Beavah

Yah, scorpionace, yeh have to tell us what your role is? Regular parent? Committee Chair? Generally speakin', financial decisions on capital purchases should be made accordin' to your bylaws or to the rules established by the chartered organization that owns the unit. If you are an agent for the troop committee (like the CC) and you truly suspect financial fraud, yeh meet with the head of the chartered organization, and proceed by going to the bank and gettin' copies of the records, and consider filing a complaint with local law enforcement or requesting an investigation. Notify the BSA council Scout Executive as well. Naturally, that involves immediately suspending/terminating your SM and treasurer. If you're a parent who just doesn't think that the group made a good purchase decision, then yeh voice your concern at a committee meeting, and perhaps work to set up rules/bylaws on capital purchases. Or just volunteer to help out more so they can benefit from your expertise in the future before they make a decision. Beavah

Yah, scorpionace, welcome to da forums. Seems like from your two posts yeh have some "issues" with your current adult leadership. Goin' out onto the net looking for "ammunition" for an adult dispute within a unit probably isn't the best way to approach things. To answer your question, no, in most generally accepted definitions of corporal punishment, doing pushups would not meet that definition. If that were the case, then I reckon most football practice drills would be banned by schools across the country, which do prohibit corporal punishment. Pushups are just pushups, eh? Like bein' made to sit in a corner and take a time-out is just bein' made to sit in a corner. It's not "social ostracism". Beavah [ps. for emb021 - can yeh tell me in what state yeh think hazing is defined to include doin' pushups? Generally speakin', hazing has an actual legal definition in a lot of states because its been incorporated into criminal codes. To my knowledge, doin' pushups doesn't meet the definition anywhere, but it's been a while since I looked at it. -B]

Yah, geez, folks. Take a deep breath! There's a process here that both this troop and this young man and the DAC are tryin' to respect. That process doesn't include spammin' every official with our sense of outrage. So far, this troop has done everything its supposed to do. The Scoutmaster did his part, he informed the boy of his decision and his avenue of appeal. He's not obligated to do that in writin', or to fax a replacement of a lost letter while traveling. The troop is doin' what it should, it's settin' up a committee meeting to hear the appeal. The DAC is doin' what he should, he's lettin' the troop process play out and then preparing to deal with any appeal at the district level. And the lad is doin' his part, respectfully using the process to pursue an appeal. All this is exactly what is supposed to happen. There's no call for phoning the IH, the SE, the national office, the cops, or da pope. There's no need to be badmouthin' the SM, or windin' the parent up, or relivin' real or imagined failures in adult or youth communication. There's no need to try to end-run whatever the normal process is in the troop/district for obtaining reference letters. We here in internet land have no idea what "the rest of the story" is, eh? We have to trust that our fellow scouters are good folks, and that they'll allow the process to play out the way it should. mdsummer45, the Scoutmaster gets to make the call on a lot of things, even ones that are subjective. Just like the referee in a soccer match or the theater advisor who chooses the lead in the play, or the teacher who gives a grade on an essay. None of 'em succeed in makin' the right call 100% of the time. But often the measure of our character is how we behave toward them when they don't. Your son is doin' a great job so far. Let him keep doing a great job. He's a young adult, give him the room to grow into the part. The skills and the courtesy with which he approaches this challenge will stay with him for many, many years. Relax. Scoutin' has a lot of good people in it, and the process is being used properly. As far as your son's question about da school counselor, I think that's a fine question that either your son or his counselor should address by calling the Committee Chair. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, Richard, I appreciate yeh all wantin' to move discussions over to your own sandbox at myscouting, eh? Unfortunately, the myscouting portal is so technically flawed that it's almost unusable for many folks. That's what happens when yeh use non standards compliant interfaces. As of yesterday, it still won't let me log in for anything but the trainin', and makes a hash of a lot of pages. Like most of ScoutNet, eh? Appreciate that that's not your department, but da reality is until yeh get some real IT and communications pros down the hall, your online communications presence isn't goin' to be effective. Besides, while I expect that most online presences would love to control as much of da market and discussion traffic as they can via their own portal, I reckon that's just not da way good communications works in the modern world. Yeh have to have a broader strategy. In case you were wonderin', dsrobert's April Fools prank just proved that for yeh. Same engaging with the broader world applies to good Risk Management, but that's another topic, eh? Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

