In the Dumpster

[bigbeard]

I am the fairly rookie Scoutmaster (approx. 2 years) of a smallish Troop, and I need some advice. During a recent meeting, two scouts tossed a third into a small trash dumpster at the Church hall where we meet. Based on information gathered, it started out as fun for all hands, but at the end, the happily(!) unhurt victim was upset. All three of the boys have a history in and out of the troop that preceedes my involvement with the troop. The real problem is the parents of the victim. They are very active in the local Cub program (Cubmaster, Den Leader), solid volunteers, good people, with maybe a few skeletons in the closet (but don't we all!). Their son was left behind in school last year, and his relationship with the rest of the Troop is weak. We didn't see him much at all this summer, his participation when he is there is quite low, and he dosen't seem to want to be there. Still, he is a good kid and he belongs to us, and all of the Troop would like him to stay and move ahead. In any event, the incident has inflamed the parents to the point of calling the District, Council, and a number of the friends they have throughout the Scouting community. They are also contemplating legal action. Their intent is to make certain that the boys in question are banned from Scouting/blacklisted from the District/the Troop is branded as NO PLACE any parent should sent their Webelo, and so on. The feeling I get after long discussions with them is that keelhauling might be too soft for this pair of 12/13 year old villians. I should also point out that the incident took place at a time that I was NOT providing adequate supervision - older Scouts only, no adults, and only nearby, not close enough to influence the situation.

 

My goals are this: (1) to impress upon the "dumpers" that they crossed the line between fun and danger, and discipline them effectively, (2) to stand between them and any unreasonable consequences the victim's parents might bring to bear, and (3), settle this with as much satisfaction as is reasonable for the parents, as they are good people at heart and strong supporters of Scouting.

 

My ideas on the first point include an appearance at this week's Committee meeting to explain themselves in a formal and somewhat mock judicial setting, a discussion of the Scout Oath and Law, which I feel with be effective with both of these Scouts, formal apologies to the victim and his parents, and Troop justice in the form of positon forfiture, camping KP, and the like. I may not be the most experienced SM, but I'm there every week and do my best for the boys, and I think this is the correct way to handle the whole thing. I have no real idea how to accomplish the second and third of my goals. The parents of the boy have every right to be upset, they are only protecting their son after all, but sending a letter to every Scout- and Cubmaster in the District, naming them, and calling the boys hooligans and the Troop an bunch of animals (an exageration on my part, but a possibility) is too much. I intend to offer my resignation to the Committee chair, (not to the parents, they are not members) for my part in all this and my lapse in supervision, but that still doesn't do anything to protect the two evildooers. If there are any older and wiser heads out there who have a minute for some advice, I would be very, very grateful.

[jmcquillan]

bigbeard,

 

It sounds to me like you're right on track. You've admitted what you see as your part, or failure, in the incident, (and that of other adult leaders who were there, don't take the full blame alone), and you've set good goals to resolve and settle the issue. I applaud your efforts so far.

 

As you seem to have observed, the adults who have taken you to task have a "my son is never, ever, wrong...he's a perfect boy" mentality. That's fine, most parents do sometimes. But most parents would also realize that kids are kids, and they'll do the damnedest things if they can. Even when told not to. Even if told by Mom & Dad. So, let your goals #2 and 3 lie for now, and concentrate on goal #1. By doing so, your second and third goals may be satisfied. If not, you'll be in a position to point out the efforts that were made to apologize and remedy the situation, and how those on the other side refused to accept those apologies.

 

I don't know if I'd go so far as to do the mock judicial thing, but I would, indeed, schedule a time to sit with the two who fell victim to "too much fun"...let's not call them criminals, yet. I would sit with the boys, their parents, your Assistant Scoutmasters, and your Committee Chairman. Forget all outsiders, they're unnecessary, and will only muddy the waters that YOU want to set clear. Set you goals for this discussion as you already have, to talk about behavior and how it relates to the Scout Oath and Law. Talk about the good and the bad. Talk about cosequences of ones actions, even if, and especially if, the situation was fun that got out of hand...that is very important for the boys to understand. This discussion might not end with the consequences being dictated at that time, unless you're ready to do so. But you and your other leaders should discuss what options you'll accept, and what those consequences will be. Oh, and remember, we're talking about kids here, so capital the punishment that the "other side" might be looking for is NOT an option. Neither is kicking them out of the troop, if you're description of the two is accurate. This whole thing needs to be a "learning" experience for the two, and the troop, not just punishment.

