Eagle1993

If you are being targeted for reporting a possible YPT violation, that is a serious issue. I think it goes even beyond the initial case. Unless the output of the investigation indicated the parent lied, I cannot imagine this was an appropriate action. Unfortunately, that has been reported in the past here. Note BSA does have an anti retaliation policy for employees, but I have yet to see one for volunteers. https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/controller/BSA_Whistle_Blower_Policy.pdf @ThenNow @MYCVAStory ... do you know if the youth protection changes from bankruptcy require BSA to include an anti-retaliation policy?

Bullying-What_is_Bullying.pdf (scouting.org) Reporting_Bullying.pdf (scouting.org) Myths About Bullying (scouting.org) This is how BSA defines bullying and how to report it. An Imbalance of Power: --> yes, if it was from an adult, there is a clear imbalance of power Repetition --> Not clear. It sounds like it may be repeated. To me, that is the big difference between bullying and just someone being a bit of a jerk. Given what you said, it probably warrants reporting to SE for an investigation to get the full story .. especially if this SM/ASM has been reported in the past by other scouts. It is hard to give much other guidance as it really does require someone talking to all involved.

Depends on how many Bitcoins the foundation was invested in. I think the BSA will stay in Ch 11 as long as the current plan is on the table. They have the liquidity and the foundation will back them up for a few months if needed. The real danger to BSA if this plan is outright rejected (either by the bankruptcy court or fairly quickly by district). In one of the hearings, BSA lawyers indicated the foundation will only loan BSA $ if they are out of bankruptcy. If the foundation sees the CH11 plan rejected, I wouldn't be surprised if they decide they need to save their $ for future BSA and let the current instance burn to the ground in Ch 7. Just a guess from the hearings and looking at their financials. BSA said by end of summer, my guess is they can last longer but not long enough to start a new plan from scratch.

Interesting ... perhaps the judge was reading scouter.com. In terms of multiple appeals, I think it really is pretty simple. If the bankruptcy court approves the case, it will go to district court. However, the plan will start implementing. If district court wants to stop the plan, they actually have to act fairly fast. If it takes them a year+ to review, most issues will be moot (basically, it will be too late to make much of an impact). So, I think we will know pretty quickly if the bankruptcy is over for BSA. Yes, there could be issues within the trust in the future, but I expect it won't take too long (perhaps a few months) to see if district is going to reject the plan. I'm expecting she either approves or has a very detailed rejection that essentially approves everything but a section or two (that can be cured by BSA). I saw a recent ruling Gulf Coast Health which was rejected due to overly broad releases (the judge indicated she would have approved the plan with narrower release language). Note that case was also in Delaware. The areas I thought Judge Silverstein was most concerned was the release language and the TDPs. I'm not sure how she handles this (perhaps she can still approve but in her ruling emphasize how she came to approve). I do think if she was going to outright reject the plan we would have seen that by now.

Part of me is a bit suspicious of the BSA court case here. I wonder if this is a method to try and get GSUSA to drop their own case and remove their claim in bankruptcy court. The $16M is nearly identical to the $16-$17M GSUSA is seeking in bankruptcy.

The GSUSA was arguing that they were not treated fairly in the BSA bankruptcy. The GSUSA was claiming that they have a good case and think they will win in appeal (or at least could win). Then they will seek a fees, etc. GSUSA estimated $17M impact but BSA only offered insurance that would pay a very small fraction of that possible outcome. The BSA's argument was that GSUSA is very unlikely to get $17M. The judge didn't buy BSA's argument. So ... GSUSA's main ask is that post bankrupt BSA backstops the plan. If GSUSA wins $15M and bankrupt BSA plan only gives them $500K, post bankrupt BSA pays $14.5M. I'm not sure if the judge will agree to that, but she didn't like BSA's argument against the request. She did lean a bit on the fact that GSUSA's case was dismissed, so that helped. Not sure where she will land on this.

