David CO

There is a very simple answer for that. They don't have do merit badges if they don't want to. The advancement program is completely voluntary.

I guess it would depend on the religion. I had an LDS student who always wore a shirt in the pool. He didn't think it was proper for boys to expose their upper torso in public. I don't know if that was just him, or if it was part of his religious training.

We had a similar discussion at our meeting just last week. It has become a common practice in some places to wear pajama-like clothing in public. In my day, this would have been just as unacceptable as going out in public in your underwear.

The scout leader certainly has the right to ban a skit. Just don't be surprised if the boys respond by refusing to do any skits from now on.

When I started a new unit, one of my top priorities was to find a SPL. I was fortunate enough to have a couple of experienced scouts transfer in from another unit. As an first-time scoutmaster, I really needed a good SPL to lead my unit.

It is well written, but I don't agree with it.

That is what In-School Scouting was all about. It wasn't about bringing scouting indoors. It was about taking education outside.

BSA prohibits many of these conversations. This is where an In-School unit had an advantage over the traditional unit. I am a Health teacher. Since it was part of the school curriculum, I was allowed to discuss any Health class topic with my In-School scouts.

Perhaps this is true if you grew up with the lax standards of the 80's or 90's. Not so if you grew up in the 60's or earlier. We had a more rigorous curriculum and much stricter behavior expectations. So did Scouting. In order to have any less pressure put on them, my students would have to be sound asleep.

We used to have a program that sounds very similar to what you are talking about. It was called In-School Scouting. There were designated In-School units. My troop started out as an In-School Boy Scout Troop, but morphed into a traditional troop when BSA dropped the In-School program. As with Lone Scouting, the In-School Scouting program got little support from the execs who didn't like the program.

Scouting should be his activity. It should be something he wants to do. It shouldn't be something that he is pushed into doing because his parents feel it would be good for him. He gets plenty of that stuff in school. As a scout leader, I sometimes got kids who didn't want to be there. Sometimes it was because the parents felt it would be good for them. Sometimes it was because the parents wanted a cheap babysitter. Either way, I felt used. I enjoyed sharing my hobbies with like-minded boys. I did not enjoy, or appreciate, being saddled with uncooperative, whiny kids who had no desire to join-in and cheerfully participate. Pushing a kid into scouting does a disservice to both the boy and his scout leader.

I have declined many honors. I'm sure you have too. We simply don't have the time or the inclination to accept all of them. This is especially true if the honors have duties/work/cost attached to them. The same is true for your son. Support his decision.

Don't make him go.

I see this all the time at school. They like to team up the special ed. kids with our high performing students. They are basically using our best students as unpaid teacher's aides to get the test scores up. This is very unfair. If students complain about it, they get lectured about not being discriminatory and unkind towards the special ed. kids. The only way to get out of it is to let their own grades/behavior drop to a point where they won't get selected anymore.

Yes, I have had to deal with this situation, and there is another obvious way to handle it. Don't take him.

That's a good pitch line when doing public fundraising, but in reality, it is absolute nonsense. Father Flanagan was wrong. There are lots of bad boys. Some of them are bad to the core. Some of them are incorrigible and extremely dangerous. Parents expect us to use good judgement and screen out some of those boys. We shouldn't just take everyone. The Chartered Organization has the right to reject boys who don't meet their standards for participation in the unit. I understand that the Brits don't have CO's. I have no idea who, if anyone, would make that sort of decision on their side of the pond.

It says the council vote was 18-0 in favor of the merger. I am always skeptical about a unanimous vote. In a fair and honest system, where people are free to express their opinions, there is always someone who disagrees.

Nor should you. Ideally, the COR acts under the direction of the IH and Chartered Organization. It is not always appropriate for the COR to disclose or explain everything to the unit leaders. Some discussions are kept in confidence with the IH. It is possible that the COR was acting at the request of the IH. She might be stepping in because the IH asked her to step in, and she might not be happy in that role. Just a thought to consider. When she steps down, the IH will appoint a new COR. Let the new COR decide how things will be done as far as the keys, passwords, etc. are concerned. These would be appropriate decisions for the new COR to make.

I agree. It probably shouldn't be on a backyard patio/deck with a gas fired Weber grill. So long as the cookout uses the same equipment and skills as what would be typical on a camping cookout, any outdoor setting will do.

I get asked this all the time regarding sports. Can the boys on a team get together for an unsanctioned practice. My answer is no. If they do it, they can be kicked off the team. The school could be penalized. It is the same way when I was on the school board. Can we get together at Starbucks, have a cup of coffee, and chat about the weather? Yes, but we couldn't talk business. If we did, it would be a serious breach of the Open Meetings Act. We would be breaking the law. I have a relative who is subject to the insider trading laws. He has to be very careful about talking about business outside of work. I would be very concerned if I had scouts/parents who were trying to get around the rules like that. It would not be teaching the boys the right values and habits. I want them to learn good habits to take with them into the adult world. I sympathize with those who are frustrated with the tangled web of rules being put out by BSA. I also support the right of Chartered Organizations to confront/oppose BSA on some of these rules. But don't be sneaky about it. Sneakiness is not an attractive character trait.

Sometimes it is the insurance company who is actually doing the suing. Many insurance companies will have provisions in their policies allowing them to sue, in the policy holders name, to recover medical costs they paid out. We had this happen at our church. Someone slipped and was injured on some ice. The insurance company sued the church to recover the health costs they paid out. The pastor was very upset/hurt that a long-time parishioner would sue the parish, until one of the parish council members explained to him how it works.

It's always a possibility, when you expose your children to other religions and cultures, that they will choose a different path from your own. It is the risk you take by raising confident, intelligent children. Despite their Catholic school education, about 1/3 of my family has chosen a different religion. It was their choice. They will believe what they believe. I'm a little disappointed by it, but it's not the end of the world.

Good question. Does a boy join scouting to be served by his community, or does he join to provide service to the community? If the boy has the right attitude, would say it is a bit of both. Isn't a scout leader helping the boy while he is helping the boy to serve his community?

Agreed. I would add that a fair-minded reading of the DRP would conclude that the imprecise language was intended to make the terms "group" and "organization" all-inclusive. BSA didn't want to leave anyone out. It is meant to include all who instruct on the subject of religion from the largest cathedrals to the smallest storefront missions. BSA did not make a distinction between those religious groups and organizations who charter units and those who do not. Both are included. It would be a mistake to conclude that BSA, in its imprecise language in the DRP, meant to specifically exclude Chartered Organizations. If a CO is a religious group or organization, it is certainly one of the groups and organizations mentioned in the DRP. The imprecise language in the DRP was intended to be inclusive, not exclusive.

Actually, that one word does change the fundamental point.