Jump to content

Beavah

Members
  • Posts

    8173
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

Everything posted by Beavah

  1. Yah, thanks for comin' back and sharin', 5scoutmom. And thanks for supporting scouting, and being the kind of parent that a young fellow of age 15 will respect and be grateful for when he's 30. I reckon this thread is a good example of the way these things often play out, eh? Plenty of blame to go around, and enough drama in teens' lives that they don't need the adults adding any more . And good example why we should stay thoughtful and consider all sides in our comments to posters. Beavah
  2. Yah, studentscout, sorry for da allusions. Kudu is/was a sometime frequent poster who was a bit of a one-issue-wonder like Merlyn. His issue was his view of "traditional" scouting and ranting about how the BSA has departed from it. One of his mantras was that patrols must always camp at least 300 feet apart from each other. Threads tend to naturally morph and change focus over time, like any conversation. This thread started out talkin' about the incident you describe, and my and others' early comments focused on it. I think you and I and most everyone else was in agreement, eh? The lads involved deserve serious consequences. My comments on that remain the same as they were on Page 1 of da thread. But da thread has moved on, to discussions of the meaning of hazing, and to the appropriateness of pranks and jokes more generally. So some folks have shared truly funny pranks, and others have talked about how not all pranks are bad, and some have steadfastly maintained that all pranks are bad. Some have called this "hazing", some have shared various definitions of hazing, some have talked about whether an OA ordeal meets da definition of hazing. All useful conversation among friends, eh? Beavah
  3. LOL. Yah, good one. Very apropos to the discussion. I really enjoyed this:
  4. Yah, Merlyn, I get it, eh? Yeh care about yourself and your agenda, but not about children in particular. Again, usin' "violate civil rights" is another hurtful exaggeration, eh? If yeh actually care about people, yeh refrain from such labeling of other groups as violators and criminals and such. We teach boys to respect folks they disagree with, and treat 'em fairly and with dignity. You seem to care about MY actions even though I'm pretty sure I don't live anywhere near you, either. Yeh live near me here on Scouter.com, eh? Yeh seem to have an almost child-like need to hang out with us. So yah, sure, I care about you and your actions. Not because of what you're doin' to others. Frankly, you're affecting Scouting not a whit. I care because of what holdin' all that animosity toward others is doing to you. Ain't healthy, physically, mentally, socially, or spiritually. I say da same thing to folks on the other side of the political spectrum who get all angry and hurtful. So as a friend or at least a caring fellow citizen, I'd encourage you to go volunteer in your local schools because you need to learn how to do something for people and not for a cause. You'll be happier for it. You'll accomplish a lot more. And yeh just might develop a more nuanced and mature perspective about schools and clubs and kids. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)
  5. Yah, da point of bringing up OA is that overbroad definitions of hazing, like some folks were advocating here, are dangerous to liberty. Like all overbroad definitions of criminal acts. Knot Head, it doesn't matter whether participation is voluntary. In some of the states that have hazing statutes, they expressly exclude voluntary participation as a defense against the charge. Calico, since participation in the Ordeal is required for membership, I don't think your notion that only da ceremony is initiation cuts the mustard. Restricting food and requiring labor as part of an initiation meets da definition of hazing in some states. If yeh ever have a kid hurt by such things (diabetic; tired kid injures himself with tools; kid becomes hypothermic, etc.), I reckon there's a chance a local DA looking to make a name for himself would bring the charges. And besides being a PR nightmare, those are criminal charges, eh? Yeh have to defend those yourself. OA is much closer to da legal definitions of hazing than this incident is, which is why we should refrain from such broad definitions. No arguments with what yeh wrote in the last, TwoCubDad. I think you're sayin' the same thing EagleDad and I am, eh? The intent of the prankster matters, as does the nature of the prank and how (and to whom) it's done. Same as any other ethical choice, eh? We could say the same about first aid. The intent of the caregiver matters, as does the nature of the care, how it's done, and to whom it's done. There's good first aid, and poor first aid done with good intentions, and bad first aid, eh? No different for pranks or anything else. Yah, kids' and adults' judgment when they're new to anything isn't always the best. Good judgment comes from experience which comes from bad judgment and all that. You're goin' to get the occasional poor prank the way yeh get the occasional poor PL leadership or the occasional adult who can't handle a mouthy teenager with grace and humor. But occasionally poor PL leadership doesn't mean we should never let youth lead, eh? And occasional poor judgment in pranks doesn't mean they should be universally banned either. