skeptic

Yep; that is the issue with this whole thing. Blow it out of perspective and suggest it is rampant all over the country. Just not the case, nor ever has been. Hype, hype, hype and negativity where it really barely exists. And for those few that keep suggesting that means I think the abuse that has happened is okay because it is not rampant. Please keep it to yourself.

Since when is thirty million dollars a small amount?

Similarly, I come back to the utipian idea that each case would be dealt with based on its merits with outside, but unvbiased by money or power of position, and the payouts be, "fair and balanced". Weeding out the grifters and viewing known factors is the fairest and best way, but due to the time frames and simply the changes in society that is almost impossible. All victims, or survivors if that is the better term, should be treated with fairness based on known a verifiable factors. None should be "paid more" just because they have the ability to bring the most pressure or stretch the legal boundaries. Reality is that this "should be" scenario is likely not possible. So, we need to reach the best results possible, while doing whatever is viable to move forward with the best barriers and rules in place and regularly monitored, at all levels. And it should be under constant review and bend to best practices, including those outside the BSA. Of course, until somehow the larger system that allowed these crimes, as well as poor decisions under stress or other outside factors like legal threats and family choices for the time. All of these played, and might, unfortunately play again with the reality of societal interactions. Focus on the protections and vie for the least failue with constant review and vigilance. Then work the program and make it better for the youth and others interacting. No absolutes, but we can get close. We cannot depend on government or even a rebuilt legal system. Ultimately it is on all of us.

Thank you for that comment. I hope that they have already recognized this issue and it is part of "Council" having instructions in this regard. I am speaking with our own council tomorrow and will have additional info. The good thing, fingers crossed, is that the Methodists are still on board to be a CO, just with better protection.

Part of this notes that the registration element is separate from the Charter, and that is supposed to happen still if necessary. Councils should have the details in regard to that; again as per the article.

This just posted in the United Methodist's Men web site. Charters extended through June to allow time to work through the myriad remaining concerns. https://www.umc.org/en/content/united-methodists-extend-bsa-charters-through-june-2022

Sadly, unless a major revamp of the legal system is also made, disreputiel legal people will prey on this as a feeding ground. And, because of our societal perversions, not just sexual, people will respond negatively and loudly against the BSA and other YSO's perhaps. The can of worms will be even larger and less useful in carrying on needed real youth work and growth. Somehow we need, we in the sense of the broader society, to find a way to take the hype and knee jerk condemnation out of anomalous problems, but also realistically react and protect. As I have suggested over and over, the positive of BSA far out strips the negative, but our society focuses on the drama and most salacious and ignores the overwhelming positive. How to combat that is possibly even a bigger challenge.

I have read it, and the it is reprehensible. And that is why the efforts to improve YP should continue. But, it is not the norm, and never has been. Weaning out the worst that prey on others, whether in Scouting or elsewhere is a constant challenge. It is also not an abosolute possibility. Back to the old adage of the baby and the bathwater. But it is your option to refuse to look at the worst as the norm. But, as noted before, I cannot make you get beyond whatever demons push you to ignore the larger and more complete picture. Please just stop painting others with your same negativity.

You seem to be one with one of the broadest brushes and no periperal vision. Many of the ones in your "pervert files" were there for other reasons, as has been noted many time. Reality is that it is a societal problem. I did not say survivors should be overlooked, though I am sure you read that and just choose to ignore it. Your comment about what leadership just indicates to me that you have little or no real grasp of how beneficial overall Scouting has been for the larger society. We are talking about the youths that have stepped up and used their positive scouting experiences to better themselves and the larger communities. Instead of focusing on the small (but real) percentage of problems, we need to take the best parts and magnify them. It is obvious that you prefer to just ignore the preponderance of positive contributions to not just our country, but other countries that have been rendered by Scouting. Hate is almost as bad as abuse, and it does almost, or maybe sometimes more damage. Perhaps you might recognize that. So, please do not belabor your self with accusations and sputtering exagerations. Thank you for your comments; I just wish you could see beyond that cloud of negative and recognize the positive and opportunities that are there with efforts going forward.

