Boy Scouts helped alleged molesters cover tracks, files show

[JMHawkins]

AZMike,

 

I agree that the overall quality of discussion on this topic is not always very high. However, I am very much interested in reading what you have to say, especially in re: "A lot of the information on how to deal with the abuse situation that WAS accurate and effective got brushed aside as new psychological and social theories came to the forefront in the 1960s and 1970s."

 

This subject is distastful and uncomfortable, but it is a reality we need to face. I do not want to leave young men vulnerable to predators, nor do I want to see good men chased away through overzealous prosecution and misguided vigiliance. Likewise I don't like to see malcontents use something like this to score cheap political points.

 

So information is valuable. I do hope you'll stick through and share more of what you have.

 

 

[WAKWIB]

AZMike asks about more/better training.Current YP training is good in content, but I think is suffers in the delivery. Thirty minutes at the computer, a few clicks of the mouse, and your done. Do it again in two years. Easy and painless. When YP was first rolled out, you had to sit with a group of people and learn. It's a bit more sobering that way than to click through it while sitting in your comfy-chair with your beer and popcorn.

The YP videos for the kids generally sit on the shelves at the council office gathering dust. Again, kudos to the folks who create these learning tools, but if they are never used, they might as well never have been produced.

We serve a HUGE number of kids who are statistically the most at risk for abuse, which are children with absent fathers. When I was a scout-kid, there was a predator in our troop. He targeted kids like me who had no dad at home. Our YP training for kids details all the classic signs of a predator's techniques. Wish I knew then, what I know now. I also wish we as an organization would pull our head out of the sand and give our youth and adults some better exposure to this training so they can be spared the insanity of abuse.

[packsaddle]

I agree with WAKWIB. In my experience this and some of the other training experiences have been superficial and ineffective. I personally felt like all the exercise was meant to do was to check a box on a form somewhere, perhaps in order to cover someone's backside.

This unit is small enough that leaders can get to know each boy. I can observe them during most any activity and I know them well enough to detect if one of them is troubled about something. I can tell if there's a change in mood or some other 'tell'. I think this is one way to detect problems...to really know the boys.

As for what BSA has done with their list, I think we should fess up if we did something wrong, pay whatever price society exacts, and do better in the future.

 

AZMike has asked a good question for discussion though. It will be good to see the responses.

[Tampa Turtle]

This issue keeps whipping back to hurt us because the higher you are (in the public opinion BSA, Catholic Church, Penn State)the harder you fall when it gets out. Fall hard enough you break.

 

Arguments that "this sort of thing happens all the time everywhere" may be true but does not matter. If we espouse the scout oath and law, and get many intangible benefits from our past virtuous history we should expect the bricks that come from our ugly history as well. People expected and still expects better from us. To do less "cheapens the brand" as National seems concerned about.

 

Personally I find the poor response from National troubling. I left the Catholic Church because of the CYA response to historic abuse patterns. To me this is a more fundamental problem than Gays, Girls, and God. This is like a finding the foundation of your whole might house built on a foundation of sand.

 

Hyperbole? What do I know I am just an ASM...

 

 

[AZMike]

JMHawkins, I'll try to write something up as a follow-up on my comments on forgotten lessons. I have to go out of town so it may not be until after the weekend,

[BadenP]

 

The saddest part about all four threads on this topic is that due to some severe lack of oversight and accountability by council SE's and the National office this has mushroomed into the crisis it has become and has forever tarnished the credibility of the BSA, which IMHO is still the best youth program in exsistence today. The parallels to what is happening in the Catholic Church today because of the priest pedophile which has also mushroomed since 2002 is eerie to say the least. Both organizations have experienced severe drops in membership and contributions, both the Catholic churches and scouting units in my area alone have severely shrunk in size or disappeared altogether. All because those in power at the head of both organizations refused to recognize they had a problem and did not openly deal with it at the onset. If they had met their responsibilities head on at the beginning we probably would not be having these discussions now.

[Beavah]

In my experience this and some of the other training experiences have been superficial and ineffective. I personally felt like all the exercise was meant to do was to check a box on a form somewhere, perhaps in order to cover someone's backside.

This unit is small enough that leaders can get to know each boy. I can observe them during most any activity and I know them well enough to detect if one of them is troubled about something. I can tell if there's a change in mood or some other 'tell'. I think this is one way to detect problems...to really know the boys.

 

Yah, I agree with packsaddle, eh? I don't think there's any evidence to suggest that adult BSA training on YP is effective, or that our stock YP policies (two deep/no one-on-one) are effective at stoppin' predators. Those are primarily ways of protectin' adults against false accusations and protectin' da organization. Worthy goals of themselves, eh? Just not da same as protectin' kids.

 

Da problem as several have pointed out is that predators do all of the things that saints do, eh? They befriend the lads that need a dad, they listen to 'em, they involve them, they play catch, they talk to 'em like they're not little kids. They get to know the parents, they befriend the family, they and their spouses throw kids' parties and such. And da abuse almost never starts in scouts, eh? It's starts at outside events, visits to the parents' home, big-brother type relationships, private outings and sleepovers with parents' permission.

 

To my mind the answer to that is not to treat all of the saints out there like they are criminals. Boys need adult friends who listen to 'em and care about 'em and pal around with 'em and hug 'em occasionally and who will sit privately with 'em when they are down and frustrated.