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)
  6. I sense that some of the personalities in these forums might have been bullies at one time. Maybe even now. Yah, what's up with a comment like that, eh? I doubt you've ever met anyone on these forums. I reckon that's an example of bullying, eh? The stuff this young lady experienced was way, way out of line. It came at a time when her age and her being an immigrant made her exceptionally vulnerable. Teen girls can sometimes be exceptionally cruel. I'm more interested in SM224's point #2, eh? I was a bit of an egghead growin' up, had glasses at an earlier age. I remember being bullied a bit. Sometimes more than a bit. Never really bothered me, I was fairly secure in myself and my friendships. I don't think a bunch of hyper adults intervening with "policies" is ever goin' to stop bullying. In some cases it will make it more subtle and cruel. So to my mind da real question is how to help kids have enough sense of self so that they can handle the bullies in their life. Scoutin' helps a lot with that, not because it creates a "safe haven" or any of that malarkey, but because it provides a space where some kids can experience real challenge and success and friendships that give 'em the wherewithal to resist the effects of bullyin'. Beavah
  7. Good to see we still have "April Fools". Yah, ain't that da truth! I confess I'm not particularly fond of folks from outside of a jurisdiction makin' complaints. Not sure that it's any of my business what a school district in Arizona is doing. Not my tax dollars, not my elected officials. Heck, not anybody's tax dollars goin' to a BSA unit, since BSA units typically pay their own way. I reckon in my district, and Merlyn's, and everybody else's, the schools have plenty of need for involvement by thoughtful citizens who have some time to give. So when it comes to schools, I spend my time just tryin' to help my local district do an OK job for kids. Maybe yeh should try that approach, Merlyn. Da schools could use your help, as a volunteer, perhaps as a board member. It'd be a nice way to contribute as a citizen, and come to appreciate the needs and challenges of a lot of kids. Certainly accomplish a lot more than what you're spendin' your time on right now, and might deepen your perspective. Beavah
  8. A highly placed individual in the Boy Scouts of America (BSA), on condition of anonymity, announced today that the preparations for moving the National Jamboree from Fort. A. P. Hill to The Summit: Bechtel Family National Scout Reservein West Virginia have not been progressing at the expected pace. The long-term contingency plan had been to hold the 2013 National Jamboree at Fort A.P. Hill if The Summit is not ready. In a surprise announcement, however, the Department of Defense notified the Boy Scouts of America in March that A.P. Hill would not be available. The Summit should still be able to support a greatly scaled down National Jamboree, according to the BSA source, of approximately 15,000 participants. As a result, the new contingency is to repeat the practice that had previously been attempted for the 1973 National Jamboree with two sites by splitting the Jamboree among three venues. This will actually have a positive result, said the BSA source, scouts from differing parts of the country will be able to seek out more affordable venues, however, we will have to increase the fee for participants significantly to cover the cost of the multiple venues. The two sites considered beyond The Summit are Camp Owasippe in Michigan and Farragut State Park in Idaho, the site of the 1967 World Scout Jamboree and 1969 and 1973 National Scout Jamboree. Given today's networking technology, we see this as an opportunity to demonstrate that Scouting has entered its second Century by allowing the scouts at each venue to experience the other venues using virtual technology. When asked if this networking opportunity would be made available to scouts who were not physically attending one of the three venues, the source stated that "we feel it would not be beneficial to the experience for scouts to only participate virtually. We also haven't worked out a financial package that would be satisfactory for such an offering." The source reported that as of April 1, National Commissioner Tico Perez (ticop@aol.com) is taking the lead on preparations for alternate venues. Volunteers interested in helping with preparations for a western or central states jambo site may wish to contact him directly. Wow! Donald Roberts, Fullerton, California(This message has been edited by Beavah)
