 minutes. It's da sort of thing where a prudent trip leader really wants to have a med form and a physician physical from the adult participants in particular; HikerLou is right about that part. In addition to the expense of da physicals, there may have been adults who didn't want to adhere to the height/weight chart limits (?). But that doesn't mean that everyone going on the trip has to have those. T2Eagle, where are yeh gettin' that notion? Absolutely everybody goin' on the trip is supposed to have a health/medical form. Da med form is supposed to be a "minimum standard" for providing medical information, and it applies to everyone, youth and adult. Quite frankly, it's the adults who are at greater risk, as anybody will tell yeh who has worked Philmont. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

And medical forms should be current and up-to-date at all times! My goodness! These parents and leaders need to get it together. This is a clear case of outright laziness! Yah, I think we should be a bit more circumspect, eh? These days, we have lots of kids and families in our programs who are stretched thin, and quite a few without medical insurance. The money for an annual physical for a healthy boy or adult when yeh aren't insured and are otherwise "stretched" might make the difference between whether the boy can go to camp or not. And in some areas, scheduling that kind of annual exam can be a 3-month delay. So before we start calling these families "lazy", I reckon we should take a closer look, and give 'em the benefit of the doubt. Beavah

Ed - HIPAA more accurately applies to the health *insurance* field, but you are right that it has limited applicability to the BSA. I wonder why people keep bringing it up? Yah, it's a culture thing in da BSA. People like to sound authoritative, and they think that quotin' laws and such at other people makes them sound authoritative. I reckon it's just because they haven't been around enough laws and lawyers to realize how stupid most of 'em are. So in actual fact, da legal mumbo-jumbo doesn't make 'em look authoritative, it makes 'em look like one of those dumb lawyer jokes. HIPAA does not apply to scout troops, period. Not for PHI, not for anything. Anybody who tells yeh otherwise is a fool, a liar, or one of da characters from the dumb lawyer joke brigade. With due respect to nldscout, dispensing Rx medications to a lad which have been prescribed to the boy in accordance with da physician's orders is not dispensing medications without a license, and it's hard to fathom a circumstance in which even da most dimwitted county prosecutor would spend any time on a scouter holding meds for kids on an outing. I'd wish him the best of luck. (Exception might be if a lad could self-medicate but the SM insisted on taking the kid's meds and keeping them under lock and key, and somethin' bad happened as a result. I'm not hugely fond of da lock-and-key nonsense, having intervened once or twice in camps that insisted on locking up asthma meds and epi pens. ) So having dispensed with the usual pseudo-legal mumbo jumbo, we can return to our regularly scheduled program. What's the best practice for handling meds within a troop, so that boys who have conditions which require medication can participate fully without feeling singled out or embarrassed in any way? Perhaps, as scouters, we can address da needs of children instead of trying to throw up false or misleading roadblocks. Our goal should be doin' the things that make sense to help our boys and families. Beavah(This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, so I'm more sanguine about medication than most, eh? I think it's personally just fine to help a lad take medications, and I think yeh need to in some cases if yeh want to provide access to scouting for kids with special needs. That having been said, I think each volunteer needs to decide what level of responsibility they're willing to take on. Yeh can't force someone to take on a role they're uncomfortable with. I'd suggest two things. One, yeh might have the lad's doctor talk to the SM. Sometimes, it's more da fear of the unknown that drives people to be wary. If the SM knows more about the meds and the condition, he might decide differently. Second, most units have at least someone on da committee or among the parents who are medical pros, eh? Nurses, docs, PAs, EMTs. Perhaps one of them would be more comfortable takin' on the medication role on an outing if the SM is uncomfortable with it. Beavah

If you were the parent of the SPL and such an expectation was made known, how exactly would you respond? How would you counsel your SPL child to respond? I think as a parent, I'd stay in my proper role, eh? "Lad, you're smart and brave and I think yeh do a great job as SPL. I trust yeh to do what you feel is right." And leave it at that. Learnin' to work with different people is a part of growin' up and something that we provide in Scouting that most other youth programs don't. I'd let him have the full benefit of the program without my getting in the way. Now if yeh ask what advice I'd have for da CC or the SM, that's a different question. But as mom of the SPL, I think yeh know that your role is to give your son the support he deserves - by trusting him to handle these sorts of challenges on his own. Beavah