While its nice to dump this mess on the last president, the Democrates were running congress and were the gate keepers to making it happen. ?? Yah, hmmm. Can't quite figure how yeh figure, Eagledad. Leastways if you're lookin' at it rationally and fairly. The auto bailout money that Bush spent wasn't approved by Congress, eh? That was TARP money which the administration misappropriated to prop up GM and Chrysler without congressional approval. Congress was balkin' at the notion. Now, it is true that since '94 the Republican Congress blocked any efforts to increase fuel economy standards, especially on the loophole "light trucks / SUV" category. Aided and abetted by the midwestern auto state Democrats. In 20-20 hindsight, uppin' those standards would have saved the domestic manufacturers from themselves (though to be honest, it's a pretty sad day when industry has to rely on our politicians to think for them). B

Yah, I think now the ban is on any "simulated weapon." Not sure if flashlights count, but squirtguns, toy phasers, and pointin' a banana and goin' "bang" are definitely out. Perhaps Richard can stick around a while and try to explain that, along with other odd H&S views. Might be more helpful than publicly chatisin' a scouter for an April Fools prank. BTW, welcome to da forums, dsroberts! And thanks for the chuckle. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

A signature refusal of the Scoutmaster or Committee Chairman would be a "decision leading to the appeal" at the unit level. Therefore an appeal would be made to the district. Nah, this gets spelled out elsewhere. SM refusal gets appealed to the unit committee. And that's just polite anyways, eh? That's necessary in the areas where EBORs are held at the unit level, of course. If the EBOR's are held at the district level, then you're right, that's where it will be resolved. In that case, though, it makes a difference if the unit committee endorses the application even if the SM does not. Those are separate endorsements, eh? If the committee approves, the chair should sign on behalf of the committee, he/she should not sign for the Scoutmaster. So for this lad, whether EBORs are held at the unit or district level in his area, first step is the unit committee. Beavah

Yah, Obama in this case is only stating the obvious. Chrysler is a dead man walking. No fool, not even the government, would rationally try to prop that company up. Either it gets bought out by Fiat or it's goin' Chapter 7. GM really needs to be in Chapter 11, and the administration essentially said that. So the UAW and the bondholders get 60 days lookin' down the barrel of that gun, eh? I still don't think they'll get it together. I don't think the administration does either. So yah, that'll be Chapter 11, and probably the end of Gettlefinger. Now, if only we could start takin' a hard line with the financial industry. AIG and Citi are both dead men walking. Too big to fail means "should be broken up." Gas taxes, BTW, do not cause inflation. But if we ever get out of the recession, rampant inflation and $5/gallon gasoline is a given, eh? Prepare for it if you're smart! The Fed has been devaluing the dollar for 20 years, and in the last year has been almost literally dumpin' dollars from airplanes. That's a way out of our massive debt, eh? Inflate the dollar and essentially tax everyone's buying power to make up for the taxes we haven't been willing to pay to pay our own way. None of that has a lick to do with Obama, it's all been brewin' for years. Poor guy is just left with the mess, and is tryin' to thread the needle between depression, inflation, national default, and the politics of pork and entitlement. Beavah

If the boy does not have a sign off for scout spirit, can he appeal that to the district/council? I thought the appeal process was only for the SM conference signature and not for scout spirit? Yah, it's always just treated as the Scoutmaster refusin' to approve the application, eh? Doesn't matter what the reason is. You can appeal if the SM is refusing to endorse for Scout Spirit, or if the SM is refusing to endorse for position of responsibility, or if the SM is refusing to endorse for being active for six months, etc. Or if the SM is refusing to endorse because he doesn't like lads who are taller than he is. It's all the same process. If the "no" for any reason is coming from the SM, then the first level of appeal is the troop committee. Then district, council, national. If the issue is Scout Spirit, then the lad should be prepared to talk with the committee on how he views the Scout Oath and Law, and how he feels he's demonstrated Scout Spirit in his life both inside and outside of Scouting. Part of that can be how he's handled this situation respectfully and courteously. Includin' an apology to his SM for any misunderstandings or unintended "attitude." Beavah