  9. One, regarding the Jamboree brought a post from the National Commissioner about not being funny, even April 1st. Yah, had to go over to scouts-l.org to check it out. I personally thought it was quite funny, though da satire was perhaps a bit sharp. Tico and da national office really need to get a humor transfusion, eh? Or at least learn to take some lightly critical satire with good grace. Reproduced here so yeh can share in the fun:
  10. Yah, studentscout, da thread is not all about you, eh? I was respondin' to other folks like asm1429. One thing that pranks can be very useful for is lightening up people (especially adults!) who are takin' themselves too seriously. I can imagine a few patrols in Kudu's troop who have heard the "must camp 300 feet apart" thing a few too many times decide as a prank to try to set up camp with every tent tied into one single tent stake. Pranks help us laugh at ourselves when we need to. But da humorless fellows would no doubt launch into an angry lecture about LNT and patrol method separation and then send da SPL home for being disrespectful . We're seein' April Fools pranks all over da net today. I was totally confused by Google being renamed "Topeka" until I heard da story of Topeka renaming itself Google, KS. I thought it quite funny. I suppose you would have taken it as a vicious insult to all of the residents of Topeka. Is Starbucks announcing a new half-gallon sized coffee inappropriate ridicule of coffee drinkers? I suppose both involve "deception" if yeh want to call it that. I think yeh also can't judge by unintended outcomes either, eh? I've seen first year lads collapse in tears from everything from swim checks to gettin' spooked by the snake at the nature area. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do swim checks or must set a policy that first year lads aren't allowed to handle snakes because they might cry. The art of a good prank is someone who intends genuine humor choosin' somethin' funny and creative. In da original case on this thread, the lads chose something not funny... in fact, downright mean. That's not a prank, that's being nasty. Sometimes a lad will genuinely intend something fun which is taken the wrong way. That's a learning experience for both the prankster and the person takin' it the wrong way. Learning experiences are our bread and butter in Scouting. I honestly think da humorless adults who take everything seriously are worse for the program than the occasional prank that goes awry. Just look at da other thread with the CC who precipitated a whole big deal over pot-cleaning. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)
  11. Yah, I've been da butt of many a great prank, and seen even more at camps. Remember when a group of scouts lofted my entire tent, platform and all, up a tree (not with me in it). Said it was where I had to sleep from then on so that they couldn't hear my snoring. Another year they got up early, snuck in and swapped out my uniform parts with those of a fellow who was a much more well-rounded scouter than I. Without my morning coffee, I confess I was completely confused at why my pants had stretched so much da previous day/night that they just wouldn't stay up, and why my shirt tails were so long... Had a fellow once serve me a lobster that he had actually chilled and then painted so it looked cooked. Knowin' I'm sorta a talkative fellow he kept me yappin' while the creature warmed up a bit, so when I went to start eatin' the darn thing moved!. I must have jumped 12 feet. Yah, I get that some adults frown on all varieties of pranks. In units that do pranks, I have seen it build real comraderie. I still tell those stories and lots of others, eh? And remember da perpetrators with affection. Beavah