LOL. Nah, Calico, I agree with yeh on the Scoutmaster. He should have stood up to the whining parents. I don't agree with yeh on all da made up legal mumbo-jumbo about judges and such. In a lot of ways, da liability of the SM is less on a family camping trip, because there's no reason to believe he has a duty of care. I have a dream that some day we can have conversations about scouting without makin' up legal nonsense. Yes, I have a dream! HikerLou, it's goin' to be the SM's or individual Merit Badge Counselor's calls on whether something counts or doesn't count for advancement. There are lots of things that can be signed off outside of a formal scout trip, eh? Though I agree with yeh that it shouldn't count for patrol camping time, sadly, neither of us gets to make the final call. Medical forms are one of those things most troops collect annually prior to camp. Is there some reason yours isn't? I think that's the procedural thing your unit should correct. In the end, yeh can't stop a bunch of folks in your troop from goin' on a family trip together, so it's just not worth having the argument. They even invited you, so yeh can't claim they were being exclusionary or somesuch. You thought it should have been run as a scout trip, but if the SM didn't want to run it as a scout trip, you or he or any other family could offer it as a family event. Just da way of things in a free country. Beavah

Yah, what moosetracker said. My guess is that your older children were girls? I'm pretty sure I never got involved in my kids' schoolwork on an assignment-by-assignment basis. I expect that would have driven us all nuts. If the lad blows off a lab, seems like da consequences are all natural ones, eh? His friend is mad at him, he gets a worse grade. No need for you to step in to that. The lad is old enough that he's making his own decisions, and you fussin' and fumin' isn't going to be very effective. Lots of times I reckon we as parents care more about being right than about doin' what's right for our kids. I know I fell into that trap occasionally. Just like in Scouting, teens often learn best from their peers and from da school of life, and those lessons get messed up if we hover and lecture and such. I reckon schoolwork becomes important when it's theirs. If it's yours - just somethin' yeh do to keep dad from blowin' a gasket - then there's no reason to do more than the minimum. Of course, makin' dad blow a gasket at least asserts da independence that some teens crave. If dad won't respect yeh enough to manage your own schoolwork, at least he'll be forced to deal with yeh as an independent person when yeh blow him off. Sounds like you're in for a treat, mate. God gives us children to teach us humility, eh? Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Thanks EV. Just to be clear, I'm not talkin' only about expenses. Anyone who's run a lot of trips knows there are a lot of other things that go on. Yeh allocate adult leaders based on da size of the crew (recruiting people to take off work so as to keep a good adult:youth ratio). There are group discounts for everything from airfare to outfitter fees to food in bulk that depend on the number of participants. Yeh have to plan for specialty gear purchases in some cases. Safety planning depends on group size and ability. And, most importantly, yeh took a place for another kid that might have gone when the outfitter reserved that space for that number, eh? B

Started the process with a high of 16 'definates'. After all the "I changed my mind's" came back we went with 10 after dipping below the minimum of 7 at one point. Yah, I was struck by this, right after da other thread on priority venting. Is this really becoming commonplace? More than half of da lads quit a trip after having committed to it? I seem to hear about it more and more these days. That can create all kinds of chaos for outfitters and high adventure bases. It means other kids or units who might have been able to go can't. It can mean higher fees than what was planned for those who do go. Same deal for shorter trips too, of course. How are your units handlin' this kind of behavior by kids/families? Are yeh demanding full, non-refundable payment up front? Anybody adopting a one-strike policy (fool us once, shame on you, fool us twice shame on us) so that they become ineligible for future trips? I'm not talkin' the lad who is in the hospital or whose mom has cancer, eh? We all would flex for that kind of true emergency. Those things are rare. Certainly more rare than half of the kids bailing out. Beavah

