dkriss Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 Our troop has had a policy of not allowing boys to be a Den Chief for a parent's den. I'm getting some grief about this. I found several troop policys on the web that agree with this. Most don't say anything about it. I want to know how other unit handle this issue. Thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SemperParatus Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 dkriss, Welcome to the forum. Our troop does not have any policy to that effect. Some of our Den Chiefs have worked with the parent's (or little brother's) den and some have worked with dens where there were no relationships. As long as the scout is engaged and reflective of his experience, IMO it does not make a big difference as to who the den leader may be provided they are willing to work with the scout to make the position meaningful. What is the purpose of the policy? Is it out of a concern that the parent den leader may be too demanding on their own son, or too lenient? Or some attempt to foster independence? If independence, do you have a similar policy to forbid SM son's serving as SPLs, NSP ASM son's serving as Guides, etc.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneHour Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 I don't understand why this would be a problem. My oldest is the Den Chief for my second son's Webelos 1 den. The boys in the Den enjoy having him. If preferential treatment is what people are worrying about, I'm not sure about others, but I'm harder on my oldest if he does not execute his duties as a Den Chief. He helps plan the meeting. He keeps them busy while I tend to the parents with the Pack information. He teaches them. As an example, at an AoL ceremony three weeks ago, our den was tasked to be the Color Guards at the last minute. I gathered the boys in the Den together. I told them, "All right, listen up guys, we are Color Guards tonight, I want you to listen to Mike." I promptly left to tend to other details. My son took over and got these guys rehearsed and performed beautifully. Now, if the boy is not mature and is a handfull, first of all, he should not be a den chief, because you don't want to have another kid to watch over and of course, being in the parent's den will only makes it worst. The parent/den leader should be very objective in allowing/teaching the boy to lead the den. He can do it if he is allowed. It could be that the parent may not know what is expected. Maybe the difference is that I am an ASM and I know what is expected of the position. The parent/den leader should be given the position duties and expectation by the SM so that he/she can follow. Usually, if this occurs, the parent/den usually follow the instruction to the letters. 1Hour 1Hour Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falcon93 Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 I agree with what has already been said. We do not have that policy, but I don't see where there would be a conflict of interest. Either the Den Chief is doing his job or he isnt. That will ring true no matter who the den leader is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleInKY Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 Falcon pretty much summed it up. Either the boy does the job or he doesn't. The fact that his parent is the den leader or brother may be in the den could have an impact. You have to be the judge as to whether you think it would work. I've got some parents that I would never put their sons in this role because I know that the parent would do all the work. I have other parents who would probably be harder on them. From a convenience factor, I can't think of anything better. Often older brothers are drug to den meetings or left home alone anyway. This allows him to put that time to good use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FScouter Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 One of the aims of Scouting is character development. Interaction with other adults helps to achieve that aim. Boys have plenty of time to interact with Mom and Dad outside of Scouting. Opportunities with other adults are more limited. If a boy wants to be a den chief, I'd steer him to a den where his parent is not the DL. I don't think the convenience factor is relevant to the mission and aims of Scouting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkriss Posted March 8, 2005 Author Share Posted March 8, 2005 When I talked to the previous Scoutmasters, their main concern was that perents will make their son a Den Chief simply because he has to be there anyway. The boy will not be used in the way that he should and he will turn into the den's maid. He will simply set up and clean up while mon or dad run the den meeting. I realize that this isn't always the case but it is hard to monitor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScoutNut Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 Turning into the Den's maid is possible no matter if the Den Chief is related to the Den Leader or not. If the Leader does not know how, or care to, utilize a Den Chief properly then the boy will not be able to develop his position as fully as he should. Unfortunatly this does happens. How do you plan on monitoring the Den Chief if he is working with a Leader he is not related to? However you plan on doing it, it should work the same whoever the leader is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneHour Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 dkriss, hence the education of the den leader of the roles and responsibilities of the Den Chief as well as the interaction that is needed and expected from the Den Leader to the Den Chief. FScouter, the convenience factor may not be relevant to the mission and aims of Scouting, but it does make a difference whether or not a boy