National alcohol policy

[cjmiam]

Dave,

 

Pardon me, but I havent posted to this board in a long time and I may get a little long winded, but I noticed your cry for and answer and Im here to provide one.

 

I have referenced my National Camp School binder for camp management and have not found any training materials on the situation that you encountered. I looked for your benefit, but knew it would not be there. Your question as far as what the camp director should have done I think can be answered in a few different ways. What he should have done in good conscience, legally or as a matter of BSA or council policy. I could answer it for what I would have done as a camp director, but that really wont help you much, because Im not the camp director that you are questioning.

 

Each camp as a matter of national accreditation is required to pass certain mandatory standards. There are two mandatory standards that I think your situation may encompass.

 

The first one is M-4, which states The camp administration has written procedures in practice to address possible intrusion of unauthorized persons onto the campsite that include: Periodic review of security concerns of the site. Training for staff, and campers when appropriate, about steps to take in such instances.

 

While the intent of this standard may have primarily been to prevent child abduction and endangerment, I believe persons under the influence are not authorized persons. I would consider those that become under the influence on camp property to fall into this category as well. You might consider asking your council executive to consider including such situations into future written procedures.

 

The second is M-5, which states There are written procedures to be in practice regarding: Release of campers who are minors to a parent or to person other than the legal parent or guardian. Verification of absentees or no-shows with the camp leader at check-in/registration time.

 

I believe this standard was to protect the child from being released to non-custodial parents and to ensure that no-shows are not in an abducted situation. The ultimate goal however is still to protect the child. I believe many camps have a release form that needs to be filed with the camp director whenever a Scout leaves camp prematurely. You will find that this varies from camp to camp. Notice that the policy does not state how it is to be implemented, only that there are written procedures to be in practice. Did the camp director follow the written procedures? You can easily find that out by asking you Scout Executive for the written procedures to Mandatory Standard 5 used to pass national camp accreditation. All these procedures and standards are kept on file during the operation of summer camp and should be made available to you upon request.

 

I doubt whether your council has a policy to address this particular situation. In my opinion the camp director should have intervened, because he is ultimately the one responsible in the Scout Executives absence. The camp director has the responsibility to protect the safety of each and every camper. Hands down that is his/her number one priority. State laws will vary on the camp directors legal responsibilities and liability. However, in the operation of summer camp, the BSA has designated the camp director through the Scout Executive to protect the welfare of the campers. These responsibilities are vast and include everything from basic health and safety concerns, to the dispensing of medication, proper food handling and a safe swimming environment. These concerns are not left up to the individual unit leaders or anyone else. It is the camp directors responsibility to make sure that ALL BSA policies are adhered to at ALL times. Thats not to say that the volunteers shouldnt take the actions they are required to take, but they are not the ones responsible when it comes to summer camp operation. While it may not have been advisable to physically restrain the person, every attempt should have been made to make sure the campers were removed from the situation. I can see the potential for a possible confrontation especially if the Scouts were his kids (which I dont believe you specified). You also didnt state what his BAC which may or may not have been a factor.

 

I hope I have somewhat enlightened you on what was required of your summer camp administration. For your information I was referencing BSA Publication M&P for 02, 2001 Printing. M&P stands for methods and procedures.

[packsaddle]

Dave, I see some good advice here. I would do whatever I could to keep a child from entering that automobile or to keep the drunk off the highway. That said, if you know the boy(s) who rode with the drunk, one additional avenue of redress is to inform their parents of what transpired. The parents have considerably more at stake and will have considerably more weight on many levels.

Eamonn offers good advice...make sure you're right before you make accusations. But if you are certain, proceed.

[Bob White]

Just to make sure I got this right cjmiam, your post when summarized says exactly what everyone else has said to Dave, that there is no national policy regarding the response of the camp director in this specific situation, it would beup to each local council to have a plan.

 

Isn't that correct?