Whoa, Nelly! There's a council out there that's opening a camp? Lisabob, aren't you somewhere in Central Region? Michigan or Ohio or somesuch, right? Why would any tom-fool of a council start a camp program in da upper midwest when the numbers aren't supportin' the camps that currently exist, and there are a lot of young families leavin' to find work in other places? On da positive side, at least they held on to the camp property so they had options for kids in the future, but why now? Did they get a super-large donation or bequest to help 'em kick it off or something? Beavah(This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, Acid Test, I reckon yeh want to look at other things in the troop besides just this one thing, eh? What you're talkin' about are just plain different flavors (chocolate and strawberry?), but how good somethin' tastes depends more on how well the cake is cooked than on the flavor chosen. So I'd let your son go to the troop that tastes best to him, eh? The one where whichever way they're setting up patrols he likes the kids and the feel. Loosely speakin', mixed-age patrols are an old thing, eh? A more "traditional" way of running scouting. Probably those troops have a long history, or at least were around before da program change in the 1990 handbook. IMO mixed-age patrol troops tend to be a bit more youth-run. That's mostly good, but it can be bad in cases where da youth run amok. Same-age patrols might be more comfortable to shy lads and families who are used to the den model and are crossin' in a group. Honestly, though, it just depends on how well each one is baked. Beavah

Yah, yeh don't worry a lick about da kids running with sticks thing. Let the PL deal with that in his own time. The issue for you is the adult's behavior. So to my mind yeh have an up-front question to ask yourself. Is your good working relationship with the dad enough for him to listen to yeh and think things through and come around to acknowledging his inappropriate behavior (including an apology to the parents of the "stick boy"?). If yeh think it is, then you call him up, meet for coffee, bring along one other adult of your choosing, and have that conversation. Yeh hear out his side of it, and then you convey the seriousness of threatening someone else's child with a beating, da fact that it amounts to assault against a minor, how it hurt the boy's willingness to participate in the program, etc. etc. If the fellow is appropriately thoughtful and mortified, and steps forward to make his apologies to the others, then all's well that ends in the well. Yeh just let him know on the side that it absolutely must never happen again. If the fellow doesn't respond appropriately, or if yeh don't think that you can trade on your relationship to get him to listen, then yeh kick it up to da COR (if yeh have a "real" one) or IH, with a note to the SE. In the mean time, yeh let him know that yeh have to ask him not to participate in any events until the COR/IH have a chance to consider his status. Realistically, you have to be ready to lose this imprudent dad and his son from your troop. Pullin' off the hat trick (keepin' the dad, his son, and the other boy) is a pretty hard shot. But yeh absolutely, positively, must not ignore that kind of behavior or allow da rest of the boys and families to feel their son can be assaulted on a scout outing by an adult. Of course yeh have one extra duty here too, yeh know? You have to do somethin' special for that SPL of yours. The lad's got guts and character, and deserves a full heapin' helping of your respect and gratitude. Beavah

Yah, it's unclear whether the family just didn't understand da BSA's position relative to Buddhism, or whether their particular views within Buddhism still objected despite da BSA's accommodation. In any event, I don't think that changes the answer to Engineer61's question. I think you tell your son (and any other scouts who ask) the honest truth, eh? Not sure why yeh would do anything else but be honest with kids. "I'm not sure, but I believe because his parents felt that as a Buddhist, he couldn't honestly take the Scout Oath. There are many Buddhist scouts and the scouts welcomes Buddhists, but each family and each person has to decide for themselves whether they believe in or can live up to the Oath. It's brave to be honest with yourself and others about it, even if it means you choose not to join. You should respect him for his bravery and honesty in trying to live up to his ideals, just as he should respect you for having the courage to take and try to live up to the Scout Oath." Beavah