 

Your "in the troop" consequences aside, which should be tempered with knowledge of age and potential future good, one thing that I've found to work well in the past is a letter of apology, from the "wrong" side, to the "wronged" side, and his parents. The letter should be sincere, and should express hopes that "friendship" can be the true mark of the future between the parties. The letters should be addressed to the "wronged" scout, and his parents. Read it, if you can, before it is sent.

 

I'll offer you a story I heard, about a Scout in my area, who performed an act quite astonishing, and quite public.

 

During a local Memorial Day parade, it seems that a Scout from a troop, which shall remain unnamed, was marching with his troop and came in view of the local public access TV cameras. Those cameras were being operated by Scouts. Scouts from his own troop, it seems. This particular Scout thought it might be "fun" to give his buddies..."the finger"...totally and completely forgetting the viewing audience. Need I say more? The outrage was enormous...a Scout...doing that? Calls to the local Coucil office were made, that troops reputation was put on the line, and the leadership was called into question.

 

The situation was resolved "in-house", it seems to the satisfaction of all...by "in the troop" consequences...and letters of apology. Letters were sent, by the "wrong" Scout, to those who had been "wronged". The SM, all the ASM's, the Troop Committee, parents in the troop, and...it was publicly read, by the Scout, at a following Troop meeting...out loud, for all to here. AND...a copy was printed in the Editorial Section of their local newspaper...Scout name withheld, of course.

 

That Scout is still with the troop, I hear. And has become quite a different boy. The "learning" experience made a difference that mere punishment would not have. And most of it happened because of a letter of apology.

 

There you have it. My suggestions. I wish you well and good luck. And, by the way, forget the resignation thing. You're probably much better than that.

 

[eisely]

bigbeard

 

I agree with jmcquillan that you seem to be on the right track. Assuming that the apology along the lines suggested is achieved, I doubt that any more punishment such as loss of position would be warranted or effective. Such additional punishments could drive the two offenders out of scouting altogether.

 

I am not sure that I would offer my own resignation in your shoes. Far worse things have happened with less drastic consequences.

 

I am more concerned about the legal action the parents are contemplating. This would be an act of vengeance with no real purpose other than making the parents feel better about themselves. What are these parents really trying to achieve? There has got to be a lot of unhappiness in that household over the school situation, and this may be what the shrinks call "acting out". Is one of the parents stronger on this than the other? Is it possible to have a rational conversation with one of the parents? Everybody is entitled to their own opinion and these parents may now be convinced that the troop leadership is awful, but if they intend to leave their son in your troop, such legal action is hardly consistent with that intention. A good attorney would advise them to forget a lawsuit. Where is the harm that cannot be remedied with the apology?

[andrews]

I would concur that you should not hold yourself overly responsible. While you are supposed to provide a safe environment, you cannot play "mother hen" over the boys all the time. They need to learn how to act properly, even when not in your direct sight. I would probably work on that more, after the immediate need is dealt with.

 

Brad

[bigbeard]

Thanks for your good advise and fresh perspective.

 

I am not sure what the parents are trying to achieve in all this. Maybe as you suggested they are trying to use this incident as a hook to hang up baggage they are not dealing with very well. His school problems weigh heavily on them, I'm sure, and maybe they feel this incident might be more than his somewhat fragile self-image can bear. Knee jerk reaction to a threat to their son?

 

My relations with the both of them have been cordial and cooperative in the past. Recent co-location at Camporees and an outstanding Scouting For Food colaboration have allowed the Pack and Troop to get comfortable with each other. Perhaps that's why the situation is so puzzling.

 

I have had conversation with both parents (together via speakerphone) to try to work through the situation, about 30 minutes or so. They indicated that they would not permit their son to stay with the Troop under any circumstances, informed me of their intentions regarding informing the District Exec. and staff of the situation, and demanding that I commit to throwing the offenders out of the Troop at once. This took place two days after the incident. They also stated they would do all they could (and they are well connected in the District) to see to it that both boys are banned from Scouting.

Is that possible? No felony was committed here, for Pete's sake, no injuries sustained, no malice demonstrated. Will the Scoutmaster wherever the boy goes understand? Should I get in touch with him and present the other side of the parent's version of events? Or maybe simply rely on his good judgement? I admit I am proud of the direction the Troop has taken in the last two years, and do not want this situation to haunt us wherever the parents decide to take it.

 

The Committee meeting featuring this event is this week, so I guess we'll just have to see how it goes.

 

Thanks again.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Rooster7]

bigbeard,

 

This one is a little difficult for me to sort through...Let me tell you why.

