Beavah

Just for the sake of clarity, how would you make the call if the SM or scouter in charge of the outing felt the river was too high/fast and the situation was more risk than he felt warranted, but another scouter with years of BWCA and river experience felt it was OK? If the SM still cant be convinced? Sandspur raises a bigger question here, eh? How do we all make judgment calls? How should we? Unlike in da corporate or military world where there's a stricter hierarchy, Scoutin' by and large is a collegial volunteer endeavor. Even in troops that are "hierarchical", the SM or SPL might not be present on a given outing, or might not have the most experience with that area or skill. Folks who have da most experience might not know the kids' abilities as well as someone else. Let's keep da discussion to outing/cancel decisions at least to start. Though of course da same question applies to other program decisions like allowing cell phones or what tents to buy . Beavah

Yah, hmmm... Yeh say your dad was arrested on abuse charges relatin' to scouting?? Holy smoke! Yah, I think that's da sort of thing that's like manure. It sticks to everyone around who was friends with or had contact with your dad. Includin' you, your former SM, your friends. Not always fair, but understandable. I think da CO has opted for a fairly extreme policy solution, but this is not somethin' you're goin' to be able to change. After a bit, hopefully this troop will get wise and revisit their policy response. I'm wonderin' what they're goin' to do when they go to summer camp, and realize that everyone from da program director on down are under their age limit for leaders? One can only imagine what these folks do when their lad gets a 23-year-old teacher in school! Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

To me, the SM (or the ASM in charge in his absence) has the final call. Nah, yeh never decide by who has what title. Yeh decide by who has what experience. Yeh don't ignore someone with le Voyageur's experience because he's not da SM. There's really only a few variables, eh? Who has da most experience, includin' on that river at or near those water levels (and, if it's early season, who has seen it this spring)? Who knows da skill level and emotional resilience of every scout and adult? Who has da most experience makin' judgment calls, and has demonstrated an ability to say "no" under pressure? Those three, or two, or one person(s), youth or adult, get together and make da call. And while they're at it, teach the rest how to think through such things. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, skeptic, yeh just have to get past da issue that Merlyn is a one-trick fellow who never grew out of his adolescent rebellious phase. I expect most of da folks he knows IRL just dismiss him, so he spends time 'round the net lookin' for other folks to be petulant with. I'm still in stitches over da "liar" thing, eh? He's allowed to project his view of other people's positions all he wants, but if anyone else does it they're "liars". Just like da personal attack bit, and da "Yes you did, No I didn't" endless repetition thing I got him doin' to kill da other thread. It's just tired teenage-style argumentation. And all of us scouters and parents know we can't win an argument with teenagers . My bet is dat Merlyn doesn't have kids of his own, or he would have grown up on that score by now. Beavah

Yah, sorry mmhardy, that section of da Troop Committee handbook is referrin' only to the Annual Program Plan (that comes out of da PLC annual planning meeting). It's not referring to operatin' policies of the troop, which by and large are set by the Troop Committee and the Scoutmaster, and the boys to the extent those other groups feel comfortable delegatin' that. I really dislike playin' book quote games. Da BSA materials are not a rulebook and are not the Bible. They offer slightly different suggestions in different places and over time because different people wrote and edited 'em and there's more than one way to skin a kid. They expect unit scouters to be good, intelligent people who know their CO and their kids and can use their brain without training wheels. Off da cuff, I enjoy bein' with da units that limit electronics (either by "bans" or "education at gunpoint") more than the others. Just my observation. The lads have actually learned how to be with each other and have fun, be alert to their environment, they tend to be more willing to engage in new stuff. More social. More like scouts. Which gets us to da other form of veto, eh? The "I don't want to be with you" veto. As in "You guys can set whatever rules you want about iPhones, but if yeh want me to spend my weekend with you as an adult then it better be 'none'." Da Boy Scout materials can't take that veto away, because we don't own the Scoutmaster's time. Beavah

If scouting tells a 14-year old (or older) young man that they can't trust him with a cell phone, period, that's a shame. Yah, but there's other ways of lookin' at it, eh? If a 14 year old brings a piece of inappropriate gear on an outin', that's a shame. An adult telling him it's inappropriate is just doin' his job, whether it's a watermelon in his backpack because his mom wants him to have fruit while he's on the trail, or a cell phone. Like others, I'm still stuck on "Who in the world is he goin' to call?" And I'm not sure how you're goin' to justify a 14 year old bein' allowed but a 13 year old not. But that's somethin' yeh can worry about someday if some organization decides that you're da best candidate for an available Scoutmaster position. Then yeh can have da joy and pleasure of dealing with all "those" parents who quibble with your rules or tell their sons it's OK to disobey the SM. You'll love dealin' with that, I promise! Until then, don't be one of "those" parents, eh? That way, yeh might actually be worthy of someday being an Assistant Scoutmaster at least. B