Yah, fact of da matter is that it isn't uncommon to see a Cubmaster double as a den leader. Perhaps not da preferred thing in Ideal Council, but I've never had a chance to visit. Often da CM makes a better DL than drafting a reluctant parent, because he/she is invested in the program. WestCoast, folks just need to grow up a bit and act like adults, eh? Yeh sit together and work it out. Among the Bear DLs, preferably. With da rest of the pack committee if need be. But to answer your question specifically, "neither." Neither the Cubmaster nor da CC have "authority" in this matter. It's somethin' that in the BSA is sorted out by the volunteers workin' together and sortin' things out as a group, in committee. Yah, yah, da COR and IH have "ultimate" authority to act unilaterally (not the CC), but no COR or IH with a brain bigger than a walnut is goin' to get involved in that kind of micromanagement. Now if yeh can't get people to behave themselves or you're just lookin' for a quick decision, there is a good workin' rule of thumb. The guy that is doing the most work for the pack gets his choice. He's the fellow who knows the folks the best and is more likely to follow things through to make 'em work. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, I like acco's notion, eh? One spare adult past two. No more unless it's a really large trip. Take the 3 adults who work well together, work well with boys that age (and let 'em lead) and who will not slow the lads down. Beavah

I think this is da sort of question you as your youth Quartermaster and da patrol leader of the patrol. They're the ones who have to live with the choice, so they're the ones who should make it. Let 'em consider lightweight gear (like da stuff Kudu recommends somewhere on his site), give 'em what you've found on the net, let 'em decide what they really want. No reason this should be an adult decision. Yeh may need to provide some adult carpentry resources of course (or not, dependin' on what the lads choose). If yeh really open it up and have a conversation and make it clear that it's their choice, I reckon you'll get a good result, but not da same one you'd have made. Yeh have to start with what they feel about da current boxes? Like 'em? Hate 'em? What would they feel about ditching 'em? Making 'em bigger? Open up da conversation and get 'em thinking about likes and dislikes and what they'd want, then let 'em go. Beavah

The "rule of thumb" for college courses is that students should do an hour of work (or, gasp, more) on their own, for every hour they spend in class. Yah, hmmm.... Dat's college, eh? A full load would involve about 12-16 hours of class a week, so doin' a couple of hours of homework per class still doesn't get yeh up to a full 40 hour work week. Plenty of time to be engaged in co-curricular and extracurricular activities. But now let's take a typical high school lad, who has to get up at 6am or so in order to make the bus to get to school which starts at 7:30. Class runs until 2:30 at least, followed by sports/band/etc. until at least 5:30. At an hour of work per class plus a half an hour for dinner the lad would be up until midnight, leaving 6 hours of sleep before da whole thing starts all over again. If they were adults, they'd form a union and file a labor suit that would obliterate the school. Springing a Friday assignment on a 13 year old that's impossible to complete without sacrificing da weekend is unreasonable to any rational human being familiar with sound educational practice. None of that matters to da core issue, though... do you keep your word to those to whom you have made a prior commitment, even at personal expense? Or is it OK to blow off a prior commitment to others whenever you feel something better (oops, I mean something yeh feel is a "higher priority") comes along? Has our go-go-go, have-to-get-ahead lifestyle reached the point where honoring our commitments to others is no longer a priority? If so, shame on us. Both scouting and da schools have failed in a fundamental way. Yeh may think that somehow da lad's middle school education will earn him a job. It's quite a stretch, since I reckon a lot of folks would develop a real dislike of school and opt out as quick as was reasonable. But I'll tell yeh straight up just as a few others here have, if a fellow came to me with that my-advancement-first attitude, I would never hire him no matter what his education was. Da point is to hire good people, eh? That's the high priority. So like as not, what we're teachin' will cost kids jobs, and cost society. Honor matters. Or is it Character Counts? Somethin' like that. Beavah(This message has been edited by Beavah)

a) ASM cannot sign off his own son's requirement. False. Well, could be true. Da SM gets to set who can sign off for things, and he/she can impose that stipulation. 2) Merit Counselor cannot work on a merit badge with his/her own son. False. Well, again it's Scoutmaster's choice, eh? Could be true in a unit. B(This message has been edited by Beavah)