Mr FD told me that my son can request a District EBOR, Council EBOR and National EBOR after his 18th birthday. Does that sound right to you all? Yah, mdsummer45, yeh might have missed my last note if you were typin' at the same time. The SM is refusin' to sign off on the lad for Eagle. First Appeal is therefore to the Troop Committee. Second Appeal is to the district, just as the Field Director said. The FD is another executive "above" the District Director. Like the District Director, the FD won't be directly involved in the process. After that, your son or you can appeal to the council, and then to National, just as your FD indicated. So the information you've been given is correct. The first step on the road, though, is the troop committee. And that may well be all that's needed to get the job done. Beavah

Yah, mdsummer45, that helps a bit, eh? So there was a fairly ordinary discipline issue (kids bein' loud at night), and then a fairly ordinary adult overreaction along with a fairly ordinary smart-aleck response from a teen. Followed by a somewhat out of the ordinary overreaction by da SM (parent meetings over kids talkin' late in a tent??), followed by a fairly ordinary smart-aleck response from a teen. Yah, followed by a further escalation by the SM. Yeh all need to stand down a bit. Did your son ever take the initiative and apologize for bein' a smart-aleck? Sometimes when both sides are in the wrong and throwin' egos about, the proper thing for a real man to do is simply stop the escalation and apologize. Probably late for that now, but I'd still give it a whirl. Dear Scoutmaster Jones, "I'm really sorry there's been this much confusion, and I apologize if along the way I've done less than I should have to show scout spirit or respect to you or any of the other leaders. I understand and respect your position...." Maybe that's all it would take to break the logjam. The steps here for the proper appeal process are very simple. The Scoutmaster Conference matters not a whit, the issue in the rules is that the Scoutmaster is not recommending the boy for Eagle by refusing to sign the application. First appeal is to the Troop Committee. That should be done respectfully, bring documentation. If the troop committee approves the application, the boy goes on to his Eagle Board of Review and the matter is done. If the troop committee says "no", then they must provide the reasons for the denial as well as what the boy needs to do to improve, and do so in writing. Your son can either try to improve and then try again, or he can appeal. The next level of appeal is to the district. The contact for that is the District Advancement Chair which you listed, not the District Director (who is the equivalent of the District Executive). That appeal should proceed only after the troop committee has ruled. Calling the person to give 'em a polite heads up is fine, but IMO calling them to try to short-circuit the normal appeals process at the troop level makes yeh look bad. By being polite, respectful, and followin' the process, your son will go a long way toward demonstratin' his "scout spirit." The district will typically hold an Eagle Board of Review as part of the appeal. If they approve Eagle, congratulations, your son is done. If they say no, they must do so in writing with a list of things to improve. Your son can use his remaining time to try to improve, or can appeal to the council, through the council advancement chair. And then, finally, can appeal to National. The council professional staff (District Director, Scout Executive) don't like to get sucked into these things, and really just try to act as assistants to the process where they have to. Because it's a BSA award issue, it's really not somethin' for a COR to get involved in. No COR is goin' to micromanage a SM on an award decision. Yeh go to the COR if the adults' behavior is such that yeh feel it's appropriate the SM be removed from his position and expelled from da program. Hope that helps. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Hee hee... There is no fool like an April Fool, eh? Beavah

Yah, ghermanno, there's no need for a time extension here, eh? The lad has all the requirements completed. He's just holdin' on SM approval and BOR. Both of those can happen after a boy's 18th birthday without an extension. mdsummer45, it sure seems like there's somethin' else goin' on here, eh? I'll ask again whether your son has been involved in any behavioral incidents recently, is dealin' with any personal issues. Did he once swear at the SM and the SM hasn't gotten over it or somesuch? Is he the sort that argues with everything? If you've been an active volunteer in the unit and know the SM or one of the ASMs or the CC personally, you might also ask them on the side what they perceive the issue(s) to be, just so as a parent you have both sides of da story. Teens aren't always the best communicators, eh? Barring any of that, there just seems to be a real communications disconnect here. That usually takes two to tango. But I think the boy's response to a Scoutmaster sayin' "I never got that", etc. is to respond, "Well, I'm sorry you were having difficulty with your internet service. Now you have received it, and you now know I sent it 3 months ago, so can we meet this week?" Since this is proceedin' more formally at this point with an appeal to the unit committee, I think yeh encourage your son and be quietly supportive, while respecting the leaders. Yeh might coach your son to write up a documentation trail. "Talked to Mr. Scoutmaster on meeting 11/22, was told to email. Emailed on 11/23, got no response." etc. If everything is as you have said, your son will prevail on appeal at some point (district, council, national). It might take a step or two, and you should quietly encourage that. Beavah

