Fathering a child

[scoutldr]

Rikki, as you read more of these posts, you will learn that we volunteers have very little "power" over how the BSA is run. It's similar to going to McDonalds. If you want your kid to have the joy of a Happy Meal, you take him to McDonald's and get in line. If you don't like the way they put the mustard on the bun, you don't get a vote at the Board of Directors' table. All you can do is havea chat with the manager about your opinion. If the manager gets overruled by corporate headquarters, your only option is to refuse to go back and take your money to Wendy's.

 

Sorry for the oversimplification of what is a very serious manner, but what would you like us to do? A lot of people like McDOnalds just the way it is. And those people provide a lot of money and members to the BSA.

[Rikki12]

Scoutldr,

 

You are comparing apples and oranges. McDonalds is a FOR profit business that makes it clear they have a product to sell. They own the business and yes can dictate how it is run.

 

That is not what Baden Powell wanted for the Boy Scouts and not what the PAID BSAs run around spouting when it comes to the Mission Statement. Everything you read that is BSA related is that its purpose is to mentor and guide boys to help them become productive members of society. Tossing a boy out because he has made a mistake is not mentoring and guiding. It is being judge, jury, and executioner in the most hypocritical manner possible. Any I have seen anyone wanting to support the boy have their own membership threatened.

 

I am amazed that you have no problems being a volunteer that really cares and wants to help boys being dictated to by a bunch of business suits that are only interested in the almighty dollar, not the boys. Do some research. It is very easy to find enrollment records being falisfied so the council could get more money to line their pockets. It is happening all of the U.S. And the whistle blowers have their memberships revoked. These PAID BSAs are earning $900,000 plus a year and too many are given very expensive cars to drive. That is not why I have my son sell popcorn.

 

You can either continue to bury your head in the sand, or you can stand up and take back the BSA and make it what Baden Powell wanted. You either follow the teachings of the higher power (for me it is God and Jesus) to reach out and help, or you can be part of the problem and destroy a boy's future for making a mistake. I am willing to bet you are not perfect and have never made a mistake. Should you be stomped on and destroyed for being human? Should a boy?

[Rikki12]

Trevorum, I'm sorry. Since you posted to this thread I thought you were following the context of it. A boy made a mistake, fathered a child, and from what I hear, the PAID BSA now advocates throwing him out with the garbage.

As for the religious affiliation, you stated BSA does not define what constitutes belief in God or the practice of religion" (BSA policy statement, 6/2000) , perhaps you should share this message with others.  Boys have had their Eagle denied because some BSA official decided they did not like the particular way the boy views God.  It seems that only particular religions are acceptable.  Another example of what is preached is not what is practiced by those in powers of position.

[John-in-KC]

Rikki,

 

Like others, welcome to the Forums.

 

From your posts here and in another thread, we can see there is some "gut-check" level disconnect between you and the folks of your local Council.

 

I agree with the others, there's a lot of missing backstory. We can't use our own judgment if we're assuming the story as we respond to you.

 

Be forewarned: You'll get a range of responses, and you may not like what folks tell you. There are very, very few folk here who do not shoot "from their heart." We don't always agree, but we've come to respect each others opinions.

 

We'll be happy to listen, help us understand the context of your challenges.

 

YIS

[Trevorum]

Riki, OK, I see now, Yes.

 

Regarding the religious issue, I'm very sorry to learn that there are Eagle Courts that are not following BSA policy. I invite you to spin a new thread on this topic if you wish. I know of no religion or faith system that would, on it's own, bar a candidate from Eagle. At least in my council.

[evmori]

I never knew the BSA had any policy regarding Eagle Courts of Honor?

[scoutldr]

"They own the business and yes can dictate how it is run"

 

And the same is true of the BSA. The Boy Scouts of America, Inc., is a not-for-profit corporation, which is governed by an Executive Board and the Chief Scout Executive. They control the program, content, publications, trademarks, etc. That program is licensed (chartered) through local COuncils to Chartering Organizations who agree to deliver the program as designed (with the exception of the LDS). They also decide the membership criteria, and since the Supreme COurt ruling, can discriminate however they want. I'm not sure what you mean by "stand up and take back" the BSA...we are customers of the BSA...not owners or shareholders. If you don't like the product, don't support it...or get yourself elected to the Executive Board.

 

The important thing you are pointing out is the inconsistency in the interpretation of BSA policy among Councils. And, yes, the program is different from what B-P envisioned. It has morphed and changed with the times....as have we all. I personally think it is wrong to revoke the membership of a Scout who declares himself an atheist or gay. But I don't get to decide. So, my choices are to live with it, or leave the program.

[Rikki12]

John-in-KC:

My context challenge is that everything I read that I can find publically on the internet, at the national and local council sites, and in all of the Scout documentation I can get my hands on repeatedly says the BSA purpose is to guide and mentor. Even if there are problems, the BSA will work with the parents to help the boy. Even the scout handbook says on page 397 "Don't let others pressure you into harming your body and your mind with drugs, alcohol, and tobacco. And if you have been foolish, there is no law that says you have to stay that way."  But it all seems to be a lot of empty words, because the moment a boy makes a mistake, the PAID BSA turns their back and walks away. That is not guidance or mentorship.