Beavah... there is honor in a students commitment to do their best in school as well. Yah, zippy, this to my mind is a good example of how we twist things. Yeh make commitments to people. I gave my word to myself to do my best in school and therefore I don't have to keep my word as a leader of others doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Doin' your best in school is a fine personal goal, but it's not a commitment. Other people aren't relyin' on you. Your implication that by putting schoolwork ahead of scouting is in some way encouraging him to go down a path of greed and ambition is a bit far fetched. Oh, I dunno. What folks do in small things often carries over to big things, eh? That's why we do Scouting. We figure by teaching boys to be responsible and ethical in small things they'll eventually be responsible and ethical in bigger things. Reverse is also true. The attitude that you can break your commitments and obligations to others whenever it's necessary to advance yourself is not what we want to teach. Even in small things. Gettin' good grades is advancing yourself. There's nothing wrong with it, eh? It should be encouraged. Just not as a "highest priority." When yeh start thinkin' that advancing yourself is the highest priority, you're in da same camp as the dad who spends too long at work and not quite enough time with his family. Ultimately, you're in the same camp as those fellows from Goldman Sachs we heard from this week. It's just fine to break your commitments to clients if you're advancing yourself. Your dad wants yeh to get good grades. Yeh want to earn good money. Your boss wants yeh to earn big profits. Nuthin' wrong with those things, they're good to strive for. But what yeh do in achieving those goals matters. You feel that he was right to keep his commitment, but was he also right to hide the reality of his work situation to his dad? Dishonesty is not a part of the scout oath. Yah, except we're supposed to be mentally awake, eh? Nothing in anything Engineer61 posted suggested any form of dishonesty. That was Lisabob's speculation. Gotta get your testimony straight . I doubt that Engineer61 demands daily reports of his boy's homework. He strikes me as a good dad, not one of those hyper-hovering-helicopter types. What he's upset about is the lad being late with an assignment and droppin' his GPA, and I think we all agree he's right to be upset about that. And he's a great dad because he came here to vent rather than venting on his kid. So we're doin' what good friends do and lettin' him vent and then remindin' him he's got a great kid, that middle school grades are nothing to blow a gasket over, that other things are important, too. I expect a few time management tricks from a supportive older scout or father are all the lad needs to have his cake and eat it too, and they'll serve him well in high school. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

LOL. Yah, dat's a new one. I'm still laughin', in fact. Where do people come up with this stuff? Complete urban legend. Nothing at all like that anywhere in any BSA materials. And it's been what, like 20 years since the high-velocity airbag incidents with a few kids? How old is your car? All vehicles have low-velocity airbags these days, and almost all modern vehicles have passenger weight sensors. If not, yeh can get your dealer to install an airbag off switch if you're transportin' kids. Your instincts are right, ASM59. This is completely bogus. Beavah