The only reason Christians are not still burning each other is because the secular state stopped them. LOL. Yah, da atheist states like Stalinist Russia and Maoist China were sterling examples too, eh? Give me da Holy Roman Empire over those any day! Fact is that da risk of burning people has everything to do with having a state with singular power and almost nothin' to do with the beliefs of those who hold that power. Atheist, Christian, doesn't matter. Da problem is with havin' too much power in the state. ------ Now, Merlyn, an article callin' angry atheists bores and whiners is somehow da same as National Socialist propaganda vilifying Jews? You must be jokin'! That sounds a whole lot like da "boo-hoo" victimhood the article talks about. Beavah

Because your son is the exception, not the rule. Not all scouts are 14 year old Star Scouts behaving as responsible young adults, and the policy has to be fair and equitable. Exactly. And odds are your son really isn't da exception anyways. Or won't be, when he gets a girlfriend and just has to text her every 30 minutes. Adult leaders get to choose how they spend their volunteer time, eh? A few might try to spend it teachin' da youth phone courtesy, but honestly they aren't goin' to make a dent if parents, friends and school aren't reinforcin' it da other 95% of the youth's time. Mostly, I reckon adult leaders in scoutin' are there for teachin' Scouting. Trying to teach 30 or more kids of different ages phone courtesy isn't their idea of a fun use of their free time. And since it's their time, they get to choose. BTW, scoutldr's description of cell phones disruptin' camp is far from an isolated incident. Check out this one: http://listserv.tcu.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0904&L=SCOUTS-L&P=R8818 Beavah

Considering the news I'm not sure the Tamils are a good analogy. At least I sure don't consider myself as part of a well-armed rebel insurgency that was just vanquished on the battlefield. Dat would be da Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka. Tamils are a large ethnic minority in India and the surrounding region. Just like not all Irish are part of da IRA, not all Tamils are part of da LTTE. But I probably had 'em on the brain because of da news and havin' a young naturalized American lad of Tamil background at an EBOR last month. I've seen what you've advocated on how public schools should be able to treat atheist students. That they should treat 'em just like other students? Yah, that's what I advocate. You can deny it as much as you like, but advocating that public schools ought to be able to discriminate against atheist students is advocating that schools ought to be able to violate their civil rights. Eleven times. Must be tough to think of yourself as such a "liar." Are yeh perhaps a professional liar (aka politician), and yeh think that if yeh just repeat a falsehood enough times people will start to believe yeh? Beavah(This message has been edited by Beavah)

We have boys coming up that are not all about back country camping and hiking 30 miles (including my own) Yet. Sometimes da young lads can be a bit scared or overwhelmed by da outdoor program of an active troop. But that active outdoor program is vital to keeping those lads when they hit age 13 or 14. Key is to ease da transition, especially for oldest children who aren't used to havin' older brothers around. If I may suggest, consider a more active and fun campin' program for your son and his webelos, and work a bit with da SM and youth leaders in the troop to help with that and with da first six months of the transition. I'd give the troop some feedback and your own webelos program a kick up before I'd abandon a good relationship and a troop with a strong outdoor program. Beavah

Religious people should be careful not to saw off the tolerant, secular humanist branch they're sitting on. LOL. Nor should secular humanists cut themselves off from da religious soil and roots from which they sprung and which continue to support and nourish 'em.