  12. LOL. Yah, 5scoutmom, that should read "the CC has no authority over the boys, not "ultimate" authority over the boys. Workin' with da boys is the Scoutmaster's role. The CC shouldn't micromanage, and if he does, the SM should tell him to butt out. In a normal, well-run unit, da CC cannot unilaterally do anything. He's the chair of a committee. Like a chairman of the board, he sometimes may serve as da "public face" of the committee, but it is the committee that chooses to do or not do things, and the chair only has one "vote." The only people who can act unilaterally are the SM with regard to a youth or program issue, or the COR/IH with regard to makin' changes in adult leadership. So your COR can remove the SM (or the CC) unilaterally, but da CC cannot do anything unilaterally. Now it's true that sometimes da official positions some folks hold in units are different than their real role or social stature. I don't care for that much; I think it gets confusin' to people. Do yeh happen to know what the "advisor's" council position is? As for the other stuff about the old "botched" BOR and whatnot, yeh just have to let that stuff go. It's been years since then. It's water under the bridge. The more yeh dwell on old stuff like that the more petty you look. Keep that stuff out of it. This is a simple case of a mouthy lad being disciplined by his SM, and that's all it should be. Save all da other adult drama for when you write a soap opera. And make your lad stand on his own two feet and apologize. Don't get between him and the consequences of his actions. B
  13. By the way, the SM said he has proposed a one month ban from meetings and activities (which is almost halfway done by now) and a "zero tolerance" for disrespect with him being the final and only arbiter of what disrespect is. That would be acceptable to me and my husband but we don't know if the CC will accept that. Yah, hmmm.... Why is da CC involved in this? Seems like the SM has made his decision, and that should be that. It's the Scoutmaster's job to handle this sort of discipline issue, eh? Only when it becomes a "really serious" matter that may merit expulsion should it rise to the Committee. And then it rises to the whole Committee, not to just da CC at a private meeting. So to my mind, your lad should apologize to those he needs to apologize to, and then that's it, eh? Da SM has decided, and it's the SM's job to deal with da CC and ASM. Who is this "advisor" fellow again? A former leader? Unit commissioner? I'd have a chat with da SM and say you support his decision and that you promise your son will live up to his end. And then raise da issue that you don't think any further meetings are required, since he's made his decision and it's his call. See what he thinks. Beavah
  14. Yah, WestCoast. No problem. All of da BSA insurance coverage specifically allows having guests along for recruiting purposes, and all BSA camps will welcome guests with a unit for that purpose. Proceed without worries. Beavah
  15. Yah, T2, can da school counselor provide resources to the lad who is questioning his gender identity? Can da school or college offer LGBT programming because those communities need da support (or just a place to hang out and talk about "their" issues and struggles)? Or is that discrimination, too, because the straight lads or the girl who isn't questioning her gender identity can't get in? A local alternative school provides parenting classes for teenage mothers that exclude all males. Unlawful? What if it also provides similar classes for teenage dads? The government targets services to sub-segments of da population all the time, including those in suspect classes. All illegal? I don't think so. Lemon established a tripartite test, eh? I don't think Merlyn's argument is convincing. If large vouchers for attending religious schools are OK; if targeted public-private partnerships are OK; I think it's a stretch to claim that nominal sponsorship of a club on public property to serve a sub-set of students won't pass muster. Especially when there's no public $ cost, and a district can show it sponsors many such programs to meet the needs of a diverse group of students. I'm usually about 95% right on SCOTUS rulings, and have had some of my language reviewed by 'em. I think this would pass muster with da current court. Just my opinion, of course. What isn't really opinion is that Merlyn's claims of illegality are a bit exaggerated, eh? It's an open question. And I think when it's an open question, it's a bit dishonest to be castigatin' folks. "What if we banned Jews?" is more than a bit a straw man. Da real question is "can we provide Jewish students with kosher food during Passover in the school cafeteria at government expense?" Beavah
  16. Yah, so OGE.... If a lad's family is a recent immigrant from Vietnam, can they provide special services, tutoring support, an after school mentoring program, etc. targeted to his special needs, or would that be discrimination based on national origin because it would exclude kids whose ancestors came over on da Mayflower? I also reckon your district is being a bit disingenuous by implying that their very broad non-discrimination policy is really required by Title IX. Beavah