 

The facts as stated are - 1) the boy was having fun; 2) even after being dumped was happy; and 3) was unhurt.

 

Given these facts, I have to say the parents of the boy must be nearly insane for pursuing this matter. But there seems to be something missing. Another fact given was the "victim was upset". This is the part that baffles me. Why was this kid upset? Have you asked him directly? Who provided the "information gathered"? Who are the witnesses? Friends of the kids doing the dumping? Or are they friends of the dumpee? Both? I can't believe the boy was upset for no reason. Before you attack this problem, I would suggest gathering more information. You said these kids had a history in and out of the troop. What does that mean? Do these two boys have a history of bullying the third?

 

From my observations of boys in my troop and elsewhere, I can imagine a whole range of scenarios, from the very innocent to pretty darn evil. As stated above, it does sound very innocent. Still, since you weren't there as it was happening, I have to wonder. Suppose the two boys, not liking the third, told everyone they were going to dump the third boy in the dumpster like he was trash. Suppose the third, feeling like there was nothing he could do about it, tried to laugh it off and make it look like he was just one of the guys having fun. Suppose, in reality, the whole thing was very humiliating to him. Yet, in an attempt to save face, he tried to make it sound like it wasn't a big deal (to those witnessing the event). Suppose this was one of a string of incidents involving these boys (since you stated there was some kind of a history). Suppose the parents know the reality of the situation better than you do.

 

I may be way off base. But based on the given facts, I'm trying to figure out why the third boy was upset. This is why I think you may want to do a little more fact finding. If my alternative story comes closer to reality than yours, then the parents do have a pretty strong case to get these boys banned from Scouting.

 

The following is from the Guide to Safe Scouting. Whether or not it is applicable, depends on an accurate accounting of the story. Was this kid a victim or a participant? If he was a victim, just how bad was it?

 

Youth Member Behavior Guidelines

 

The Boy Scouts of America is a values based youth development organization that helps young people learn positive attributes of character, citizenship, and personal fitness. The BSA has the expectation that all participants in the Scouting program will relate to each other in accord with the principles embodied in the Scout Oath and Law.

 

One of the developmental tasks of childhood is to learn appropriate behavior. Children are not born with an innate sense of propriety and they need guidance and direction. The example set by positive adult role models is a powerful tool for shaping behavior and a tool that is stressed in Scouting.

 

Misbehavior by a single youth member in a Scouting unit may constitute a threat to the safety of the individual who misbehaves as well as to the safety of other unit members. Such misbehavior constitutes an unreasonable burden on a Scout unit and cannot be ignored.

 

Member Responsibilities

 

All members of the Boy Scouts of America are expected to conduct themselves in accordance with the principles set forth in the Scout Oath and Law. Physical violence, hazing, bullying, theft, verbal insults, and drugs and alcohol have no place in the Scouting program and may result in the revocation of a Scout's membership in the unit.

 

If confronted by threats of violence or other forms of bullying from other youth members, Scouts should seek help from their unit leaders or parents.

 

Unit Responsibilities

 

Adult leaders of Scouting units are responsible for monitoring the behavior of youth members and interceding when necessary. Parents of youth members who misbehave should be informed and asked for assistance in dealing with it.

 

The BSA does not permit the use of corporal punishment by unit leaders when disciplining youth members.

 

The unit committee should review repetitive or serious incidents of misbehavior in consultation with the parents of the child to determine a course of corrective action including possible revocation of the youth's membership in the unit.

 

If problem behavior persists, units may revoke a Scout's membership in that unit. When a unit revokes a Scout's membership, it should promptly notify the council of the action.

 

[eisely]

Suspending or kicking a boy out of scouting is a unit level decision. If real physical harm with permanent injuries or death had resulted, and the unit did nothing, I might expect the council to intervene. Under the facts you describe it would be an unusually pusillanimous council that would comply with the parents' demands regarding the two perpetrators.

 

Concerning the boy's transfer to another unit, I would say nothing to any other scoutmaster unless asked. I would simply provide the family with the transfer form to which they are entitled and wish them well. Unfortunately for their son, if the parents follow through with their threats and demands, they will only make things worse for their own son, not better. I would proceed with the apology route, even if the parents are unwilling to acknowledge the apology. How do the parents of the two perpetrators feel about all this?

[eisely]

I was composing my second post in this thread at the same time that Rooster7 was writing his. Rooster7 makes some very good points. You probably need more information.