My guess - it would have to be weeks. Lock all groups in a room and work through language ... understanding that the alt path is likely CH 7. I haven't seen any update from the court. The BSA finalized voting ~March 11 and it has been over a month since the hearing ended. Purdue Pharma (which was a big bankruptcy) took from Aug 2 (voting end) to Sept 13 to get a judge's official ruling but the judge indicated he would approve Aug 27th. (So they knew approval would occur <1 month after the vote). We are over 2 months since the final vote and a month since hearing closed and no clear sign if this will be approved. Is this 1+ time since the hearing closed typical? For those closer to this case, is the mood/discussions that the judge is likely to approve?

@Eagledadsimply said girls are better at planning and boys may feel intimated and back off. He never said that means women belong in the kitchen (nor even eluded to that). https://www.nm.org/healthbeat/healthy-tips/battle-of-the-brain-men-vs-women-infographic Perhaps this + the differences in development (female brains mature earlier than male) could lead to some behavior differences between boys and girls in a mixed setting. I read what @Eagledadwrote. I think there is an argument to be made that boys could be better off within a single gender troop with only male leaders. Again, the GSUSA argues for this as well (except for girls). There is some science backs up the differences in brains and I think there could be a logical conclusion that there could be benefits in single gender settings. I am ignoring the fact that gender in and of itself is a complex topic (for example, in my Troop I have one scout that doesn't identify as a boy or girl). I land on the side of coed Troops. For my son, and the Troop I lead, I think coed works. I think seeing female and male leaders who share their interests is great. Seeing powerful women benefits the boys in our Troop. Having girls that can canoe, lash and fish right with the boys helps as well. The girls and boys work well together in scouting situations. So, that is the choice I personally made for our Troop (we have a very closely linked Troop and both male/female leaders). That said, I haven't done much research to determine if there are negative consequences and if those negatives outweigh the positives I have seen. I barely have time to run a half way decent Troop. I think given the differences in development & brain ... there could be an argument made that single gender scouting is better overall.

I never said this ... and I don't think anyone has. If you are going to debate a topic, please do not utilize a strawman argument. I personally support having girls in BSA. My daughter was in Cub Scouts and as of now plans to join Scouts BSA. I have worked with girls in BSA and have found most of them to fit well into the program. My daughter is also a girl scout and has enjoyed that program (and GSUSA has been very adamant about keeping their program single gender). That said, I think @Eagledad has valid points and there is neuroscience that indicates male and female brains are different. Also, I do think there is valid concerns that boys are having greater issues in today's society than girls and we should consider the impact on them by opening up BSA to girls. I fully support boys only units and will be interested to see how they differ long term that coed ones. No one thinks (almost no one) GSUSA is evil or a bigot for thinking their program should be for girls only. I will also say GSUSA discourages male leaders. They want female leaders leading all girl units and are open about it. They see this as key for the development of girls. I think there is an argument to be made that male leaders and all boy units could benefit young boys in a similar manner. I have been impressed with our female leaders in my Scouts BSA unit. They have gone to Philmont, canoe trips and have been critical to many of our outdoor activities. I personally have included both girls as scouts and female leaders in our Scout unit(s) and will continue to do so. However, the experience I had as a scout (with only boys in our Troop and male leaders) does seem different than what I see in my current Troop. Is it better or worse? I'm not sure, but it is different. The one aspect I believe is nonnegotiable is that scouters who are not fans of girls being in BSA is that they follow the scout law when interacting with girls in the program. In my experience, 99% of scouters and scouts do that regardless of what opinion they may hold.

I haven't been watching this thread (was pretty active this weekend in and out of scouts). However, I do think neuroscience does clearly indicate brains are different between boys and girls ... even at birth ... and they definitely develop differently. Is that due to epigenetics, genes or hormones ... the answer is likely yes. Regardless, we do know there are differences in brains between genders. Now, it doesn't mean that every female or every male fit a single gender specific behavior. I think the science indicates that differences in behaviors in a single gender exceed the differences between genders. However, if you talk in generalities, I think you can say there are differences in the "average" boy and "average" girl and their behaviors. I am not aware of the same type of studies that would point to race or religion in terms of brain development. I do agree we have to be careful in this area. I think there are girls that are more into risk taking and adventure than boys and boys that are better in terms of organizing than girls (I see it in my own Troop). However, in general, there are gender differences. How we address those is up to BSA and the units that implement the program.

