Beavah

Yah, I think another reason is that the level of training and experience in a troop is much higher than in a pack. * It's a different thing to take a bunch of kids out into the wilderness than it is to do den meetings indoors and an occasional car-based family camp. * It's a different thing to be responsible for kids when their parents aren't around than when their parents are required to be present. * Budgets for troop involve a lot more money and cash flow than for a pack. * Youth leadership is a much harder thing to build than putting together a meeting yourself. * Equipment is much more extensive (and potentially more hazardous). So the result is that da current leaders in a troop have a lot more personal skill and experience, and have to be a lot more personally invested in being responsible for troop operations. Big dollars and real safety on the line. It's a much bigger, more complex operation. So folks also have to stay around longer in positions. In short, it's just like da transition from elementary school into middle school and high school. Sports go from being parent-run "rec" sports to professionally coached high school teams. Teachers go from one generalist to a team of specialists teaching different subjects. PTO's go from being very involved in elementary school to being much less involved in high school, because it's a bigger, more complex, more expensive operation. Pretty natural, overall. Would you trust your kid on a high adventure trip in da wilderness with a guy who'd never done it before? How about a weekend trip? And I wonder... how much say does a new parent get in their son's high school chemistry course or the band program or the football team? Why should we expect Scouting to change for new folks if nobody else does? It's an optional program that you choose to sign up for, eh? Not that you necessarily get to run. Yah, sure, it can get "entrenched". But more often than not that's a good thing - while not perfect, "entrenched" is pretty good. Da best troops in most districts are the ones with long-term, dedicated, experienced Scoutmasters. Not sure why anybody would want to make 'em less stable with term limits. Usually turnover causes all kinds of problems and conflicts. As long as the leaders are still havin' fun and still giving their time freely, let 'em stay! That experience is invaluable. Beavah

Won't let me edit... Make that apology include: And I apologize for using a live human as an example in any event. I agree that is not a courteous thing to do in public. Beavah

Yah, as I mentioned, the original poster wrote, among other things, that "it teaches them that they are not to be trusted and it is also arrogant of the Troop. " That sure sounds like griping to me. But if I misinterpreted, mea culpa. My point was not to attack da original poster, but to illustrate one possible "other side of the story" to all of those who joined in on attacking a fellow scouter. So I apologize profusely if in any way I misinterpreted or wrote poorly or was in error. And I'll send a personal private note to the original poster as well. Now, here's an interestin' question.... Will da other posters who attacked scout leaders who they didn't know also apologize to everyone? I at least "witnessed" the parent's words personally. Nobody here "witnessed" the scouters actions. For all we really know, the troop in question did everything right. It is the SM's prerogative not to approve a particular MBC, especially if he/she believes the counselor or camp isn't following the full set of requirements or the BSA's standards. For all we know, the troop's position may have been stated clearly at the pre-camp meeting (but the dad didn't attend) and in writing in the pre-camp mailing (but the dad didn't read it), and to the scout at camp (but he really wanted to try riflery for fun and the counselor generated a printout because that's his job, even though there was no SM-signed blue card). As Lisabob points out, there's a LOT of stuff that a new parent gets flooded with, and it's hard to absorb all at once. Takes a year of seein' things in action before they're really understood. And if we're all to be judged based on whether our troops have a communication failure with a particular family, then I reckon we're all "ignorant morons" . How 'bout it, folks? Beavah

I would however be in extremely displeased if a troop denied a scout a shooting sports MB. Around here, it's most common for SM's from very active, effective troops to limit a few summer camp MB's. First Aid is common. So are badges like Citizenship in the Community which shouldn't be offered at camp in the first place. Shooting sports isn't really an issue. But if a unit had an excellent in-troop archery or rifle instructor, where's the harm? The boy does his qualification rounds at camp, but gets a double-check and extra reinforcement on firearm safety and handling back in the troop, because da troop cares a lot about making sure that's done well. Up here in da great white north, it's fairly common for Boy Scout aged lads to go hunting, and be using a rifle in non-range environments. How is a kid harmed by gettin' an extra dose of safe handling checkout that isn't done immediately after the original instruction - so that it actually has to be remembered for somethin' longer than 10 minutes? I've been at camps where the archery instructors were either inept or just overwhelmed. Now I'm fairly well known 'round these parts, so I took 'em over and recruited a few other folks to help. The young "counselor" was relieved. But that option doesn't help an average unit. Point is, the place to start is to begin by imaginin' our fellow scouters are good guys and gals, and that they might actually have a good reason for doin' what they're doin'. Beavah