Four adults, five scouts. COR can dual as either MC or CC. So three there, plus a SM. Five scouts has been the national requirement for charterin' a new unit as far back as I can remember. Beavah

Beavah, just out of curiosity, how did they classify the boys from Little Sioux that died? What type of building was the shelter listed as, I mean. Just my guess, sheldonsmom, but I think they classified it as a "business building". Their reporting standards only identify three types of building: permanent home, mobile home, and business. B

Yah, KurtB in da parent thread raised a very common issue. Boy Scout Leaders want boys to lead, and are good at allowing them the freedom to do that... includin' accepting the level of short-term planning and disorganization that entails. Parents coming out of cub programs which are parent-run are looking for something very different, eh? They're looking for competence and organization. Often da most active cub packs, the ones that have the most webelos, benefit from several adults who are very organized and driven types, eh? So that's what they're used to and looking for. I'd love to hear how different folks here manage that dichotomy. How do yeh appear organized enough for the cub parents to attract recruits, while not compromisin' your boy scouting? Yeh can also comment on how you take steps to re-educate the cub parents, but I'm lookin' more for how yeh deal with and overcome the initial impressions that turn people off sometimes. Beavah

Yah, hi mdsummer45. Quick question for you, if you can share. No boy is perfect, as you suggest, but can you let us in on what your son's "mistakes" in the program have been? Sometimes, yeh know, a serious mistake or two can be hard to overcome in peoples' minds. Does your son have any learning disability or similar issues? Sometimes Scoutmasters aren't very good at interpretin' the nonverbal cues of such boys, or the boy misjudges situations with the Scoutmaster. That havin' been said, kudos to your boy for being mature in his approach. His next step is to (in person and in writing) request that the Committee Chair schedule a special session to consider his Eagle Application without the Scoutmaster's recommendation. If in your area Eagle Boards of Review are done at the unit level, it's common for such an appeal to be combined with an Eagle Board of Review with a district representative present, but that's not required. Document that request. When the troop committee does the review, if they choose not to recommend your son for Eagle, they should give him the reasons in writing. He can then either work on those things in his remaining time and request another review, or he (or you) can appeal to the district. The district will typically conduct an Eagle Board of Review at the same time as the appeal, if it hasn't been done already. If the troop committee refuses to hear your son's appeal or schedule a meetin' in a timely way, yeh can also appeal to the district (usin' the dated copy of your request above as documentation). So essentially, your son keeps up his mature and adult-like responses, and firmly but courteously moves things "up the chain." Along the way he gets to learn important lessons about documenting things, and about how to politely use the mechanisms that are available to resolve disputes. As far as you attending the committee meeting, it's allowed, but I think whether yeh choose to do so depends on your son and the adults involved. An almost-18-year-old HS senior goin' for Eagle should be able and allowed to stand on his own. I'd only attend if yeh really think the adults will get out of control, which seems unlikely given that the SM has politely indicated the route of appeal. Let your son fight this fight, and it will mean more to him. Just be quietly encouraging at home, while still demonstrating your respect for the other adults in the troop. His high school counselor should be listed as a reference on your son's Eagle Application, and so will submit a recommendation to his Eagle Board of Review in the normal course of events. Hope that helps. Beavah(This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, GKlose, I think packs are pretty diverse on this in the northern states. The January/February crossover time seems to work for the Texans. Gets lads out on their first campouts with the troop in the cooler weather of March. Up here in the northern plains, crossin' over later in da school year achieves the same purpose - makin' their first troop campouts happen in forgiving and pleasant weather. I think yeh just roll with it. Invite 'em on troop trips as guests / recruits, but pretty much treat 'em the same. A smart pack will have 'em share what they're learning on your troop outings with the webelos 1 boys. That's somethin' yeh might want to encourage! Beavah