[cjmiam]

Bob,

 

Dave asked if there are guidelines and I advised him that the camp director should be following the written procedures of Mandatory Standards 4 and 5. At least I view the situation as falling under those standards. Not as much 4 as 5, unless the council has it written specifically under 4. You can interpret my response as you wish, however, I do believe that I indicated that Dave would need to find out what 4 and 5 say for his council. If you interpret that as national not having a policy, be my guest. Maybe Dave can inform us all if he found my thoughts relevant or beneficial. But Im guessing that Dave didnt know about either Mandatory standard before I informed him of such.

 

[Bob White]

As you have correctly pointed out M-4 is in regards to intruders, which this parent was not. M-5 as you corectly pointed out has to do with non-custodial parents, which this parent was not.

 

Two fine policies, neither of which apply,except that both put the responsibility for having a plan in place into the hands of the council.

 

So when Dave asked if national had a plan in place and what was it, the answer is that the responsibility for having a plan is left with the local council. So Dave's local council is in far better position to tell him what their plan is then we are.

 

Is that not correct?

 

It's not that I don't want to help Dave, but he wants details from national on something national doesn't have. It's like asking us on this forum what his council service center office hours are. He is in much better position to know that then we are.

 

Heck we don't even know what council he is in and he wants us to tell him his council's unique plan.

 

I just don't know how we are supposed to know that.

[cjmiam]

Bob,

 

I respectfully disagree. I have been on national visitation teams and Mandatory Standard 5 DOES specifically pertain to the release of campers. I simply stated one of the main reasons it was implemented. However, all occurrences of Scouts leaving camp outside of the normal hours of departure should be following these guidelines. And once again, if you consider this a non-policy be my guest. However, I can guarantee you that if your camp sees it as the BSA not having a policy on the matter, they will be conditionally accredited or shut down. So does the BSA have a policy on the matter or not? I think it is clear they do and I informed Dave that he would need to ask for Mandatory Standard 5 from his local council to see how they are implementing it. Geesh, I think Im remembering why I took a vacation from this board.

[Dave Beam]

I appreciate everyones' time and research on this matter. It was both enlightening and informative.

 

As far as the incident, the camp I was in the South Jersey council, which was not in my home council.

 

As far as any and all questions that I have previously posted, the most important thing that I learned was that I now know what I should have done, and will act pro-actively to see the matter resolved in a safe manner.

 

Thanks to everyone, see ya at the Jamboree (Go to Scuba/Snorkeling!!!!)

[acco40]

I don't condone drinking but ...

 

Let's take the same situation only instead of drinking the driver 1) didn't get much sleep and is not well rested, or 2) is planning on driving over the recommended time/distance level "advised" on the tour permit. What do you do?

 

Far more accidents in Scouting occur because of mental fatigue and not alcohol (I have no facts to back this up, just heresay). Something to keep in mind!

[cjmiam]

Far more accidents occur in Scouting because of dull knives. Thats why we have toten chip. And Im quite sure that how to deal with sleepy people isnt in the NCS binder either. Making sure campers get enough rest is however. There are probably thousands of hypothetical questions that you could insert after your what if statement. Of course as trained leaders in Scouting we are suppose to reduce risk and prevent loss. That is the primary reason we become trained. If a shooting sports director feels that someone on his range is not mentally alert, he has every right to not allow the person to use a firearm. If the Handicraft director finds a Scout using a knife without their Tote`n Chip, they can take away the knife and give it to the Scoutmaster. If I as a Scoutmaster felt that one of my leaders was not fit to drive my Scouts safely, I would not allow them to drive. Im not sure my response as what the camp director should do would change a whole lot. It is still the camp directors responsibility to make sure that Scouts are being released from camp appropriately according to M-5. If I found the person to be half asleep, I believe I would have serious reservations releasing the Scout. But that is quite a leap from having a high BAC. Plus it entertains a certain level subjectivity that may not have the same accuracy or legal ramifications as BAC. I think it is important to inform any adult in Scouting that if they do not follow the policies that they may be found negligent or liable if anything happens. It is the individual units responsibility to make sure that they are following the tour permit guidelines. If a camp director found out that a unit was not following the guidelines, it is his responsibility to inform the Scout Executive about the BSA policy violation. And on a side note: I believe in most states inattentive driving is a crime.