In the matter I am referring to (not the Fathering A Child), there has been absolutely no effort to speak with the parents or the boy. The boy admitted to his mistake and took responsibility for it, but the council won't even acknowledge how their lack of training, supervision, or interaction played a role in what happened. Does it negate what the boy did? Of course not, but it was definitely a contributing factor. For adult staff to threaten these boys several times a day if they did not work harder is definitely not conducive to creating a positive environment.

My problem is that they don't practice what they preach. They act dishonorably by not abiding by their own publically declared mission statement, and yet have the audacity to revoke a boy's membership for not being as perfect as they are (yes, this was stated sarcastically).

I have spent years promoting the BSA and to find the PAID BSA have such little integrity and do not uphold their own standards is disheartening. Parents try so hard to teach their children right from wrong and to have the PAID BSA demonstrate such hypocrisy almost makes the situation seem hopeless. If the PAID BSA can cause one scandel after another across this country AND flat out ignore their own stated purpose, then why should the boys bother to do right or care about the next guy. T

hat is a rhetorical question. The PAID BSA spouts a lot of words, of good but their actions speak louder of not so good.

 (This is not pointed at all the great volunteers out there that really and truly give of themselves. This is aimed at the PAID BSA that are only out for themselves.)

[Trevorum]

Ed, Good catch. I meant Eagle Boards, not Courts.

[John-in-KC]

Rikki,

 

In everything you have talked about here, the first several layers are, to a man and woman, VOLUNTEERS ... just like most of us. If a member of the professional service got involved at an early stage, it's because a volunteer or a non-Scouter parent called and complained.

 

Most of the volunteers I know and work with do their very best to run the program honorably, and to run it as volunteers. Generally, the folks who should see the professionals the most are the other two members of the Key 3 (commissioner and chairman in each district), certain staff advisers for operational matters, and when money gets involved.

 

If you know a Scout who is a parent, then the matter is how he accepted responsibility. Has he started earning money to pay child support? Has he wed the young woman? Has he moved from mainline high school to GED track so he can work to support them? BTW, how does Scouting at this point fit into the responsibilities of his new life? Every one of those is a legitimate question for either a Scoutmaster Conference or a Board of Review.

 

Now, how does your Chartered Partner feel about youth who are wed, particularly ones who are still in the Boy Scouting program? The Chartered Partner is the licensee of record of Scouting, not the Pack, Troop, Team or Crew. If they say the Scout has to go, there is no recourse vis a vis that particular unit.

 

Who has your Scoutmaster shared these situations with along the way? The COR? The Unit Commissioner? The District Advancement Chair? What have they given as feedback to the SM?

 

 

[dScouter15]

One more thought I'd like to throw in to this mess:

 

One of the greatest things about scouting, in my opinion, is that avoiding failure is not as important as learning for our mistakes. Sometimes our scouts will burn their dinner, be late coming back to camp, sleep in a little too long, get into fights, etc. This happens, and is part of growing up. A good troop leader will see these types of instances as opportunities to help the scouts grow, learning from their mistakes.

 

I've been led to believe that for a Board of Review to fail someone, they had to provide a reason why the scout was failed, as well as instructions on how to remedy the situation. For instance, the board may determine that a scout lacks scout spirit, and initially fail the scout on advancement. However, the board would offer to see the scout again next month, and re-evaluate his scout spirit. Again, guiding the scout towards growth is the key.

 

So, what happens if we can confirm that the the scout's a daddy, and he's not married to the mommy? What can the scout do to grow? In my opinion, the most important thing he can do is put the child's needs first. This may mean having the child be raised by its grandparents or put it up for adoption. Maybe the scout is able to care for the child well himself, and provide the necessary financial support. And, quite honestly, is the scout can't see to it that his child is well cared for, he probably doesn't have time to be tying knots, going camping, and attending troop meetings. So, if the child is being taken care of, what has the scout learned?

 

Yes, an unplanned pregnancy is a much much bigger "mistake" than breaking curfew, and should be addressed with this in mind. However, I believe that the methods of Scouting can scale to address such an issue. I don't see ANY offense being bad enough to automatically freeze advancement. The WHOLE POINT is to help scouts grow, and if a scout recognizes what he's done wrong, and is taking appropriate actions to deal with his mistakes, I don't think advancement should be out of the question.

[Hunt]

"It absolutely amazes me that an organization that purports to guide and mentor the boys of the U.S. of America will throw a boy onto the garbage heap of humanity for making a mistake."

 

Well, it depends on how big the "mistake" is and how it affects other people. The situation that Rikki is concerned about involves a boy who was a paid staff member at a council camp who admitted that he smoked pot while at camp. That's more than a mistake, it's a crime, and it's a betrayal of his responsibility to the younger boys he's supposed to be leading. While there may be mitigating circumstances even in this case, it's really quite bad. In my mind, in terms of whether to allow the boy to remain in Scouts, it's worse than fathering a child out of wedlock, because it directly relates to Scouting and endangers other children in Scouting. Also, it's more illegal.