Parents attending OA Ceremonies

[SeattlePioneer]

Yes, OA works like other parts of the program. To be specific, the Youth Protection guidelines from the Guide to Safe Scouting apply:

 

No secret organizations. The Boy Scouts of America does not recognize any secret organizations as part of its program. All aspects of the Scouting program are open to observation by parents and leaders.

 

 

 

 

http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/HealthandSafety/GSS/gss01.aspx#b

 

 

I don't see ANYTHING that allows you to burden a parent or guardian who wishes to observe any part of an OA program.

 

 

 

[Eagle92]

SP,

 

Actually the policy I am using is within the past 2-3 years, Again please be patient as I had a den meeting last night ( Whittling Chip and no blood YES!!!!!) And hope to have time to search my policies tonite, barring any complications.

 

As for my YPT, I'm current with it, as well as the camp staff one. But my VYPT may be out of date

 

Again please be patient while I get the source of the OA policy, there are a lot of them.

[Twocubdad]

Maybe folks consider conversations with you, SP, to be a burden, but it doesn't have to be so.

 

Where in the world do you get that talking with a parent about an element of the program, educating them and helping them understand our purpose and methods is a burden? BSA policy is for Scouts to advance at their own pace. But is it a burden for me to counsel a Scout to slow down and enjoy the program or to get it in gear if he wants to make Eagle? Is it a burden to talk with a parent who is pushing his Scout to advance? Of course not. It's my job.

 

Similarly, an OA advisor has an obligation to talk with a parent who wants to attend the Ordeal. It's his/her job to explain the program to the parents to their satisfaction and, if they still insist on attending, to make sure they understand the expecatations of guests at the ceremonies. Otherwise, sooner or later, you will have some Speilberg wannabe wandering through the ring for a close up.

 

Somehow you seem to have a very low opinion of OA advisors. Perhaps, in your experience, it's deserved. But most of the Scouters I know can carry on a reasonable conversation with a Scout or parent without it being a burden to them.

 

The policy E92 mentions is well known and reasonable. Just apply a little common sense and courtesy. This does not have to be an all-or-nothing issue.

[SeattlePioneer]

If you read through this thread, you will find a number of OA leaders boasting about their ability to fast talk or otherwise discourage parents from observing OA ceremonies. That kind of attitude is pernicious and toxic in my opinion.

 

Frankly, such people worry me. It's an attitude that is warped. How adults can fail to respect the interests of parents and put them first is beyond my understanding, especially when unambiguous BSA policy underlines that primacy.

 

I've never had bad experiences with OA myself. But what I've read in this thread worries me a lot.(This message has been edited by seattlepioneer)

[Engineer61]

"I've never had bad experiences with OA myself. But what I've read in this thread worries me a lot."

 

Here! Here! Pi-o-neer!

[shortridge]

I find it ironic that a person who declared this thread hijacked and dead ("Rest In Peace!") is one of the people continuing to rant and argue.

 

Not getting in the last word doesn't mean the other person wins, fellas.

 

The amount of self-righteousness in this thread has become noxious.

[Eagle92]

Ok I admit I'm still looking. Some stuff is easy to search, others a bit more challenging. Plus some stuff is put away.

 

Here's what I've found so far. Sorry it's not letting me cut and paste.

 

Guide to Inductions 2005 ed, 2007 revision p. 2 Talks about safeguarding

 

P. 17-22 talk about teh Call Out ceremony and how that is the public recognition for the scout.

 

Now this is not a national site, but a lodeg one. But there is a quote, that as I have repeatedly stated, parent have the right to attend if they insist.

 

http://www.witauchsoman.org/Parents.html

 

"The induction is not a hazing or an initiation ceremony. The Order is not a secret Scout organization, and its ceremonies are open to any parent, Scout leader, or religious leader. There is an element of mystery in the ceremonies for the sake of its effect on the candidates. For this reason, ceremonies are not put on in public. The ceremonies...are not objectionable to any religious group."

 

BUT later on the same page

 

"question: Why does the OA keep most of it's activities secret?

 

Answer: First of all, as stated previously, the Order of the Arrow is not a secret organization. Rather, we recognize that an aura of mystery not only stimulates interest in the Lodge, but also helps new members feel proud of an accomplishment that is not achieved by every Scout.

 

Most candidates receive less benefits from the induction if they know about the induction in advance. Knowledge lowers expectancy, dulls the edge of experience. In other words, you hurt candidates by telling them about the "Ordeal." Parents should feel free to discuss the experiences their children had at the Ordeal, after it's completion.

 

The Order of the Arrow is happy to share any pertinent information about our activities with legitimately interested individuals. For more information, one should contact the Witauchsoman Adviser" Emphasis mine.