Then BSA will go Chapter 7. They brought this up multiple times. They do not have the liquidity to continue in bankruptcy after this summer ... and a completely rejected plan would likely take 6 months to a year to get through the process (plan, voting, confirmation hearing, approval). If national goes CH7, then expect many local councils to be immediately sued and a large number to file for their own bankruptcies. LDS and some COs will also get sued. I'm not sure if the BSA can survive, but it will be ugly for much longer. Now, I think a more likely outcome is that the judge either approves outright OR rejects but on narrow grounds (i.e. something minor around the releases, injunction, etc.). If it is narrow, I do think BSA can quickly work through an update to the plan and survive in Ch 11. In the end, we will have to see what district court says as well. As you say, I do expect DOJ will fight as they see any non-consensual non-debtor releases as an abuse of the bankruptcy court system.

We did a similar camp style during Covid, and honestly, I think it was the best summer camp we attended. The Troop & patrols bonded. Yes ... many more partials and less complete merit badges, but I think it was a better style and likely closer to aligning to the methods of scouting than most summer camps. We patrol cook which helps provide an experience outside merit badges which is challenging and fun. The Troops/scouts I am most surprised by and the ones that hang out at the trading post with cell phones plugged in just watching videos (or playing games). It is not many scouts (as a percentage) but I always wonder at that point why even come to camp.

ATVs are at our summer camp ... so I think they must still be allowed.

Could you add in "Antifa" into your comments? I almost have OAN BINGO! The DEI & Citizenship in Society MB are very mild. They are not on any sort of fringe of political stances. The early release of C in S did have some concerning content, but that was removed. So far, I see no impact to day to day operations of any unit from DEI. The biggest impact I have seen is council JTE which was actually created back in 2019 (prior to DEI). So, for 1 line item in JTE, the "goal", at the council level, is to recruit your minority ethnicity at least 45% as well as you do the majority population and this was added back in 2019. Is this "woke"? I think, scouters who are attempting to be "helpful" and believe in the program, should be working to get more communities involved in scouting. I think our country would be much better off if we double or triple the number of scouts from minority backgrounds in the program. I live right next to a urban area ... I would love to see thousands of youth in scouts, getting exposure to the outdoors, performing service projects in their community, etc. I don't see this as a bad goal at all. Now, how you obtain that goal is a risk. I know this was attempted back in the 1970s and they changed the program. I haven't seen that yet (other than another citizenship MB ... which there were already too many of). If that occurs (such as camping no longer required, ending patrol method), then I absolutely agree that your fears are valid and it would be damaging to everyone. That is what I think we should be watching for vs worrying about being "woke". In the end, I don't think DEI will be the driver of program changes. I think plenty of suburban/exurban white kids (actually their parents) are driving the program to be day long merit badge clinics and summer camps just focused on advancement. As someone who loves the potential of scouting, I see that as a far more serious threat than DEI (at least to date).

Welp... April came and went with no decision. Any estimate from the court on timing for a ruling? Quick update on BSA net unrestricted liquidity ... it ticked up a bit in March. Net Unrestricted Liquidity February 2020 234 March 2020 238 April 2020 240 May 2020 235 June 2020 224 July 2020 208 August 2020 191 September 2020 190 October 2020 188 November 2020 184 December 2020 175 January 2021 189 February 2021 163 March 2021 172 April 2021 176 May 2021 175 June 2021 167 July 2021 154 August 2021 142 September 2021 145 October 2021 141 November 2021 139 December 2021 140 January 2022 141 February 2022 118 March 2022 121

I would rather see names. Perhaps Dr. Kennedy for taking the lead on the TCC to help improve BSA's youth protection. If they want to do something, then give actual names and statements on what was done. Otherwise, it seems like platitudes. I won't come down too hard on the BSA. It is good they did mention survivors as they were awarding individual's whose goal was to minimize payment to survivors.