  17. "If I live through this without completely losing my mind, it will be a miracle of Biblical proportions." - Susan Ivanova Yah, seemed like it was time to bring back da Babylon 5 quotes from early in the thread. Beavah Council Commissioner The Grey Council(This message has been edited by Beavah)
  18. Holy smoke, mds3d! 1. REQUIRE the COR or IH to be at the meeting. Now, I may just be a touch old-fashioned, but I don't think it's at all courteous or "respectful" to demand the presence of a volunteer or of the head of an organization just because you're an upset customer. Do yeh perhaps mean you'd like to request time to speak with one of these people? 2. CALL the Unit Commissioner for your unit. Yah, da thing is, a good unit commish really isn't goin' to insert himself/herself into a situation like this unless they are asked for advice by a SM, CC, or COR, or at least they're sure such advice is welcome. Guess we just disagree on da other pieces. I think a 15 year old Life Scout can and should be able to step up to a meeting with adults and that that opportunity shouldn't be taken away from him. And I think a short suspension can often be a good thing to let people calm down and regain their bearings, while showin' da rest of the lads that there are consequences to a behavior. Different strokes, eh? But I agree with yeh, goin' down this road is really a decision to leave. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)
  19. Yah, I think respect has to be earned, and deserved. Up until that point, yeh give people da benefit of the doubt based on their claimed experience. Or you at least pay lip service to the concept because it's good tactics or the best thing to do for the group. Often times kids and adults both don't "get" the second part, eh? That yeh show respect to others as a sign of good faith even before they've "earned" it, or just because it's the best thing to do for everyone. 1. Yah, hard to say, eh? Sometimes it's OK to speak to da whole troop about a common bad behavior, like bad language being used in camp. I don't much like yelling and such, but yeh still should respect a fellow who brings a legitimate problem to da attention of the group and is tryin' to address it. Then yeh work with him to develop better tactics . 2. Why is this a Committee issue? If the PLC wants to authorize boys to bring their own equipment, they should just do it. I could see the PLC, for example, wanting to allow boys to bring their own tents, but the committee still providing tents for lads who don't have their own. As to da committee's inclusion/exclusion of da scout, that's a local thing, eh? While I certainly would encourage a committee to fully include a lad who was bringing a proposal, sometimes that doesn't fit with an agenda or da way some people operate. But I'd at least let him present his best case and let the members ask him questions. 3. Yep. Yeh respect da system, even if yeh don't like the outcome. Good lesson as a citizen. 4. When I'm workin' with kids, I guess I'm too busy paying attention to who they are, what they're doing, what they're learning, how they're growing and all that. I honestly don't have enough brain cells left to pay attention to what they're wearin'. Unless it's something that they clearly want me to pay attention to - like a purple mohawk haircut So I just don't get committees that get all bent about clothing. At da same time, I think if a lad wants folks to respect him for who he is rather than what he's wearing, he should give the same courtesy to others. 5. Nah, I don't care for that response by adults. At the same time, the lads aren't always great about timing such inquiries, eh? Or phrasing 'em in ways likely to get a fair hearing! 6. Respect? Can't say. Maybe some understandin' that adults get tired and grumpy on campouts sometimes too . Yah, as an adult I'd do things a fair bit differently than what's being described, eh? At da same time, it does strike me as being a long list of teen whining. Yeh can find such things to complain about in any group, in any job, on any committee or project or case. Complainin' about 'em says a lot more about you than about them. Most mature folks learn to accept such occasional things as the normal foibles of people and work around 'em, forgive 'em, and soldier on. Beavah