 

Again I apologize for the delay, but I thought that the information was in one of my PDF files and easily searchable. It appears that the policy is in one of the books that I do not have in pdf file.

 

[Papadaddy]

"The ceremonies are not objectionable to any religious group.."

 

I think we've established that to be false. And my belief is, if most young scouts knew in advance what the Ordeal entailed, they would opt to stay at home with their video games. Being elected is no longer considered the "high honor" it once was, for whatever reason.

[shortridge]

Papadaddy - What's your definition of "we've," "established," and "false"?

 

As BDPT00 wrote in the Christian objection thread: "You're referring to some religions, some lodges, and some parents. That's the problem. It's always about somebody, somewhere. ... Those making the issue out of nothing seem to think there is ... somewhere by somebody, but it's always somwwhere else by somebody else."

 

There is nothing in the practice, structure, goals or ceremonies of the Order that interferes with any member's religious obligation.

[dennis99ss]

"Papadaddy - What's your definition of "we've," "established," and "false"?

 

As BDPT00 wrote in the Christian objection thread: "You're referring to some religions, some lodges, and some parents. That's the problem. It's always about somebody, somewhere. ... Those making the issue out of nothing seem to think there is ... somewhere by somebody, but it's always somwwhere else by somebody else."

 

There is nothing in the practice, structure, goals or ceremonies of the Order that interferes with any member's religious obligation. "

 

 

Huh? This post simply affirms the notion that there are people that just don't get it.

 

I don't care what your opinion is about whether the OA interferes with someone's religion. That is not the question. The question is whether it is a true statement that "The ceremonies are not objectionable to any religious group" as espoused by Eagle92, in support of his contentions that his positions are valid.

 

This is a patently false statement. There are recognized religions that have policies against the BSA and by extension, the OA. There are people who find the ceremonies objectionable on religious grounds.

 

Your comments, shortridge, are insulting to those who are a member of a religion who does have objections, or to those who have objections based on religious grounds. Or, is it that you just don't count them, since their religious views differ from yours.

 

All in all, these comments, and the purported basis for some of the members' comments in this thread simply solidifies the argument that some on here wish to ignore the reality of the rules in place, and will reach to make a false interpretation of any rule, so long as it appears to support the position they are putting forth.

[Papadaddy]

Well, you are correct. I refreshed my memory and went back to the thread, "Lutherans and Honor Societies". The Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS) has a specific to NOT support the BSA or GSUSA, based on the BSA Declaration of Religious Principle. And by extension, a youth or adult cannot belong to OA unless they are a registered member of the BSA.

[ThunderFox]

If an established religion objects to the Boy Scouts, the OA need not worry about objections from that quarter as their followers will not join BSA so OA membership, ceremony and ritual are moot points.

 

What is under discussion is parental or clergy PERCEPTION by individuals who do have boys and/or followers in the program who may have bad information or no information. If these folks, who already are suspecting something is up, encounter what seems an organized campaign to thwart their investigation or concerns, they will see this as proof that something negative is really going on.

 

Creative accomodations can alleviate their fears and still preserve the "confidentiality" of the ceremony. Staunch objection and subverting the rules could be a Council or National "Black Eye".

 

Please remember, in situations of litigation, if the leaders in question are found by BSA to NOT be 100% in compliance with BSA Rules, Guidelines and Policies, the BSA provides 0% legal support nor financial defense support.

[Papadaddy]

And cue Beavah....

[Eagle92]

What is under discussion is parental or clergy PERCEPTION by individuals who do have boys and/or followers in the program who may have bad information or no information. If these folks, who already are suspecting something is up, encounter what seems an organized campaign to thwart their investigation or concerns, they will see this as proof that something negative is really going on.

 

Creative accomodations can alleviate their fears and still preserve the "confidentiality" of the ceremony. Staunch objection and subverting the rules could be a Council or National "Black Eye".

 

Agree with you 100%

 

Sometimes discussing the matter, providing scripts, informing folks of who they know who are in the OA will alleviate fears. I know when we do info sessions that does the job.

 

But sometimes it doesn't. Again I had a situation where I was trying to talk someone into just having their son attend period. Not trying to dissuade her from seeing the ceremony, but trying to inform her about the facts on the OA and how what they have heard and and read on the internet is total garbage; informing them of the members in their troop, including their SM who was a past section officer, etc just didn't work either.

 

 

[Tampa Turtle]

This is all pretty new to me. My exposure to OA has either been presented as "the Boy Scout Honor Society" (yawn) or "the Secret Society" (kinda weird or like the Moose or Elks (again yawn). If my boy wanted to do I and got elected I might let him go...

 

That said I can't see how there cannot be a creative way to accommodate some parents. A hunters blind with periscope perhaps?