 

The answer is to have more people involved in the boy's life, eh? To have scouters and teachers and relatives and friends of the family and parents and coaches all of whom know the lad, recognize his moods, and offer support and care. In order to work, predators need to isolate boys from other supports and adults, so that when they switch from saintly to sinister, the lad is dependent on their emotional connection to them and can't easily say "no." He doesn't have any other adult friends to trust or turn to.

 

It's ironic that in our fear, we have in some ways dismantled many of da true protections for kids, makin' it harder for predators to make initial contacts, perhaps, but easier for 'em to proceed. And makin' it more likely that isolated kids turn to other behaviors that are destructive.

 

It's da packsaddles and WAKWIBs and Tampa Turtles and AZMikes and SeattlePioneers and other good folks of da world who are good friends to kids, and know 'em enough to recognize when somethin' is amiss, and who care enough to be there for 'em when it - those are who actually keep kids safe. Surrounded by folks like that, mandatory reportin' policies aren't an issue. There would be appropriate reports. I expect da question would be whether a man who took advantage of a boy would survive long enough for law enforcement to protect him.

 

Beavah

 

[SeattlePioneer]

>

 

 

I suggest that BSA generally acted reasonably to protect children.

 

BSA is not a police force and isn't in the law enforcement business. Generally speaking, all BSA officials might have to go on are unproven allegations, many times the children and parents involve do not want to file complaints with the police that have a chance of being investigated effectively.

 

The REAL people responsible for letting such issues continue are parents who choose not to file complaints withe the police and probably don't want BSA filing such complaints either. And too often parents are failing to pay sufficient critical attention to their children and with whom they are associating.

 

Even when complaints are filed, very likely police often have a difficult time accumulating evidence that could result in a successful prosecution.

 

In short, I see BSA as generally being a responsible organization about such issues, but with no real effective role for preventing such problems.

 

What BSA often did when reasonable suspicion of bad conduct by volunteers was made was to kick people out as leaders and do their best to keep them out. Since there is generally only going to be unproven suspicions about what might have happened, that seems like reasonable actions for BSA to take.

 

I'm also glad to support the new YPT policies. I hope they can improve on the old status quo. But without parents who are aware and proactive, I imagine many of the same problems will continue to occur one way or another.

 

 

You are just dealing with a highly motivated population of people with a particular sexual orientation. We have seen how motivated such populations can be in getting what they want when not effectively opposed.

[WasE61]

"BSA is not a police force and isn't in the law enforcement business."

 

...and as such, suspicions and allegations should be immediately turned over to law enforcement, who are the professionals in investigation.

 

I really wonder if BSA is doing that even now...post-Oregon and post-PSU ... or is it still same-o, same-o?

 

Let's not forget that these problems are documented back to 1919...it's not like the 80's showed up and suddenly perverts were everywhere.

 

Maybe this is another reason why my Dad kept me away from Scouting in the '60s, maybe he knew what was going on.

 

[SeattlePioneer]

>

 

 

Says who?

 

The actors in this kind of drama are the PARENTS.

 

In recent years, a few child protection advocates such as physicians, have been mandated to report reasonable suspicion of child molestation to police.

 

That did not include BSA decades ago, and still does not include BSA today.

 

BSA did not prevent parents from filing complaints with police, and parents are the people who are the responsible actors in this kind of drama, I suggest.

[BadenP]

SP

 

Yeah thats right blame it ALL on the parents and hold the council and National blameless, what a crock. Time to get your head out of the sand and see the reality of the situation. All organizations who deal with youth are accountable for their safety or they have no business being in exsistence. Scouting leaders and professionals bear part of the blame in this scenario for not coming forward and being proactive with known or proven cases of abuse. Instead the BSA was trying to keep things under wraps and for not involving law enforcement in their actions, which is still the situation today, unless the case get exposed.

[qwazse]

I really wonder if BSA is doing that even now...post-Oregon and post-PSU ... or is it still same-o, same-o?

 

The one case that involved my unit was not an actionable offense; and yes, it went up the chain and the authorities were called. In fact folks who should have known better kept it from me because they knew I'd make everyone tow the line.

 

Don't know if you realize this, but folks have a palpable distrust of authority. They don't always act according to their training. Think about it, if your kid is the accused, how quickly would you make that call? Once you did, how certain would you be that if innocent, the system would vindicate him?

[Tampa Turtle]

Though it is sad, whenever we talk about the "3 R's" requirement (Recognize, Resist, Report) I go into:

 

Recognize-Yes it can be a scout adult like me. Sometimes a family member.

Resist-I make them practice screaming for help. Some kids (I was) are pretty shy. I tell them IF something happens (and it probably won't)this not the time to wait for permission.

Report-Tell a trusted adult right away. It will be hard and might make you unpopular for a while.

 

I know I felt very uncomfortable talking to my own son's. Yet I was molested by a trusted stranger (my couch) and my dad, the alter boy, buggered by his favorite priest. (One of those death bed confession things, and explains why he was an atheist--kinda disillusioning, that.) In any case similar things to YPT would have helped.

 

I understand some folks fear of false accusation. That happened to me as a young professor but YPT would have protected me there. Luckily my squeaky clean reputation kept me out of trouble from that troubled girl but I learned no one-on-one the hard way.

 

I was wondering how do UK Scouts and other youth organizations handle this?

[trailwalker]

News out on the trail is another release of the in-eligible files is to occur next week, this release will be made up of more recent incidents.

[SeattlePioneer]

>

 

 

Yes, I believe that's the EXACT legal situation.

 

As I understand it, BSA has zero legal obligation to report such allegations.

 

Parents are free to report whatever they wish.

 

 

When all this finger pointing at BSA is going on, let's keep those facts in mind.