Not every parent who questions a "questionable" troop policy should be labeled as a "Griping" or helicopter parent. Perhaps they just want to know. Yah, OGE. Nuthin' wrong with a parent asking questions... or as J-in-KC mentions, every troop can do a better job with parent communications. But if yeh go back and read the original posting and thread, we have "This seems very unfair to the Scout as it teaches them that they are not to be trusted and it is also arrogant of the Troop. " That's not a parent asking questions. That's a parent griping. And when yeh read further, it's clear that the primary gripe is about his kid gettin' awards. That's helicoperting. A scout is capable of askin' his PL/SPL/SM and following up, eh? It's the boy's award, after all. But let's say it was a real question, framed more respectfully. When someone comes with a question to you in person, how often do you respond "well, that other person is a flaming arrogant moron who should be shot?". That's the courtesy issue. It's bad enough when people who saw the game holler at the coach or the referee. We here in the forum didn't even see the game and don't even know da players and we're calling for the coach's head. Worst sort of adult behavior imaginable. Are you saying as long as a unit is not losing numbers leave them alone, they must be doing something correct? Do you remember the turf surfers? Yah dan, there are a very few situations where it's important to pass along information to folks who are responsible for oversight. Severe safety issues, perhaps. Adult criminal activity for certain. Use of the awards program or outdoor program or (as in the other thread) youth leadership program? Hardly. Even when we're in one of those very few situations, like Joni and the accusations of sexual activity on a campout in still another thread, we take the time to figure out how to respond respectfully and appropriately. We ask more questions, to gain a better understandin'. We engage thoughtfully, and try to appreciate the views of the "other side" which we don't have. We don't just start hollerin' and calling people names. Dat's the real issue. Beavah

Do you think the "people in Texas" and at the Council will view this as a success story? Of course not. In fact, da DE might lose his job if he has a couple of those. Loss of numbers of youth served, loss of FOS dollars from those who left. Fewer kids receivin' scouting in any form. All these "line in the sand" "what about a simply awful troop" arguments to me sure look like ego-driven straw men, and pretty judgmental to boot. I'm doin' things right, everybody who does different is "wrong" and should have their head lopped off and fed to da parent BBQ. It just ain't the reality in the field. The reality is there's all kinds of different units, with different strengths and weaknesses, and mostly caring but overworked adults. It's possible to find real fault with any unit. And it's possible to find real successes. And there's a natural tendency of new folks and outsiders to notice da weaknesses first. But it ain't fair, or kind, to comment on anyone's weaknesses until yeh know their strengths. Do I wish all units were better? Sure. But that's based on their outcomes not on methods or tactics. The best units for kids are the ones that keep their eyes on the prize and are willin' to try any changes to procedures so as to do better at developin' kids. Do I have the human resources to make 'em be better, or to replace a SM who gets so focused on some program thingie that he forgets (or never understood) the goals? Nope. Lop off that head, lose that unit, lose those kids and others down the road to scoutin' opportunities. There is one thing, though, that should be a line in the sand. It is dead wrong, poor parenting, and harmful to children to show lack of respect for (or undermine) the other caring adults and authorities in a kid's life. Doesn't matter whether it's your spouse, the schoolteacher, the coach, the game referee or the SM. Teaching character, citizenship, sportsmanship and all that, eh? Doin' it that way always undermines da goals. Beavah

Hardly any of the boys except those in a real stretch run for Eagle work on any MB outside of summer camp or a MBU setting. This is sadly true, eh? But it ain't the real Boy Scouting program. Yah, KC, it goes even further than that, in that the instructions from National to the councils are that the list of MBC's is a restricted document, because it is the responsibility and prerogative of the SM to select the counselor and approve the boy for a badge. Da boys aren't even supposed to have access to the contact information for other counselors, to avoid an "end run." That's become more important as some CO's have different YP and program rules that require counselors to meet additional CO requirements. Beavah