Yah, just as I was readin' the previous thread I got word last night about a new national H&S mandate. As part of the "every youth deserves a trained leader" initiative, startin' next year they're goin' to be adding the H&S Risk Management course to the mandatory training requirements along with YPT. For those of you who aren't familiar, this course was developed initially for district/council volunteers, but has been offered more and more frequently in different parts of the country to unit volunteers with good reviews. It includes a G2SS familiarization, but also a fair bit on more general risk assessment and management. As I understand it, this course will not be offered online, so that local councils can present risk management issues which apply locally (heat in da south, cold in the north, falls in the mountain states, etc.). Course is three hours, with an estimated cost of $35-$40pp for materials and support, includin' G2SS copies as well as a new composite booklet of Trek Safely/Hazardous Weather/etc. stuff. Part of that is I think they want da council professional staff involved in instruction, so course fees have to take into account their salary. Course will be required for all registered leaders, including committee members and CORs. They want da folks signin' off on tour permits and making calendar approval and leadership staffing decisions to all be aware. I don't think it's been decided yet, but they're talkin' about requiring renewal every three years to stay registered. What's not clear yet is whether other trainin' will be adapted with this emphasis in mind. Da rumor is that there's a move a foot to require a Risk Management component as part of all Woodbadge tickets, which has to be reviewed and approved separately by council risk management staff. Also not yet clear whether they're goin' to require both of the two-deep leadership on an outing to be registered and have done the trainin'. Looks like that's likely, so the days of usin' one scoutmaster and somebody's parent as second adult are over. Be interestin' to see if they start requiring it for SPLs and PLs in order to do patrol outings, eh? Leastways if those are still around. There's also an anti-bullying online course required module comin' too, I hear. Beavah

Yah, KurtB, all kinds of approaches to this out there, eh? If I could characterize "best practices" I'd say the folks on this thread pretty much have it down. Most troops realize several things: 1) Yeh never want to be plannin' just a month out. So it's best to work up a calendar in September/October that will start in January, or work up a calendar in May/June that will start in September. 2) Planning for some things like summer camp has to start a year out, so doin' a year calendar is worthwhile. 3) But... lots of schools don't have their calendars set that far out, and it makes for a long planning meeting/weekend, and if da youth really run events yeh find that their interest and availability changes durin' the year. So yeh work some compromise where 6 months of plan are set and leaders assigned, and the next 6 months are outlined. 4) Finally, yeh have to do somethin' to line things up with your youth leader elections and such. Otherwise yeh get into problems with the "they planned it, but we don't want it" issues. Which actually show up as da youth leaders just not supportin' the calendar because they don't think it's "theirs." Troops that only do PL selection "as needed" and ones that do it yearly tend to run longer calendars than those that do 6-month elections. So I'd say your troop is doin' pretty good over all, runnin' close to best practices. Buildin' in a bit of lead time (#1) would be nice, as you suggest, but it has to be balanced against #4 and perhaps #3. Especially if da PLC is composed of a fair number of younger lads, it's often best to put a bigger emphasis on #4, since younger kids forward-thinking is less well developed, and yeh need to build to it. Those new young leaders have to see, feel, and taste the effects of their choices in short order to really grow and develop. So I'd say this ain't a hill to die on. I bet your adult leaders can come up with a "tentative" calendar for interested webelos families based on past practice that would be OK. B

Yah, I don't see anything wrong with it, SMT224. In some ways, I think it would be discourteous to decline a Facebook "friend" request from a scout. By and large, da way folks use "friend" in Facebook is what we older folk would call a "contact". Lots of teens and young adults have hundreds of FB "friends". So despite the word, it really doesn't refer to "friend" as in "intimate buddies". More like a rolodex of contacts. That bein' said, there are some potential faux pas. Be careful what you post to your adult "friends" that the kids can see, eh? And be careful about what might be on your adult friends' pages that the scouts can link through to. In other words, be a good role model, and if they're lookin' at your "friends", let 'em find good role models. Interestin', fun, zany, offbeat, is OK. Wild and player probably aren't. One of the benefits as some others have described is that you get to see what the kids are talkin' about with each other. That gives you a chance sometimes to catch some behaviors or problems before they get big and mention it offhandedly to get 'em thinkin'. It would be a faux pas, though, for you to take the trust they've shown you and turn everything into an opportunity for a parent-lecture. Let 'em have space to blow of steam or be silly with each other, too. Beavah