Yah, nettie0523, welcome to da forums, eh? In answer to your question, it is up to individual units when the events take place. If there's any trend, I'd say that in da southern parts of the country it's more common to see lads cross over earlier in the year (when da weather is nicer before it gets too hot), while in da northern states it tends to be a bit later as the weather improves. Around these parts, Blue and Golds and crossovers are often held together. Earliest start in late February, latest wrap up around now. Sometimes crossovers are held by da troops welcoming the boys, not by the packs. In one district, da district runs a crossover campout for everybody. Just depends. Your pack and troop are owned by da same organization, so it's pretty normal for 'em to have closely integrated programs that lead boys from one to da other. By and large, that's a good thing, and worth supporting. More boys are likely to stay in scoutin' that way than the situation where there isn't a tight relationship. In some religiously-sponsored CO's, it's expected. Yeh don't say whether you're urban or rural. Urban folks, where there are a fair number of troops in an area, tend to develop da "shop around" thing unless a church sponsor runs it tighter. Rural areas there often aren't other troops to shop around to. Since your pack seems to do crossover as part of a pack campout, I reckon it's hard to coordinate with da calendars of other troops besides your sister troop. And in such a case any other SM or troop would need to be invited as a guest, and it's OK not to invite someone as a guest to your show. We might not agree, but it's da pack's call, especially if it makes da coordination harder. That havin' been said, personally I salute da SM who called out his fellow SM so that someone was there to welcome the boy into his new troop, and I reckon mom should be a bit ashamed to spring that on folks at the last minute. If I had my druthers, I'd advise the CM to relax. He doesn't have to encourage the lads to shop around, but honorin' a family's choice with da simple courtesy of a shared crossover seems like a better way to go. Beavah

I'm trying to work out what the "f" is for? It's for old fellows who have a hard time typin' and get interrupted by their wives before they can finish a thought. I think offerin' additional class-type support, "advanced" or whatnot, is an OK thing. But I'm with da ladies, who seem to be better at assessing their own ability than us fellows. Bein' taught a skill is a different thing than being proficient at a skill. One yeh might teach in a weekend, the other takes experience developed over time in a variety of conditions, and quite a bit of practice and additional coaching. Can't do that in a weekend, or even a week. And bein' proficient in a skill is a different thing than being able to lead inexperienced children in that activity. One involves just self-management of a competent person, eh? The other takes a whole additional range of skills and a bunch more experience so yeh can anticipate what the kids are goin' to do or have problems with. Can't do that in a weekend or a week either, eh? Can't do it at all unless yeh have kids around! I remember workin' with a fellow, a very proficient climber, on a rappel tower. He was totally surprised by all da bizarre, unanticipated things kids did and the problems that cropped up as a result. Where he in his own climbin' would have been safe but more laid back and relaxed, in an institutional environment he needed to be more formal and more alert to da kids to be safe. Took him quite a while to learn and adjust. It's a mistake to think that because we're safe and proficient in our own outdoor activity that we're goin' to be safe and proficient doin' the activity with kids. Beavah

Beavah, you, Fred, Ed, and lots of others have repeatedly made statements where atheists should or ought to be discriminated against by their own government and be treated as second-class citizens. Even if that were true, which it isn't, it has nuthin' to do with my statement. You've seen testimony from dozens of us Tamils, I mean scouters, as to how we really interpret da DRP in our interactions with youth (or how we coach other adult leaders to act). Like I said, prejudice. Thanks for da youth application link, I was wrong. That was a recent change. Unfortunate, IMO, but no doubt one of those unfortunate responses that comes from bein' harassed by lots of legal shenanigans. That's why litigatin' "beliefs" with fellow citizens is nuthin' but dirty and destructive business. You've advocated that public schools ought to be able to violate the civil rights of atheist students. Yeh can repeat it ten more times and it still won't be true. Oops, I mean "lie" about it, to use da Merlyn vernacular. A bit like taunting a fellow child by shoutin' "Your mother was a hamster!" over and over again. But riddle me this... does it violate da rights of rural citizens to make government grants for urban development available? Doin' so actively excludes some persons from a tax-funded government program. Does it violate da civil rights of those who attend public university to give tax-funded tuition support to another student to attend da University of Notre Dame? Does it violate da civil rights of a girl who pursues a degree in English Literature by funding another girl who pursues a degree in medicine, even though it means you're spendin' more tax dollars on one than the other? (Be careful, eh? There are a higher percentage of religious people in rural areas, and more Catholics at Notre Dame. So these policies have differential effects on suspect classes ) Or rather than everything bein' an issue of litigation over civil rights, are some things just questions of public policy? Policy which we might agree or disagree with, eh? But just policy. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, tombitt, welcome to da forums, eh? I think da relevant question here is "What happens when family policy contradicts da policy of the school/youth group/scout troop/sports team?" Answer is always the same. If yeh want other people to provide services for your kids, you respect their rules. Don't like da school rules? Home school. Don't like da youth group rules? Find a different church. Don't like the troop or sports team rules? Don't play. What isn't reasonable or courteous is to expect that everyone else is goin' to change just to make you happy. So whether a cell phone ban is a good idea or not ain't relevant. Only question is whether you believe in loyalty, kindness, and courtesy toward other adults who are givin' your son their time and talent for free. Beavah(This message has been edited by Beavah)