[bigbeard]

Rooster7

 

Can't thank you enough for youy perspective. The rules are there for anybody to read, and must take precedence. The information gathered is from written statements by the boys present - some saw nothing, others everything. One of the offenders confessed his role in great detail - a truthful Scout, if nothing else. The participants themselves will be telling the full story to the Committee tonight, and the Committee will decide the appropriate action. As SM, I'm going to reccommend the course of action that allows everyone to continue Scouting somewhere - Justice would not be served by removal from the program. Apologies and pennance seem appropriate, rather than banishment.

[P_Swigs]

Sorry to take a side-step to this issue, but in my 41 years, I'd never even seen the word "pusillanimous". Is it any wonder Eisely is a Senior member?

 

(It means cowardly - One learns something everyday!)

 

I wish I could add something else to the discussion on this subject. I just hope cooler heads prevail and the parents realize that there is far greater harm from pursuing legal action than from having the boy change Troops.

[Mike Long]

You might want to inform these parents that vengeful and slanderous are not traits of a good scout or scouter.

 

When children go astray we correct them and we all move on. We don't toss them out. What an ignorant idea, throwing a kid out of the single most positive outside influence they may ever know. These kids are in learning mode, they are supposed to do things wrong so we can correct them. I'm suprised when I get a boy who doesn't do things like what you described.

 

Removing a boy from a unit should only happen, as the rules say, after PERSISTENT behaviour that is unable to be corrected. I would also add unrepentant to the description too.

 

To me removal would only be an option if these two were constantly razzing this boy over a long period of time.

 

Frankly it seems that the parents have already solved this symptom by choosing to change troops, but they certainly haven't solved the problem. Kids don't drop kids in the dumpster for no reason. What was the reason? Was he annoying, rude or simply didn't know when to quit "having fun."

You mentioned that they were all willing participants. I'm guessing since everyone was having a good time the dumpers thought that the dumpee (I won't call him a victim cause he's not) was ok with being dumped. The dumpee got upset because he didn't think that the two would actually do it. Sound about right bigbeard?

 

This is not hazing. Hazing is malicious physical and mental abuse dealt out (usually) arbitrarily. This is three kids screwing around and taking a fun time for all too far and someone got their pride hurt.

 

[eisely]

bigbeard,

 

How did the committee meeting come out? Please keep us informed.

[evmori]

I must be missing something. I agree with Rooster to a point. It seems the three were horsing around & it got out of hand. It is also possible the Scout tossed in the dumpster might be the kind who can dish it out but can't take it. I am in no way condoning what was done, but I do feel holding a mock judicial court is a little harsh, not to mention a little out of the scope of responsibility of the committee. It seems to me a good explaination to all three of proper behavior is in order. I also think a warning to the "tossers" if this type of behavior continues something more severe will happen. I might include all three in the warning depending on what actually happened.

 

This falls under the Scoutmaster's responsibility, not the committee and should be dealt with that way.

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

 

 

[FScouter]

One of the three "Aims of Scouting" is character development. We don't accomplish that when we "kick out" a member of the troop. By doing so we would be admiting that we failed to successfully correct the offending boys' behavior. Now it might be different if there have been many, many prior incidents with these two boys, and many, many efforts had been made to correct their errant ways. If we kick the boys out, we have failed them.

 

For the same reason, resigning as Scoutmaster is an admission that you have totally failed, and that the troop is better off without you. Scouting will not be better if you resign, and it won't be better if we start "kicking out" scouts.

 

 

[Rooster7]

FScouter,

 

You said, "Scouting...won't be better if we start 'kicking out' scouts."

 

I agree with your intent (don't give up on the kids), but I also feel kicking out a scout is not an admission of failure. It may not be appropriate in this particular case. However, in some cases, I feel it is not only appropriate, but it's the wisest course of action. A troop of boys should not have to continually suffer the misbehavior of a few. I'd rather have a group of 45 boys in a well-run, well-behaved troop, whereas all of the boys enjoy the program as it was meant to be; than to have a group of say 49 boys, whereas four boys have "fun" and 45 boys can only imagine what a real troop would be like. If the "troublemakers" cannot be reformed relatively quickly, then I feel no shame in seeking their removal.

 

In this particular case, I would only be guessing. As first blush, I have to agree it appears like the parents are overreacting. A warning seems proper and just. Still, if there's one thing I can't stand, it's a bully. If this represents one in a series of incidents perpetuated by the same character(s), then perhaps a mock trial would be appropriate. Assuming the boys have no unusual history, then I agree with Ed and the other posters, the trial would be too much and could definitely create hard feelings with the boys.