BSA National has NOT made Basic Training, consisting of This Is Scouting (NLE), Leader Position Specific, and Outdoor Training, MANDATORY, or REQUIRED. Yah, while this is technically true, National's push on the trainin' front has functionally caused a lot of councils to go the "mandatory" route. So while it's technically local option, as it needs to be, the changes to more mandatory stuff aren't really bein' generated locally. I think encouragin' training is a fine thing, particularly if the training is done well. I think the way we encourage folks can and should demonstrate a bit more sensitivity and finesse than just slappin' a "required" label and a guilt trip on volunteers. B

Yah, from the NOAA Storm Center people Tornado Fatalities 2008: Inside Mobile Home: 56 Inside Permanent Home: 42 Inside Vehicle: 14 Inside Business Bldg: 10 Outside/Open: 3 TOTAL 125 Houses that come down around yeh and cars that get flipped are dangerous things, eh? Almost everyone gets hurt by debris. In a tornado, safest place to be is probably a ditch outside. That's why those old Kansas storm cellars like da one depicted in the Wizard of Oz were usually outdoors, eh? I thought that was an interestin' lesson from the Iowa tragedy. The buildings weren't safe. Only way to satisfy these kind of helicopters is to bring in a neutral outside "expert" that will (half) satisfy 'em. You can do that in the guise of trainin' everyone on hazardous weather, includin' parents. The expert goes through everything, how things work, what yeh can do to try to be safer, and gives the straight scoop that it's just as risky to be at home. People trust "experts", eh? Plus, what it does is make things less of an "unknown" to parents, by movin' it into the realm of their personal experience, or teachin' 'em enough to understand. Beavah

Yah, ScoutMomSD, it's not just "old days", eh? I hope yeh get to do some international scoutin' at some point. As a culture, we're about the most fearful and controlling on the planet, eh? Just look at the thread about storm worries. I sometimes think kids livin' under dictatorships have more experience with freedom than ours do. I reckon some of that is because families are smaller and parents are older these days. Yah, and because moms aren't at home. So when and older parent who is more removed from their own younger days has only limited contact with their one-and-only on evenings and weekends, it can be a hover-fest. I think it's also true that a lot of folks aren't alert to courtesy. That probably hasn't really changed with time, just that as we get older we all see more of it. So it's common for some parents not to be aware of the courtesy issue to others of havin' their kids run around nuts all the time. Sometimes a word on the side to the effect of "Oh, I always try to think of what it's like for folks who aren't a parent to have to listen to my kid shrieking at 10pm. The boys need to learn to think about others." Light touch plants the best seed, eh? I wouldn't get too upset about a parent who behaves idiotically when their kid gets hurt. That's pretty common, eh? Anyone who's ever worked EMS can tell yeh stories. Just too much stress and not enough knowledge, so their brain kinda goes haywire. Same as many husbands when their wives go into labor. Be compassionate. The guy was facin' something new and challengin' and just retreated to what he knew. Kudos to the camp staff for doin' the right thing. Beavah

Yah, I was worried about this this year. I think we're seein' a lot more of it, as fewer parents serve in the military, fewer parents camp or hike, more kids get driven by mommy and daddy to school because it's cold or raining or hot or whatever. I think da BSA hazardous weather trainin' is a byproduct of that, in addition to a bone to throw a few parents to settle suits. Tornado risk and lightning risk is present in-town and even in your house. Makes yeh wonder if this parent is runnin' weekly tornado drills and lightning safety drills for the whole family! Yes, it's overkill. Your biggest risk goin' campin' with your boys is driving to the campsite. So if yeh really want to control risk, make this parent take a defensive driving course and complete a drivin' test under your supervision. Second biggest risk, IIRC, is havin' a tree knocked over on yeh. So no campin' near trees! Risk of lightning in the flatland midwestern forests is negligible. Ain't worth spendin' a lick of time on. Risk of tornadoes is what it is, eh? Probably no worse in the field than it is if the boy stayed home. In fact, if da experience in Iowa tells us anything it's that taking shelter in a building can be more dangerous than lyin' in a ditch or hunkerin' down on an embankment. IIRC, all the boys who were killed or seriously injured were hurt when the building and brick fireplace got munched. And nationally, more people die of tornadoes in houses than outside. None of that's goin' to help a lick with your worry-wart parents, and it will look insensitive. I think yeh acknowledge that there's some risk, but that you are all trained and experienced and the risk is manageable. Biggest issue is that this is unknown risk to this parent, and the unknown is scary. Easier to accept known risks that are much higher. So yeh can help with information, to try to make the issue more "known" to them. Beavah