Am I to understand that you are advocating that this Scout should just accept that all the work on the merit badges he earned at summer camp was for naught . No learning is for naught. No time spent out in the outdoors having fun (da MB's were fun right, not just boring school classes?) is for naught. Is the badge important? Or is it da knowledge that's important? Which do we want to teach kids to value most? because his unit is failing to follow National Advancement Policy on earning Merit Badges We've got no information that's da case, eh? Or any of the other accusations yeh make about a group of fellow scouters who we've never met. Do we believe scouters are good people who care about kids, or do we believe they're all wicked sorts, so it's safe to assume a scouter we haven't met is out to hurt kids? Do we even know if da camp is actually following the BSA's guidelines? There's plenty that don't. And let's say when all is said and done we still believe da SM in this unit blew the call. Then we're left with "What's the appropriate, courteous, best action for a parent to take when he/she disagrees with the call made by a spouse, teacher, coach, referee, or SM?" I submit to you that the best action to take, the best lesson to teach their child, is to support the other caring adult in the boy's life even when they're wrong. Cloth patches for skill recognition are really a very small thing when all is said and done. Are they really worth setting the caring people in a boy's life against each other? Is that really the best lesson? I say no. Unless we're willing to go off and take over every troop where there's a complaint, we have to accept that there will be troops of different quality and troops that just do things differently. I guarantee that if I visited the troop of anyone who posts here, I could immediately identify several ways in which they were doing things contrary to what is written in some manual somewhere. Is it OK if I tell one of your new parents that because you do XXX you must be ignorant and they should pitch a fit at your next committee meeting or with your DE? We should all do unto our fellow Scouters as we would expect them to do for us. And we should help new parents learn to support coaches, referees, teachers, and scoutmasters, because that's good parenting and what's best for their kids. Beavah

Yah, hmmmm.... In da original thread, a unique Scouter.Com phenomenon occurred yet again. A new parent to Boy Scouting and a Troop came with a gripe. Dat's natural. All of us experienced scouters know that new parents have a lot to learn about the program, have quite an adjustment to make from Cub Scouting, etc. We also know that a fair number of 'em have a focus that's pretty exclusively on their own kid, over whom they "hover" and for whom they "attack." Now comes da Scouter.Com part. In response to this new parent, da first half dozen or so messages light right up and pour fuel into the Attack Helicopter, while throwin' our fellow volunteers under the bus. The Scoutmaster must be an "arrogant moron." The troop policy is dumb. File an appeal all the way to National. Da troop must be doing other bad things because I disagree with them on this particular thing. Go make a stink at the next Committee Meeting or with da CO. HOLY SMOKE, people! What are we thinking?? So now da wound-up new parent figures his kid has been really injured by havin' to spend an extra meeting to get his MB done, and that his troop's leadership are evil. So, armed with what we've told him, he goes off to da district and the troop committee. People take sides. Arguments start. Factions form. Haven't we all seen this, at least all of us who do anything with unit support? Da new parent who feels their troop is "wrong" and launches an attack? There's a posting about a unit coming apart because of adult squabbles about every other week. Da end result is the same... lots of boys get hurt. Units split and fold. Scouting opportunities for dozens of boys and families are lost. All for want of Courtesy. And a willingness to believe the worst of our fellow scouters, rather than the best. Shame on us. Everybody here with any time in da program knows that summer camps vary a great deal on MB quality. There's plenty that use youth counselors and CIT's with little oversight, and plenty that don't even come close to following the requirements sometimes. Heck, we just recently had an example of a camp where the Wilderness Survival counselors burned down a forest during a fire ban. Every experienced scouter here also knows that the best possible MB experience is a personal experience with a local mentor and expert, where a boy, in da words of the BSA's own policies "receives maximum benefit from the knowledge, skill, character, and personal interest of his counselor." Dat's what the program is supposed to be, at its best. If we begin with da assumption that our fellow Scouters are Trustworthy, then this seems like a unit that wants to fully use da advancement program and have the highest-quality experience, even if a camp is cuttin' corners. We certainly don't know any different, eh? We haven't heard from our fellow leader, only from da griping parent. New hovering parents are always goin' to present data in a way that makes their son look better and the referee look like a dolt. Mature adults recognize that referees and Scouters have a tough job, need to make hard calls sometimes, do make mistakes, but do the best they can out of love and care for kids. They deserve our support. Even when we might have made a different call from where we sit. Beavah