  20. Yah, so much energy and so little information. Everybody needs to take a deep breath and step back from da edge of the cliff. He-said, she-said, he's the enemy, sheesh! It's like a gaggle of middle school girls. Sounds like the lad was a teenager who did his best to push every adult button. That's called bein' a successfully stupid teenager . I dunno, me personally, I don't mind dealin' with teenagers and would have just made a joke of it, or told him to go sit in his tent for a bit and talked to him later. But not every adult is used to dealin' with such things, or takin' lip from a smart aleck. Nor should they have to. It's OK for an adult to get angry about such things, eh? But I reckon I probably wouldn't want to use such adults as registered leaders for a kids program with teenagers. I reckon if I were an ASM who had to leave a campout to drive a kid home because he was being so bad a jerk/example/influence then I'd be a bit annoyed by that. And on his return, it's natural that he talk to the other boys about what happened. Yah, he might not have done the best job; a really experienced leader would make it a serious talk without committing to a definitive course of action, but I reckon we can forgive adults for not being perfect. All da other stuff about the CC, the "enemy" advisor, prior accusations against da SM and all that I just don't know what to make of. Way too much adult baggage there. That's not teenager stuff, that's little kid stuff with an adult memory for holdin' a grudge way past its expiration date. Everyone involved just needs to grow up. Until then, they should all be ignored. None of it is relevant to the current Case of the Dumb, Mouthy Teen. So, what's da proper resolution here? It's that the lad owns up, apologizes, and is punished appropriately. First and necessary step, and the only one that you should be focused on, 5scoutmom. It's the one that's your responsibility as a parent - to make sure your kid does right, and to make sure you behave like a responsible adult and not a kid with a 3-year-old grudge. Then it's a quiet decision by da SM and the troop on how to help an ASM or other adults do a better job, and give 'em a few more techniques to better manage mouthy teenagers. Da job of the other troop adults is to back the ASM on his send-him-home decision and make sure the boy learns his lesson, and then, later, perhaps over time, to help 'em learn some better skills or move 'em into roles which have less direct contact with teenagers. You aren't goin' to be involved in that 5scoutmom; it's not your role. Yeh might not see it happening directly. But yeh hope that the other good adults in the troop will do their thing, and you help 'em by being polite and supportive yourself. By being polite, reasonable, and supportive, you make da folks who are goin' a bit "over the top" look bad and make the SM's job easier. But if you go off da rails with grudges against "enemies" yeh just sabotage yourself. I think the apologies go out immediately, and should be in person to da ASM. And apologies by definition have no strings attached, eh? Then I think it's reasonable for your son to ask for a SM conference. This sort of discipline stuff should start with da SM, eh? If there needs to be a bigger meeting, I think it's fine if yeh ask for a delay for a week for da COR to join. Sometime during that meeting, after your son re-iterates his apologies to everyone, yeh might have him step out so that you can say (1) that you thank and support the adults for helpin' your son learn a valuable lesson, and (2) that you were a bit disappointed by the "yelling" that seemed to go on, and think it might be helpful for da troop to address that by helpin' adults learn some different approaches. I know if I ever caught an ASM yelling at parents over the phone I'd be havin' a few words with him, eh? There's really no cause for that. And while it's occasionally OK to yell at a lad to get his attention, it's not somethin' I'm very fond of. When it's a matter of more serious discipline, it's better to get quieter and not louder. Is 5scoutdad around? Don't take this wrong, but since yeh seem to be a bit wrapped up in da energy of this thing, 5scoutmom, dad might be da guy to do the talkin' here. Beavah
  21. Yah, 5scoutmom, sorry you're feeling your sons' troop leadership isn't living up to what you think is right. Now, first step for you is to take a deep breath, go out and take a walk, set it aside for a bit and get some perspective. Right or wrong, yeh won't get anywhere unless you step back and help your son learn how to be a man. Your son is of course right, eh? Respect is somethin' that is earned. Unfortunately, like most teenagers he hasn't yet learned tact or timing . Nor has he yet learned that in order to be respected yourself, yeh first have to show respect to others. Both of those are things he needs to learn at his age, eh? Yah, and I reckon he also has to learn that sometimes it's just best not to mouth off to da boss, even if the boss is wrong. None of the rest matters. Doesn't matter that yeh think the adults are gangin' up on him; doesn't matter which adult is takin' lead on dealing with your son's behavior, doesn't matter that their communication is all confused. Bottom line is your son should have known better, and needs