Me thinks you paint far too broadly and darkly. I seriously would doubt the numbers suggested, though because of the era involved, and the societal responses at the time, many poor decisions likely "could" have occurred. But, the picture you would have us see does not include the efforts very early to find a way to head off undesirables, as they were recognized. It has been pointed out that while it was not nearly enough, at least some efforts were made far earlier than was common for the times. On the other hand, much of the hyperbole is based on little or no evidence of the level purported. Based on the historical material known, Scouting played and still can play a major part in better commuities. The supposition that there was an organized plan or effort to abuse youth by BSA on the national level seems ludicrous and far fetched. Were there episodes of abuse. That is also likely a given, as Scouting afterall is still part of the larger society. The difference is that most likely the bad players were less common there, especially given the multitudes that passed through in the first century, than in the broader society. Yes, crimes occurred and some were not dealt with honestly and openly. Again, not unusual for the times. Was there a problem? Yes, but I fail to believe it was the magnitude that is played in the frenzy to paint BSA as some are doing. Should there be some penalty to BSA for episodes of very poor decision making and maybe on occasion actual coverup? Certainly, but again, the balance should be found and the mistakes used to make these things less likely to happen. Will they possibly reoccur. Sadly, that is not probable since it is worse in the larger society, though we should see it far less of it. Vigilence and constant review, as is part of the proposals now being suggested are necessary and should be implemented. At the same time, efforts should continue to offer the good of the foundational tenets, and strengthen them as well. Our society needs is begging for the leadership and service BSA has tendered in the past, and still does. But, the yellow press and a few misled or simply "bad" players ignore the positive and push the negative. And our jaded society points fingers, even as they ignore similar or worse crimes against youth and society in general perpetuated by those with power and positions to be far worse than BSA or the various clergy. We cannot shove things under the proverbial carpets, but we can recognize that the lumpy carpets of society are not restricted to youth serving groups or the spiritual/religious organizations. Yes, BSA and other youth groups can do better and should always strive to do so. But it is time to spread the efforts to address the even larger problem that secrets the bad players that prey on BSA and others. I will now step down off the stump again. Please understand that I am NOT denying recompense is due in some manner to the survivors, and I am not suggesting that we just ignore the bad management and decision making. Only pointing out that BSA and others are still part of the larger society, and that the bad players are lurking there, waiting for lack of vigilance that will allow them in.

This gets muddier as we go. Not the legal guru, but I want to know what is the status of the vetting of the huge amount of last minute claims? How much of an effect does that have, and would it not benefit the survivors by weeding out outright fakes and overblown claims? Want to get this in the rearview mirror so we can move forward locally without too much worry.

Without complete rebuilding of the legal system that got us here little will happen without waste and actual balance.

Three things come to mind initially for me. Living in California where a new Volunteer law took effect this year, we have to adhere to that state madate. It is not overly expensive, but there is a price factor for the fingerprinting and background check. The councils within the state are supposedly developing a plan to to include all councils, but it is still not presented to us. This is on top of any other background checks already done through BSA. It is my understanding that some other states also have some type of similar law on the books now. These, it seems to me, should be joined in a nation wide statute which makes them all alike and offers their implementation as inexpensively as possible. Having overlapping and possibly conflicting laws and checks in varous state will be confusing at least, and possibly very problematic in some cases. How does the California law and therefore requirement effect a Scouter simply coming to the state on a trip, with or without scouts? Similarly, in other states with their own versions of this? Second, what will be done to combat the real issue of parental/guardian lack of concern and "real" adherance to the parental/guardian part of YP, discussing in depth with their children, and they themselves actually being aware and informed? Right now we all know that the "sign off" is often just that. These then are the same parents that scream that their child was not protected, even though they never actually addressed it. To me, this seems a major concern, not just in BSA, but in society as a whole. People simply choose to ignore things unless they are suddenly confronted with them directly. Too much of the "int is not my problem or conern" attitude. Finally, I find it possibly contradictive to talk about protecting the survivor, while at the smae time putting up memorials of some kind and offering a "pin" or something. Granted, the wearing of such an item would be a choice by the survivor, but does it really serve a purpose? Should its meaning, like square knots, be open to youth wanting to knwo what it stands for? Is that the place of the survivor to explain it to a minor, possibly without their parent/guardian approval? Lot of vetting before implementation of some of these things, or so it appears to me. With our legal system, the same one that has put us here to begin with, are we opening up another "legal" morass for the less than ethical lawyers? And, we still are not admitting that no matter what is done, there will be bad actors that somehow get by.