Yah, so, here's another good opportunity to show everyone how to behave like good-natured adults supporting a kids' program. A wonderful chance to be an example to all da Little League Dads and Helicopter Moms. Yeh could go stomp and fume and complain to da unit commissioner and file appeals and tell the folks who are givin' the most time to the troop that they're arrogant and stupid and you as a new person know better. If yeh file an appeal, yeh might win... and then what? Your kid will have a couple of patches that his peers figure are "fake" and will have burned his bridges with his troop. Or you could say "when I joined this program, I bought in as a supporter, and da SM is da referee. I want my kid and other parents to see that I support the referee, even when I disagree with the call." And then help your son to finish up those Merit Badges in a way that's acceptable to the troop. It'll probably only take another meeting or two, and your son may very well get a lot more out of it than sittin' through a class with 15 other boys at camp. And sometime along the way, after you've simmered down, yeh can buy da SM a coffee and have him tell you why they're doin' it that way. And if you're respectful, maybe he'll also listen to your thoughts about how it can be perceived by a new parent. Everyone leaves happier and wiser. Your call, eh? What example do you want to be to others? Beavah

Yah, Loki, what F said, eh? What you're saying is that there's a troop with 60+ happy boys and families that enjoy what they're doing and are doin' it successfully enough that they have no problem recruitin' and retaining kids - so much so that they have a waitin' list. You even joined it because it felt so nicely organized to you. Now as da new guy, you want to tell 60+ families that they're all wrong and you know better and they should do it different and be less organized. Good luck with that, eh? I figure "tarred and feathered" is da likely outcome. Yeh got what you were lookin' for. If you've decided you want something different, don't expect them to change. Just ain't polite or courteous. You're the one who has to make a move. Or be willing to settle in quiet dignity for "less than perfect" if your son(s) are getting something worthwhile out of it. If you opt for da latter, yeh might through your own polite and generous volunteer contributions be able to bring about very gradual change. Beavah

which is a structured experience Yeh mean an adult-structured experience? B

Yah, I might just be a curmudgeonly old fart, eh? I'd say... 1) Encourage the parents to get into a class on proper parenting and kid nutrition. 2) The patrol cooks what da patrol cooks and there is no other food allowed on campouts. 3) If because he isn't eating/drinking adequately it's unsafe for him to go on the hike/play with his patrol/etc., then he sits out. Takes just a few times before kids adjust to different foods and tastes. Doin' yer own food thing just ain't polite, let alone unhealthy. When you go to someone else's dinner party, yeh don't bring your own food. You eat what's provided and say "thankyou." Beavah

Yah, velcro for patches (in a uniform-matching color) seems like a fine idea, eh? I think the move toward less insignia reflects Oz's notion that da BSA wants to move to a "game" uniform for the outdoors rather than a "dress" uniform - and move to something that kids will actually wear. Now, as far as codin' goes, forget color coding or bar coding. I think each uniform should have a reprogrammable RFID chip. We could make small, portable readers available so anyone interested could quick-zip the person's entire Scoutin' history for review - training, awards, experience, unit number(s) and positions. Even optional medical history in case of an emergency. B

The truth is that it does happen. Yah, LongHaul, yeh got me there! I thought I was clear that National would never do that, and that a district or council advancement chair should never do that 'cause it ain't their role. But yer right, just because it's goofy doesn't mean that some goof won't do it. Speakin' of goofy, I'm real interested in Lisabob's question too. What in da world happened in that district that made every MBC declare "in-troop only" ?? Beavah