Beavah, I've explained before how the DRP says only theist members can be the best kinds of citizens, so atheists must be second-class (or worse), and how it's not just adult leaders, but youth members who must subscribe to the DRP. Yah, you're sorta like one of those guys who reads a book about Tamil culture in India and then goes and tells a bunch of Tamils what it is that they believe. Dat's humorous, but I reckon it would be best to ask 'em what they really believe, eh? Da DRP actually says "The Boy Scouts of America maintains that no member can grow into the best kind of citizen without recognizing an obligation to God." No member. That says nuthin' about non-members. You've already heard from dozens of Tamils, I mean scouters, that nobody who understands da DRP or Scouting treats atheists as second-class citizens. But dat's OK, eh? You think yeh know more about da Tamils than they do. They're all dirty rotten scoundrels. What do we call that? Oh, yah... prejudice. And of course it's only our adult application, not da youth application, that even mentions the DRP. But don't let da facts disturb your prejudice. Your own attitude is similar, as you've often advocated that public schools ought to be able to violate the civil rights of atheist students. Liar, liar pants on fire! Makin' stuff up again, eh? I reckon we tend to criticize in others da things we tend to do ourselves. Yeh project into others the things yeh really find in yourself. From misrepresentin' arguments to treatin' folks with different belief as second class citizens. All I've argued that public schools ought to be able to serve all of their students with programs dat meet each of their interests and needs. You know, like da rest of da free world. Beavah(This message has been edited by Beavah)

Because they teach children that atheists are second-class citizens Yah, I've been in scoutin' a lot of years, in a fair number of places, seen lots of things. Can't say I've ever seen this. What, Merylyn, do yeh just make this stuff up? The DRP says nothing about what or how we teach children, eh? It's a statement of philosophy of da organization, acknowledged by the adult membership. Of course by feedin' da troll, this is sure to become another Merlyn's agenda thread. I reckon both fgoodwin's and le Voyageur's articles have da ring of truth, eh? I think communities of faith and common mission are powerful things, and they definitely do influence da civic behavior of individuals. That's why "organized" religion is important, eh? We need that mutual reinforcement and challenge. At da same time, some religions (and some secular pseudo-religions like Mao-ism and National Socialism and State Communism) can become too strongly tied to one tribe or culture or political power and lose their way, eh? God is subtle and nuanced and plays by His own rules. True contact with God is a terrifying thing, full of challenge to ourselves and our beliefs. It's far more comfortable to just align with da secular political culture of our own group and feel self-righteous. American Christendom fell into that trap because of da abortion mess, and started confusin' support for a political party with its proper moral place to stand outside of power and politics. So some fell into da notion that torture and extraordinary rendition and such were acceptable if proposed by "our" pro-life politicians. What would be anathema to Christ becomes acceptable. Just da sad story of humanity, eh? Our sinful weakness. I don't consider those "unaffiliated" folks in le Voyageur's article any different. Their position was just supportin' their political persuasion too. Even a stopped clock is right occasionally . True morality is when yeh tell your friends and allies and family and self that what they're doin', what you want to do, can't be allowed, and take da consequences. Put da two together, and we see that faith communities have an advantage over da unaffiliated, because we share a common touchstone that we can be called back to when we wander astray. And we get a warnin' most Sundays about da follies of personal pride . By livin' in such communities, we're challenged and supported by each other to grow. But God also makes use of the "unaffiliated" - da hermits and the prophets - to shake up and challenge faith communities when they've become proudful or complacent. Beavah

In my council, the only skills course (besides instructor training) for BSA Scouters is ITOLS. One weekend, jamb packed with basic skills. But not nearly enough to take 10 youth into the wilderness for a week. Especially if you never backpacked before. We are fortunate enough to have a couple of adults in our unit who are active outdoorsman. Just think if you had a unit with none? Does BSA provide training for those leaders? In management, not outdoorsmanship. Yah, I have to agree with Gern, eh? One of da things that I think is costing us kids is that we have fewer adults who are able to deliver on the outdoor adventure kids want these days. Da car campin' and sing-along fires are nice and all for webelos and younger middle schoolers, but the older boys lust for bigger mountains. Our cadre of well-rounded scouters and parents aren't up to deliverin' that. More to da point, IOLS isn't goin' to get 'em there. I think in order to responsibly lead children in the field, yeh need a good solid level of comfort and expertise yourself. That takes more than a weekend to develop from scratch. Lots more. So either we find those people who have a lot of prior experience who really don't need our current training (and make 'em take it anyways just to be ornery ), or we have to find ways of offerin' adults some really solid outdoor leadership trainin' and experience. Perhaps da way to go is use alternate providers, eh? We're already doin' that for things like Wilderness First Aid. Maybe we try to find things like REI Adventures programs to work with. Anyone got any suggestions of partners who would work? Beavah