Some of the earliest Rockwells also were published in the Redcross Magazine. Also, a few were on the Saturday Evening Post, and one or two other peiodicals. He was a prolific illustrator in his prime, and so some there was a wide variety of periodicals that on occasion has something from him, though The Post and BSA publications had the most due to his early connection when just starting out.

Today is the official anniversary of the BSA, 112 years.While it has evolved and is evolving still, and it has struggled often, mostly due to it membership being real people and burdened with human foibles, it continues.Just think if the tenets most of us here know were strived for by all, and not made fun of, how much better ou society might be.

It is hard to understand how the Girl Scouts can not be embarrassed by this. The BSA claims on the basic symbols of Scouting predate any the GS might declare. Their sour grapes is somply their own fault anyway, as they did nothing to meet the long term demands of many girls to have programs similar to BSA. It has been obvious from almost the beginning that Lowe was not fond of BSA, partly because she was not fond of BP or the Girl Guides. The desire of some girls to become Scouts can be documented to the girls that showed up at the first international gathering in England, telling BP they wanted to be Scouts too. This of course let to Guiding. Someone with more ability might determine if there is truth to stories that GS more than once threatened legal action when BSA planned to develop products similar in nature to the Cookies of GS, such as cakes and nutrition bars with Scouting symbols. What is really crazy is that while they are complaining about the entry of girls into the BSA, they refuse to recognize that many of the girls joining BSA are also Girl Scouts and continue in their program. So, explain please how that is damaging to them. They also need to not forget that in today's society, their disparaging comments about the abuse issues will likely just bring more digging by some, and that they themselves might become a target. They are surely not immune to bad actors, and by pushing the envelope, they may get kick back they do not want. It is sad that in much of the rest of the Scouting world, girl groups are able to work with boys, even to some extent in countries with very strict laws regarding women. What does the infer in regard to the GS leadership? Now the other noted things may or may not have credence, though they also might just be more of some of the devious pursuits of some legal opportunists to ride on the wave. In the end, we are back to the convoluted and often questionable legal system we allow to continue in our country.

Very possibly a separate thread, but I continue to shudder at what in my view is a major problem in our society. For over a century, one of the things that has made our country, and its myriad communities successful and viable has been the many types of non-profit groups that have reached out to the less fortunate and also taken on much of the community interactions for overall societal improvements and solutions. Now, due to our messed up and terribly skewed legal system, that basic tool of community interaction and helping others is being bludgeoned by a constant threat of legal problems. I realize that there are a few very negligent or misguided, and even some simply perverted individuals in all of our communities. But, they are not the norm, and while errors in judgement and non recognition of problems has always been possible, and even likely in the larger groups, it is not the intent of these service and outreach efforts. But, now, due to this focus on finding the deepest pockets to hold accountable, even though they were not directly responsible for the bad actor(s), though some think they should be culpable just for their poor oversight or blinders. This continued overreach, it seems, is now making fewer and fewer groups willing to offer help and service, either due to fear of legal issues, or just the cost of protecting against that fear. And, fewer individuals are willing to any longer put themselves our there to work within the communities, sue to the same fears. That is not to suggest that actual predators and bad actors are not to be held accountable, only that the overreach, mostly for exhorbitant monetary punishments, has knocked that Scale of Justice off its pedestal. Even faith communities, ones that have for over a century tended to the communities with free or inexpensive meeting places and volunteer aid are drawing back. They no longer can absorb the cost of a bad actor being on their property due to long time community options of their facilities. Perhaps I am more naive than I might realize. Or, maybe I am just viewing things from the wrong generation? I have gone on and on about balance, and that certainly applies. So does the reality that there are indefinite shades of grey between black and white.