Yah, LongHaul, I was mostly just tryin' to correct some misinformation, not wanting good folks to rely on it. If a boy comes to you and says he was abused by a fellow scout and you have the evidence of his emotional state and other impressions to believe it to be so, yeh should take all reasonable action to protect the boy and assist him in making a report of the crime. I'd say the actions you suggest seem pretty reasonable to me. The real world is just a lot murkier, eh? In this case, there's no boy sittin' there crying saying "I was attacked." There's an oddball adult making accusations based on what on the surface looks like inappropriate contact with youth on her part, with no evidence and no known victim. Dependin' on the state, even if something happened both boys may be above the age of consent. So when dealing with real-world murkiness, yeh call in the people with expertise to help you. That expertise has to be familiar with your state and locality. And yeh should be normally prudent about not repeating accusations against someone yourself. As a YPT trainer, yeh know that the "call the SE" response is only for a kid who is hurt while on a Scouting event. If a SM has a reasonable suspicion that a boy is being abused at home, then he/she should call Children's Services (as either a mandatory or optional reporter), but not the SE. Abuse by parents or custodial adults is "child abuse" under the law, and the immunity statutes apply for a report made to authorities but not necessarily for an accusation made to a third party like the Scout Executive. YPT doesn't make that very clear, does it? That's my problem with BSA YPT and other "short training." It offers procedures (where 95% of the people don't remember the details), but it doesn't provide the reasons and the principles behind those procedures. Those are necessary to help folks understand and remember, and to allow caring adults to make good judgments and decisions. For somethin' like suspicion of an adult-on-youth or youth-on-youth molestation within Scouting, it's proper for a volunteer to call his/her supervisor - the SE and/or COR. Chances are that in your state adult-on-youth molestation is not child abuse. Certainly youth-on-youth isn't. The statutes which require reporting on suspicion and which grant civil immunity for doing so don't apply. It's a "regular" crime. Naturally, if there's clear evidence of a regular crime, we call law enforcement (not Children's Services, although if you call them they will simply connect you with the police). But when yeh just have suspicion of a regular crime, dat's a lot murkier, eh? Accusing somebody of a crime they didn't really commit isn't a good thing, eh? That's why MTM's advice in this case could be a problem for Joni, who really has no evidence at all. And a heck of a lot of real damage can be done by accusing a 16-year-old lad of homosexual battery. So yeh refer the matter to your supervisor(s), the SE and the COR/IH, who are trained, have expertise, can conduct investigations, have access to legal counsel, etc. Let them navigate the shoals, that's why they get paid the big bucks. And that's why YPT says Joni should call the SE. Hope that helps a bit, eh? Beavah Attention: Nothing in the above posting should be considered or relied on as legal advice or recommendation. It is, at best, nothing more than informal education on general principles, as understood by some old fart scouter named Beavah. As the message itself indicates, when in doubt and in any case of this level of seriousness, you should contact an expert within your jurisdiction for professional and/or legal advice.

Careful there, mtm. Yeh gotta understand that child abuse and neglect is a very specific thing. It only involves actions of a parent or guardian (or in a few states, action of another adult serving in loco parentis for a substantive length of time). In most states, even actions of a scout leader will never be considered child abuse. Youth-on-youth stuff, or SM-on-youth stuff might be battery or rape or all kinds of things, eh? But it is not child abuse or neglect and does not fall under the mandatory reporting requirements. Which also means that if yeh do report, you do not have statutory immunity from a civil cause of action for defamation. And of course, in most states, only certain types of qualified professionals are mandatory reporters even of child abuse, and often under limited circumstances. All this is why it's important to bring in da real pros who understand the system and how to properly navigate it. Doesn't change the answer here... Joni and his/her CC should be talking with da council Scout Executive pronto, and pulling in the major players in the CO no matter how inactive they've been. But I wouldn't particularly recommend going to law enforcement authorities in this case with third-hand information. Beavah

When the boy applies for Eagle National gets involved and the Council Advancement Chair/District Advancement Chair can "question" MBC's from out of Council (usually only eagle required). Nah, dat just doesn't happen, eh? Da reality is that if a troop has filed an Advancement Report form (paper or on-line) so that there's a MB listed in ScoutNet, everything's good. National will never get involved with second-guessing that. Nor should a Council or District Advancement Chair, because that role in verifying da Eagle Application they have no say over - it's the responsibility of the Council Registrar. Only issues that come up are when a troop hasn't submitted an advancement report or the council or ScoutNet lost the record. I have shared this rant before, but I think a troop-run MB program circumvents the intent of the MB program and short-changes the boys. I agree with scoutldr on this, eh? Unfortunately, one new issue we're seein' is that some CO's now have more strict Youth Protection rules than the BSA. Their kids can't use non-CO MBC's, because they don't meet the YP standard for the organization. Part of modern life to be afraid of other adults I guess. Beavah