Yah, I'm with ScoutNut, eh? This is Middle School and an ADHD lad? I reckon that's relevant. And is it just me, but does it seem odd that being one day late on a last-minute assignment would cost a kid a whole letter grade? In middle school? So I'm solidly with da group that wants to talk Engineer61 back from da edge of the cliff, eh? [and perhaps with da group that would have a few gentle words with the teacher and her supervisor on the side ]. This is an ordinary kid thing and learning opportunity, and perhaps more a time management issue than a priorities/choice issue. For da rest of it, I reckon I'll stand by my original thoughts. Maybe I'm just an out-of-date old fashioned fellow, but I still believe a man's word is his bond. When yeh make a commitment to other people, yeh honor it. The boy made a commitment as a leader to his patrol for the weekend, and I think he was right to honor it. Now I know in da modern world folks don't take commitments that seriously anymore, especially when honoring a commitment means they might lose something. It's all about what yeh can get as an individual. Get grades, get Eagle, get recognition, get awards, get money. Sad what we're teaching the lads these days. Sometimes we parents and scouters even give our young fellows the wrong impression. To my mind, education is only a priority because it helps yeh do a better job giving, not getting. Service and honor are da real priorities. There's no exception in the Scout Oath and Law for "unless I have homework." Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, doubled with yeh Engineer61. I solve that one easy....we never vacation during the school year, only on school breaks. Yah, except a weekend is a school break, eh? It's at least supposed to honor one sabbath or the other. Da same teacher could just as easily have given a long writing assignment on the Friday before your family vacation, due the Tuesday following break, and requiring lots of time durin' the break in order to complete it. So do yeh cancel your family vacation? Education first, before fun? I reckon on balance that most of us living adult lives would feel honor-bound to honor our prior commitment, especially if we were serving as an assistant leader for an event. Even if it meant that we personally lost some money or got a worse evaluation, eh? That's what honor means. Keepin' our commitments, even when we have to sacrifice to do so. Just another thought, anyways, before yeh ground the poor fellow until he grows as grey as me. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, hmmm... Yeh know, I'm not sure priorities are always that cut-and-dried, eh? Sometimes I'm committed to a hobby (like Scoutin') where other people are relying on me. I've planned that out well in advance and made arrangements. If stuff at work comes up at the last minute, yeh might say that work takes priority over Scoutin'. I think generally speakin', though, I would honor my prior commitment to Scouting. The lads or my fellow volunteers didn't do anything wrong that I should punish them, and lack of planning in my office shouldn't become an emergency on my part. Might teach the office or clients that yeh can't wait 'til the last minute . So to my mind it's perfectly ethical and rational for a lad to say "I made a commitment to my fellow scouts for this weekend, and this last-minute school assignment shouldn't constitute an emergency as it's only a fraction of my grade. I'm goin' to honor my commitment to Scouting." I think that's the sort of good judgment we want to encourage, eh? Some day when the lad is a parent, we want him to keep the commitment he made to his son to show up for the game, even though work sprung yet another last-minute assignment on him. On da other hand, there are times when things are a real emergency, and yeh do have to cancel a prior commitment. But those should be fairly rare, eh? Beavah

Yah, hmmm... I think one of da things that's very true is that units generally follow the interests and skills of their adult leaders, eh? A troop that has adults who like backpacking will do a lot of backpacking. A group of adults who enjoys water sports will inspire their lads to do water sports. They follow our encouragement and enthusiasm. Da flipside is that adults can also hold kids back, eh? Troops run by our more rotund adults aren't likely to do much mountain biking, even if the lads are interested. It's goin' to be car camping central. The lads will follow our dis-encouragement as much as our encouragement. I'm an old fashioned sort of fellow. I don't think adults should hold kids back. I think our responsibility is to help 'em achieve more than us, more than what we're interested in, more than what we're capable of. So that means suckin' it up, gettin' in shape, and goin' mountain biking or mosquito eating on fan boats in da Everglades or snow camping in the frozen north. Or, if we can't, to make darn sure we either step aside or find some assistants who will do those things with the lads. A Scout is Loyal and Cheerful, eh? Some times yeh go along just because that's what da group wants, and our role is to support da group. The other lesson - opt out of whatever yeh don't like and show up only for da things you enjoy - doesn't seem like the sort of lesson we want to teach. Beavah

Yah, balance in all things. I think it's just fine to say "no" to da lazy video events. I can't figure why any adults would waste their time on 'em when it's stuff the lads can do on their own. At the same time, I reckon we also have to be an example of how to be a good team member. If an important or necessary member of the QD or PLC kept shootin' down any activity that he didn't like by refusin' to support the group, then I reckon a good unit leader would be havin' a word or two with him. Somethin' about Scout Spirit and teamwork and how we support each other, and support da decision of the group even when it's not the decision we wanted. So Eamonn, I reckon there's a difference between a "Free Weekend (with adult slaves)" and goin' on a troop or ship trip to the Everglades. I'd say no to da first, eh? But the second? I reckon it'd be time to suck it up and buy some DEET and permethrin. Adults have rights, but I reckon what's more important is that we have responsibilities. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)