Location, location, location.

Truly on point, especially the first few sentences. I would add, just from my own reading and long time overservations, that just getting parents to review YP in reality would be a huge positive thing. Still, I am not sure how we get past the still too common "stigma" if there is an incidence, and the family chooses to either not let it go public, or they even choose to not pursue it all. Add to that, as too oftens still, power of money and politics if the perpetrator has it. But, just actually paying attention and religiously following the alread in place rules would keep most predators away, as they would know it was not worth the effort.

The fact that many of the IV files have little or nothing to do with abuse, or at least sexual abuse seems pertinent. By labeling them as they were, it leaves exactly that impression in the minds of many. Of course the media loved it, and loves it still, and uses it as often as possible to mislead. There is evidence the files actually did in some incidences help stop abusers, though unless there was good reason to contact National, nothing was computerized, so it likely easily fell through cracks. That still seems to ask, for me, what was being done to attempt to respond to these issues by anyone else at the time? Little, if anything appears to be the answer. So, the files are forced into the public view and allowed to be mined. Yet, considering the number there, few have proven to be smoking guns; though apparently some have. Again, the additional question is what other persons or agencies may have been aware of these things at the time? How much did the societal taboos affect things at the time. How many families may have felt the need to not bring things public, nor to fight the practices of the time? So many other factors involved. And we still come back to simple statistical things that indicate, based on incomplete data to be sure, that BSA did better than most at the time. There is no question that errors in judgment occurred, and unfortunately a few really heinous cases. And that should not have happened. But that does not make BSA, as an organization, a purposeful predator. We always come back to the fact that in the minds of many, somehow NO abuse should ever be perpetrated, and that is a great goal. But, it is not a real possibility in reality, and even the loudest should recognize that. At the same time, the overwhelmingly positive effect of the BSA over the past 110 years has been positive and its tenets are in sore need of larger acceptance within society. But logic and balance, there's my favorite workd again, does not seem applicable to a few, and that is not something any of us can combat. Our goals ahould be to come to the fairest conclusion as possible, and to continue to work on stronger barriers to those who will act in predatory ways. We certainly see that progress being made; but it will only be as good as those that will pay attention and follow the rules. Again, human nature may come into play, and when it does, the response needs to be open and immediate. For my part, I will do my best to no longer label certain, what I feel are bad actors in this drama. That does not mean I will not still see them that way, just not pass it along again. Do understand that I in no way feel the survivors are not due a settlement. I just would like it to be in step with the lady and her scale.

I suppose it depends on your definition of damage. But, he is the one that labeled the IV files the perversion files early on. He has interfered with the ballots, and he has apparently intruded on other communication of which he is not a part. Most importantly, he has done all he can to paint the BSA as the predator, rather than those that actually were. His actions very likely have put the larger case in jeopardy. Just my interpretation and impression, so take as you will.

Fair enough; but that will not cure the damage he has done, and may continue to do, with his game. As it almost seems like one much of the time. "Poke the bear"; and maybe I have become an annoyed bear?

Fascinating is an odd word for him. But my words for him are not acceptable. Suffice it to say, he certainly reflects much of the worst that causes the legal profession to be seen in such a negative light much of the time.

Can someone perhaps clarify how this new California law affects Scouters that are registered in other states and visit Califonria? Also, how will it apply to things like the Reserve charter entries, especially college? For that matter, outside of Scouting, how will it apply to youth groups from other states, or even out of the country?