Yah, I'm all for minimizing the delay here. I wouldn't take any action on the boy's leadership position, though, until you've pulled in da big guns. You want the entire response to this to be tightly managed - nobody in an official position in the unit should be actin' independently. Under no circumstances should another campout occur before you've dealt with this, though. Packsaddle, one of da realities of the BSA structure is that DE's aren't often/usually very experienced in these "high stakes" situations. That's why the materials always direct scouters to report serious incidents directly to the SE. I second the others who have given that advice. Best to make contact directly with the person most able to help. I reckon that's about all we can do to help yeh, Joni4TA, beyond our prayers and moral support. On the upside, hard as it is, when yeh handle a tough situation well you build up a lot of respect and trust in your parent community and in the council. Beavah

Yah... hmmm....on da surface, that diagnosis does not seem to me to preclude learning how to swim. Swimming is not a fine motor skill, and muscle tone reflects use and is improvable with fairly reasonable effort. Workin' with Aspergers kids, I have noted that water sports tend to be much more difficult for these guys to cope with than land-stuff. Too dynamic/too much going on/sensory overload type stuff. Perhaps someone more in-the-know could comment. I'd suggest one-on-one swim coaching in a patient, controlled environment that allows the boy to focus. But I bet he could get there. And dat would be a nice lifelong gift to give the lad, eh? Beavah

Yah, dasmith, good question. Yeh see scout accounts much more often for troops than you do for packs. That's because kids of boy scout age are learning to manage money, starting thinking about jobs and such, and usin' accounts in that way is a fine learning tool. You've had some great answers. The only thing I'd add is your comment that a scout-accounts setup would be a "more balanced and fair system." Not sure why you'd think that. There's nothing at all unfair about people contributing their talents, strong and weak, to make the pack go. If there were, then the Cubmaster and Treasurer and Den Leaders deserve the biggest chunk of dough in their scout accounts, because they're clearly puttin' in far more time and effort than the most successful popcorn seller. For that matter, so is the single mom who works two jobs but always re-arranges to get her kid to meetings and to do what she can to help. I've seen debates about "who did more" and "who should get more" gnaw at the goodwill within committees or even blow up into adult fights and pack splits. To my mind, you want to keep the "all for one, and one for all" ethic front and center in everyone's mind, and avoid the "who should get more" thing at all costs. Beavah

Yah, Aquila. Interestin'. Since HillBilly got his answer, care to share a brief outline of one of your troop's in-house summer camp plans and how it works out for yeh? I'd be interested, having never seen one "live." Beavah

I would ditto but it would just introduce more apostrophes to da world

Yah, as a result of Global Warming, apostrophes are breeding more rapidly than they used to, eh? Pretty soon'' they''''''ll be e''ve''''r''y''''''wh''''e''re'''''''' B''''''

My theory is that doing summer camp on your own *could* be a great opportunity, but that it would take a huge amount of planning and prior work to be successful. Yah, good theory! Da only time I''ve seen this is with really strong troops that had a lot of internal resources. For those two units, it was a huge amount of work but the boys (and participant parents) really liked it and got a lot out of it. At least by the reports; never saw it in action (tried to visit once but got lost ). I sure wouldn''t want to be goin'' down that road without that kind of really strong unit. Now yeh can also contract out to other outfitters besides the BSA for camp - it''ll usually be more pricey, but it might get you new options or opportunities in your area. Kind of like what we teach in PowderHorn for crews. Otherwise, I''d stick with tried and true. For variety, go to a scout camp across country and add some fun touring along the way. Kudu I think has run his own camp or knows somebody who has or somethin'', if I remember right. Leastways, he''s sure to be the guy to yammer about BSA camp not bein'' properly historical or somesuch . He might jump in. Beavah