stays in scout or not. Take my family for example, we don't have the luxury of the ability to live off my income alone. Both of us work and sometimes we trade off as to when either of us can stay and work late while the other tends to the kids scouting, soccer, swimming, etc. With three boys, you bet that we will "pool" them up whenever we can! If scouting were to tell me that you can't bring anyone else but your cub or your scout to the den/troop meeting ... so choose, we'll choose for them to stay home to where I could do the same job of teaching them the ideals, but I get to keep an eye on all three of them. In our Pack and Troop there are a lot of single parent with more than 1 child. So, you bet ya convenience is a factor. Interacting with adults doesn't require the boy to without his parents. My sons interact with the adults in the troop and in the den/pack enough to get the aims of scouting across. I would agree with you whole heartedly if I were to have only one child. I apologize for this. This issue has twirked me the wrongest way recently. The swim team that my sons were in last two years decided to hold their swim practices in the mornings in the summer. This pretty much locks my boys and several of their friends out of the only sport that they love. It was done because a stay-at-home mom got electected to the director position decided that it is the way that other parents and swimmers wanted! The kicker? There is a second swim team in the neighborhood that practice in the morning! Ugggghhhh! 1Hour Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleInKY Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 I've seen den chiefs work and I've seen them fail. The two primary factors are very obvious. (1)The ability of the den leader (who is used to an adult-run system) to effectively empower and use the den chief, and (2)the maturity and ability of the den chief himself. As for the convenience factor, OneHour expressed it very well. While it is not a part of the scout law, it is a reality that we face. Families are facing competing demans. If a scout is qualified to be a den chief, and the scoutmaster and den leader agree that it is a good fit, then take advantage of the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScoutNut Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 "I don't think the convenience factor is relevant to the mission and aims of Scouting." Of course it is. Why wouldn't it be? My son became a Den Chief because he wanted to help me with my Tigers. After helping run gathering & games for their Tiger year he moved on with "his" Den as their Den Chief. They crossed over to Boy Scouts at B&G this year. He still helps me with the Tigers gathering & games when he can. Just because something is convienient does not make it against the mission & aims of Scouting. My son had opportunities to work with many different Scouts (Cub & Boy), Leaders & District staff because of me. His SM does not want to help at any District activity & so never tells the boys of these opportunites. My guy goes, works his back end off, has a ball & gets transportation there & back because I'm there too. There is nothing wrong with the "convenience factor" helping boys to find opportunites to learn & grow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torveaux Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 Wouldn't such a policy violate the sacred rule against adding requirements? I think in most situations the boy would learn more if he were Den Chief in another Den. The whole picture needs to be taken in when these decisions are made. There is a great deal of potential good and potential bad and only the boots on the ground can really make an informed decision. I say nix the rule and just have a guideline that prefers such placements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkriss Posted March 8, 2005 Author Share Posted March 8, 2005 I don't think it falls under "adding additional requirements". I think it is closer to not allowing the boys to use a specific merit badge councilor because he doesn't make the boys do the requirements properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acco40 Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 How about this, at one time I was the SM for my older son's troop and a den leader for my younger son's Cub Scout den. My older son was the den chief for that den too! Talk about adult association limitations ... Yes, it is difficult for children to see mom or dad as SM or DL and not just mom or dad. One thing that I used was dual den chiefs. The older boys had a peer and it also prevented theden chief from having to work directly with his brother! Years later my younger son was a den chief for a Webelos den with no "nepotism" involved. As the Kentucky Eagle stated - the ability of the den leader (who is used to an adult-run system) to effectively empower and use the den chief is critical. My younger son's den chief didn't really give him any duties except for an occasional "tell them about Boy Scouts" request. The WDL did not have the Boy Scout background and a willingness to let him lead. Many DLs don't really understand the program. Many SMs don't either! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FScouter Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 A Den Chief for a den led by another adult gets interaction with an adult other than his parents. This is a good thing. A Den Chief for a den led by his parent does not get this interaction. He is still a Den Chief, but misses out on part of the experience he might otherwise get. The convenience or lack thereof for the parent/DL is not relevant to the quality of his Den Chief experience. If however, the convenience factor determines whether or not the boy is a Den Chief at all is another matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now