[Adrianvs]

"If I found the person to be half asleep, I believe I would have serious reservations releasing the Scout. But that is quite a leap from having a high BAC. Plus it entertains a certain level subjectivity that may not have the same accuracy or legal ramifications as BAC."

 

 

Is not our hypothetical or actual assessment of the adult's drunkeness just as subjective as our assessment of his tiredness? There are indeed means to assess BAC, but no one is claiming to have tested them prior to acting. If there are morally necessary responses to a potential driver under the influence of alcohol (and I believe that there are), then what does that signify in cases of fatigue or tiredness? They are not so different as one might assume. In addition, the assessment of drunkeness seems to be based primarliy on causal behavior alone. Substitute "had been drinking" with "had not been sleeping," and the question becomes much more difficult.

 

What are the responses to an potential driver who shows signs of fatigue and how do they respond to a potential driver who is known to have been drinking, but shows no signs of drunkeness? For some, this may be a moral question. For others it may be decided simply by which is a legal issue. In regards to Youth Protection, however, how should one respond to such a case of endangerment as grave as that of drunk driving?

 

Just some thoughts..(This message has been edited by Adrianvs)

[Bob White]

"In regards to Youth Protection, however, how should one respond to such a case of endangerment as grave as that of drunk driving?"

 

The same as with any other aspect of youth protection. If you suspect that a crime has been, or is being, committed you are responsible for contacting the local legal authorities and if taking place in a scouting environment, the local council Scout Executive.

 

For specific instructions in your area attend Youth Protection Training or to take it on-line vist your local council web-site.

[Adrianvs]

"If you suspect that a crime has been, or is being, committed..."

 

No, I was referring to the case of the fatigued driver, an individual who is statistically as dangerous as a drunk driver. In most places, this itself is not a crime. My questions refer to the cases in which the dangerous behavior of the adult is not criminal or specifically forbidden by BSA rule. It is a moral question, not a legal one. We all have a hesitation in responding to a fatigued driver in the same way that we respond to a drunk one. Of course, the legality of fatigue gives us less options than we have with drunkeness (i.e. law enforcement), but do we use our other means of confrontation to respond to the situation? It is a difficult question..

[Bob White]

"No, I was referring to the case of the fatigued driver, an individual who is statistically as dangerous as a drunk driver. In most places, this itself is not a crime."

 

I believe if you check with the traffic laws you will find that it is. It is consider driving while impaired.

 

"but do we use our other means of confrontation to respond to the situation?

 

No. And that is one of the often repeated points in Youth Protection training. It is stressed over, and over, and over again "Your job is to 'recognize' and 'report'" period. Failure to do so in most states can expose you to criminal and civil charges.

 

This is why training is SO important. This information has been offered in every council for over twenty years and is now available on line in every council in the country. Every registered leader should know these rules.

[Adrianvs]

RECOGNIZE AND REPORT. PERIOD.

 

"Hello, 911."

 

Yes, this is Robert Smeghead, Assistant Scoutmaster of Troop -5. One of my fellow assistant scoutmasters is extremely tired and is planning on driving his son home tonight. Given his state, he would be endangering himself, his son, and the others on the road."

 

"What is your location?"

 

"Asinine State Park. Youth camping section."

 

"Thank you."

 

"Now what is the Scout Executive's number again..?"

[Bob White]

See how easy is to learn new things?

 

You should also tell the scouts not to get in his car and explain the danger to them, explain to them that if he leaves you are required by law to report him to the police and to the Scouing office. You are there to protect the scouts, not the irresponsible adult. If he wants to endanger his own life or his son's you have no other LEGAL recourse than to follow the procedures outlined in Youth Protection.

 

Again, this is why training is so important.