From the article it looks like the economy of Imperial County is based on criminal activity and at least this Post is on the side of the law. Yah, despite da liberal spin/bias of the NYTimes, I don't think yeh read that right. It was that the economy of the county is poor, and based largely on law enforcement - including two major prisons, plus da border patrol, customs & immigration officials, etc. Probably most of these kids' parents are involved in law enforcement related jobs. Fact is, the types of units that exist depend on the sort of adult volunteers available. I don't reckon this county is goin' to have a lot of BSA Teams chartered to offer competitive hockey. Maybe this is what Beavah talks about when he says that the program has to have the flexibility to offer what the community needs. I think thats what Beavah says, I could be wrong. Sure. In a cursory read, there is nothing here which is a violation of da G2SS or any other BSA rule. Remember that Law Enforcement posts and crews are exempt from the G2SS paintball/lasertag/simulated weapons pointed at humans prohibition. And it seems to meet da needs of these kids, the community they serve, and da mission of the Chartering Organization. Not every troop needs to be chartered to organizations da political left find cuddly. Beavah

Yah, I'd expect it to proceed like a regular EBOR, eh? Detailed questions about his project, how the plan differed from da reality, how he adapted, how he showed leadership. Some questions about Merit Badges, his scouting experiences. More detailed questions about his leadership positions and performance in those roles, what he accomplished, what he struggled with. And some very targeted questions about Scout Spirit and his understanding of the Oath and Law, eh? If they're doin' their jobs, they're goin' to raise Scout Spirit as it relates to his life out of scouting, based on da reference letters, and they're goin' to be very pointed about his Scout Spirit within Scouting. He might get a few questions on da order of "do you feel it is appropriate to get mouthy with your SM or other leaders?" "How would you address issues of concern with colleagues or superiors in the future?" Whatever issues the Scoutmaster had in terms of scout spirit. I'd expect to even get a "Why do you feel we should give you Eagle when the adults closest to you in the program don't feel the award is merited?" Or at least, I'd "Be Prepared" I think gettin' into a quibblin' match on da details would be a poor decision on your son's part. If he can't rise above such things, he probably doesn't merit the award. So "defend himself" I think is inappropriate if that's what he's thinkin'. I think a very polite acknowledgment that perspectives can be different, and offering his perspective in a non-judgmental, non-argumentative manner can be OK, but only if they're really focusing on da SM's comments "Your SM said that you did X and Y and Z..." If they're just askin' questions like the ones above, he should give the answer based on his principles and values. Beavah

Maybe we can all agree that an increasing number of scouts are having problems with parent/guardian situations that have an impact on about half the boys we have in our troops. So, does that mean: 1) BSA keeps itself a boy program? 2) BSA changes itself to a family oriented program? 3) BSA keeps it's traditional programming? 4) BSA changes it's traditional programming to accomodate the world in which it exists? 5) Does keeping or changing harm BSA more? 6) ????? Times change so how does one react? Yah, jblake raises a good question, eh? Beyond changin' "Lad and Dad" campouts to "Parent and Pal", how do we respond to changin' demographics? To me, our numbers are pretty clear. Da BSA has never gained any traction in communities outside its traditional white suburban/rural, relatively intact family base. Scoutreach, Soccer & Scouting, none of those really go anywhere despite da occasional positive story of one troop here or there. Personally, I don't think we're willin' to change enough to serve the needs of those other communities, eh? And we don't have the talent for it. It's like J. Crew tryin' to design hip-hop clothing. Better to just do a good job for da demographic we reach, while accommodating individual lads as best we can. What do da rest of you think? How should we best "reach out" beyond our core demographic? Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

If you happen to have a link to that study I would love to see it. I'm really curious to find out more about how they arrived at that number. By rollin' dice in da back room? It's a lobbyist number, eh? A group whose agenda is advanced by providin' a stark figure. And, like all lobbyist numbers no matter how well-intentioned, it's almost completely bogus. Doesn't change Stosh's point a lick. Even in two-parent Cleaver families, I've sometimes found Mom is da one who likes to camp, not dad. Use a generic name, welcome whomever comes. If yeh really have a reason for making it a "male" or "female" - focused thing, just say "we're encouraging male partners this weekend, but women are still welcome." That's just enough nudge for folks to send a guy if they can, without keepin' a kid away. Beavah