to know better in order to become an effective and happy young adult. So that's your job as his mom, eh? Your job is to sit down with him and say "Sorry, kiddo, you reap what you sow. You might have just lost Eagle and lost Scouting because you couldn't keep your mouth shut when you knew better, and I'm not going to help you out of it. To be a man in this situation, you step forward, look the other fellow in the eye, and apologize to him for being a twit. And then you accept whatever consequence you get." As his mom, you back the other adults to him, and yeh don't stand between him and da consequences of his actions. Yah, you're goin' to stay with him and help him a bit through and after those consequences, but if yeh step in before then all you're teaching him is that you agree with his unacceptable behavior. That's it. Your son's anxiety issues or IEP aren't relevant. Scoutin' isn't school, and volunteers don't have to deal with situations or behaviors that they feel are beyond 'em. Da prior history or interpersonal relationships aren't relevant. Da issue right now is your son's behavior on his last trip. Doesn't matter that they don't have a written code of conduct. I think you recognize that your son broke our real code of conduct, eh? And so does he. Now, yeh seem to have all kinds of other baggage goin' on here, and there's no way for us to sort that out by remote. But generally speakin', in those cases where one adult just doesn't "get" a kid and goes overboard da thing gets sorted out by the other adults. Just takes a bit of time. All that is provided you and your son conduct yourselves well after the fact. It's hard to argue for your son's removal if his family is supporting da troop leaders and the lad is truly sorry. It's easy to remove him if he won't acknowledge his error or if his parents won't support da troop leadership. Generally speakin', discipline in a case like this is a matter for the SM, not the CC or some "advisor." But when a boy's behavior is disruptive enough, it can rise to the level of da troop committee. The "advisor" may be someone called the "Chartered Organization Representative" - the representative of the owner of the troop, and it might be perfectly legitimate that he's involved. Any way yeh cut it, yeh can't control who da CC or SM choose to talk to. So... your son needs to apologize, in person and in writing, to the CC and to the ASM. Then your son has to call da SM and apologize to him for causin' a big ruckus. Then it should be a SM conference, then it might be a meeting with some or all of the troop committee, yourself excepted. Then there'll be some sort of resolution. Then yeh support the other adults in your son's life, and you support your son by makin' him live up to their expectations, or by helpin' him find a different scouting venue to continue his scouting work where there isn't so much baggage. But he's got to learn da lesson first, eh? Beavah
  22. Yah, asm1429, glad yeh got the help yeh needed. Brian85, whether participation is voluntarily is irrelevant in the definition of the crime of hazing as it is formulated in most of da states that have such a law on the books. The law specifically applies even if participation was voluntary and had informed consent. Remember, hazing laws generally came into existence because of deaths from fraternity initiations, eh? In a fraternity initiation, participation is voluntary. So "an OA ordeal is voluntary" is not a defense. It is still an initiation, and da process of initiation forces participation in the ordeal. It's far closer to da definition of hazing than this incident, and certainly meets zippyboro's broader definition from da advocacy organization. That's da problem with broad definitions, eh? When yeh cry for more regulation and broader definitions, yeh end up prohibiting a lot of good things along with da bad. Better just to respond to the bad behavior instead of makin' up definitions. Beavah
  23. Yah, seemed like a good spin off. Feel free to share scouting-related, non-scouting related, whatever. Two conditions: only pranks in which all participants shared in the humor, and no "I hate pranks and if I were a participant I wouldn't have shared in the humor" responses. B
  24. Yah, this seemed like a good topic to spin off, eh? I expect lots of folks would benefit from da insights of our esteemed community! Beavah
  25. can you share what the NCS provisions are for health record privacy during a unit week at a Scout Reservation? Yah, KC, pretty much what Eagle92 said, eh? Though practically speakin', that stuff is more likely to be related to the camp licensing law in whatever state da camp is in. Those camp licensing laws often have a bunch of specifications and regulations on such things. B
×
×
  • Create New...