There are several "books" as well. YPT/barriers to abuse ... Enforce 100%. G2SS... Attempt to follow 100%; however, I'm sure there has been some violations. Program books (various handbooks, etc.) ... each Troop has their own spin on the program. Enforce the procedures/rules your Troop follow based on what the PLC/adults agree upon. In your case, the scout isn't following your Troop's very reasonable expectation, then they have the choice to leave. Now, I was ranting a bit tas I was backpacking with my Troop this past weekend. I was complaining to one of my ASMs that I am seeing less and less engagement from scouts in our overnight activities but far more in day only merit badge sessions. Another leader indicated he has heard similar feedback from Troops in our area (merit badge sessions "selling" out but camporees, overnights lacking attendance). The ASM said ... well, perhaps the market has changed and you need to change with it. She said that perhaps scouting should just be merit badge clinics and summer camps going forward. I didn't like that answer, but I don't know if I have a better one. How does this apply ... if you build a Troop program which results in no scouts wanting to be in the Troop ... well, then what's the point? The example you gave seems pretty clear. However, if there are rules your Troop has that your PLC doesn't find valuable and just turns kids off of scouting ... then it is ok to reevaluate the rules. The key is that the rules should be enforced uniformly across all scouts. That should be clear to the SM, CO and all involved.

Update to Scouts BSA joining requirements opens the door to more young people (scoutingmagazine.org)

The 18 - 30 year old age group is prime to help if approached. One of my biggest complaints of the BSA is that they seem to ignore that demographic. When I was in my 20s, I didn't have kids, had a TON of free time (compared to now) and was volunteering for various organizations. BSA never reached out (and I never even thought of it). I volunteered for sports clubs & FIRST robotics. If BSA reached out, I could have been a district volunteer or even unit. I'm convinced that there is huge potential in that group.

My thought was primarily Cub Scouts. They have Squirrels (4 - 6), Beavers (6-8) and Cubs (8 - 10.5). I wonder if by keeping these groups in smaller age groups, they may see less drop off when they go on to Scouts (10 - 14.5). I do wonder how the patrol method works by moving 14.5 year olds to Explorers. Most, if not all, of my PLs are >14. My SPL is 16 and my JASM is 17 (Eagle).

I have forever been a fan of UK scouts. Their transparency, their smaller board, their media, etc. I also like how they separate their age groups. Their result ... 3% of available youth in scouts. BSA is at 1%.

For my kids, the only way to be 100% safe from CSA is to keep them in my house under constant supervision. However, that doesn't sound like a great way to raise a kid or for a child to grow into a mature adult. So, yes, I have to take risks. They go over to friends' houses where parents are home ... there is no guarantees those adults are safe. Yes, I trust all of them, but I also know that people with dark intentions can cover them well. My kids are in various sports. There are potential chances for grooming/assault. I am a coach for one of the teams so I know the training/rules in place that help prevent it ... however, there is always a chance. BSA/scouting is similar. They have rules, which if followed, should greatly reduce the risk of CSA. However, yes, there is still some risk. I could go on with school, clubs, etc. Going back to the question ... would I stop participating in scouting if it prevented 1 case of CSA. Well, I would also have to stop sports, school or my kids going to friends/relative houses (which is probably the highest risk right now). I am not willing to raise my kids in a locked down state. That means, yes, I would continue to participate in activities that could, possibly, have some children horrifically impacted by CSA. I think the real question, the key one, is if BSA can be made safe on a relative basis vs other activity. I personally believe BSA rules and training do make it as safe if not safer than similar programs and it will get better post bankruptcy. It won't be perfect AND there could be BSA units out there that are not safe. As a parent, I would recommend watching your BSA unit to ensure they follow barriers to abuse. If they do, I would trust them with my children ... even knowing there is still that remote chance something bad could happen.

We absolutely will. I didn't attend but the scouts had a blast. My son told me that they date back to the 1950s (?) and they hold up better than commercial planes as there are less flight hours and more time spent on maintenance. The engines were GE and 1980s vintage. Also, I didn't know that the fuel they provide comes from the planes fuel tanks (they basically share their own fuel). He took a ton of pics on the planes including the lay down position for refueling. It was supposed to be a young eagle's event but too windy.

Many members of our Troop went to a National Guard base 128th air refueling wing to tour and earn aviation merit badge (the airplanes were outdoors). Next weekend, we have a backpacking trip ... only 5 scouts out of 44 signed up. We have more adults interested than scouts...

If this is picked up by Netflix it will get a major audience. If it stays on a website, its distribution will be limited. I'll have to see the whole documentary before I pass judgement, but BSA should be prepared to respond.