Yah, it must be frustratin' to all those McDonalds-program adults when they discover that children are a lot more complimicated than two all beef patties on a sesame seed bun. Da franchise thing is a pithy analogy, but it ain't the reality, legal or otherwise. The BSA Charter is closer to a licensing agreement. Roughly the equivalent of a textbook company which provides classroom materials, curriculum, books, and brief summer training for teachers. Da teachers and school chose those materials to help 'em with the school's mission of educatin' kids, and are free to adapt, modify, decide not to pay for training, skip chapters 12 and 13, add another supplementary text, etc. And da materials are designed to allow just that. Most schools pretty much follow the textbook with minor adjustments and supplements, but a few just use it as a reference or supplement for their own stuff, eh? I've known troops and crews that were run as school extracurricular activities by regular school staff, with no uniformin' or advancement to speak of. BSA was happy as a clam with their numbers, despite da different use of the materials. And to be honest, they did a fine job with da other six methods and we were proud to have 'em. So I don't get all hot and bothered about this or that approach bein' "wrong." Just depends how it's used, and whether it helps programs achieve their goals and kids grow. On that score, I agree completely with TwoCubDad and others, eh? Lots of times da folks who love quoting "policy" add a "policy" for this, that, and the other thing without evaluatin' costs and unintended consequences. Those policies, whether done by a troop or done by da BSA in the never-ending expansion of G2SS are "wrong" because they don't help a program achieve its goals for kids. Just like shoutin' "don't add to the requirements" over minutia. For example, I know a few troops that have never had an Eagle under age 17. I don't think they really put up policy roadblocks so much as that's da troop culture. They want each lad to do his best before the finale. Like a high school diploma, eh? Da bright kids don't rush to finish high school at age 13 with da minimum requirements. They wait to get their diploma, and take a full schedule includin' AP classes until they've vastly exceeded da requirements and gotten everything out of high school that they can. They've got great retention, most of da Eagles stay around as ASMs when they're in town. I expect if they were confronted with a lad or family who was tryin' to game the system they'd put da brakes on, but who knows. Never been an issue. Nuthin' wrong with that. Achieves their mission, works for their kids. Just as long as someone from such a troop doesn't take over da DAC job and decide everyone should to it their way, and start puttin' up roadblocks for other folks' programs. Beavah

I dont know, but I would bet that your Eagles are much better contributors and supporters later in life (no pun intended). Why would some aged out star scout give money, time or encourage others to join? Yah, my unscientific observation is that Star and Life scouts are as active supporters later in life. Of course, there's more of 'em. Why not let the boys knock out some hard-to-get less-than-fun MBs and move on? Just to exhibit your arbitrary power? I dont get that part of it. Set the goal posts, and help the boys to score Simple. At almost every Eagle BOR, when I ask what Merit Badges da boy feels were the most valuable, it is always "some hard-to-get" badge. Boys aren't dumb. They know that the badges where they really had to work, and had the benefit of a counselor who made them work, are the ones that are "best." You'd be surprised how many "less-than-fun" badges like Citizenship, Communications, Personal Management get mentioned by boys as being ones they really learned from. Provided they're not done at one of these Merit Badge Fairs. Beavah

The issue is exactly what does "guardian" mean in the G2SS No. The G2SS has no particular relevance when it comes to the law. It's just an internal document in a children's program. If yeh follow it and cause harm, you're liable. If something bad happens during the night, like a lad wanders off and gets lost or hurt, you are quite correct that attorneys and juries would expect to know why yeh ignored the explicit instructions of the boy's parent and made a second grader on his first campout sleep by himself or with another child. Even though yeh thought it proper that your own child sleep under the supervision and care of an adult. Does that seem reasonable to you? Mr. Cubmaster, do you value other people's children less than your own, so that you don't provide them the same care and supervision? So, with due respect, I'd personally suggest dat it's foolish to interfere with a boy's relative and da parent's designated representative who is standing in loco parentis for the campout. If yeh want to reduce your risk, legal and otherwise, yeh let Grandpa share a tent with his grandson. The passage in G2SS was meant to help protect scouters and non-familial adults from the appearance of impropriety and the threat of false accusations, and avoid opportunistic attacks. None of those are relevant in this case. But that's just my personal opinion . Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)