Hypothetical YPT Question

[Taserdoc]

Hypothetical question, What would you do if?

 

A. Multiple Scouts, (different units), Filed Multiple complaints, (with Council), alleging (non-sexual) YPT violations against multiple Scoutmasters, (different units).

 

B. The Scoutmasters were "cleared" by Council, without Council ever even interviewing any of the Scouts or their parents, (the complaintants), prior to making their decision.

 

C. As a result, several of the Scouts lost their friends, were kicked out of their units, and were publicaly humiliated.

 

D. You could prove it.

 

This was hypothetical remember. Just Curious...(This message has been edited by TASERDOC)

[Twocubdad]

Welcome to the e-campfire, doc. You're really need to provide more detail. This is waaaayyy too open ended. You're not going to much helpful information.

 

With the lack of information, responses will be based on everyone filling-in the information based on their experiences and assumptions. For example, in my experience multiple complaints from multiple units against multiple leaders seems unlikely. My assumption would be that there is probably someone behind all this tryiing to stir the pot. My further experience is that given the current environment, councils take YP violations very seriously. Because the council seems to have dismissed the complaints out of hand, I would assume they were completely without merit.

 

Of course opinions will vary based on different experiences and assumptions.

 

If you're really interested in valid input, you may try filling in the hypotheiticals a bit more.

 

 

[BS-87]

If you can prove abuse occurred and that it was inappropriately handled, it sounds like an issue for the authorities and not an online forum.

 

The first time I read the hypothetical it didn't make a lot of sense, but the second time it sounded like it was possible through a camporee or OA event.

[Taserdoc]

Hypotheticaly...

 

3 scouts, 2 different units, 2 different Scoutmasters, 2 separate incidents.

 

No contact of Scouts or parents prior to clearing SMs.

 

SE admits situation handled wrong but won't correct it due to threats of lawsuits from SM.

 

Multiple adult volunteers feel that SE "covered up" the issues.

 

Hypotheticaly Speaking again.

[fred8033]

The hypothetical question asks for a conclusion based only on outside actions without any specifics to analyze.

 

- This could be a case of someone stirring the pot.

- This could be a case of society changing but old time scouters not changing.

- This could be a really significant or just noise or people with hurt feelings.

 

In any event, this forum can't help without more details.

 

Ask your own conscious. Do you believe it merits further action? If so, as a citizen, as a scouter and as probably a parent, you should pursue it with the appropriate authorities. The problem at Penn State was everyone passed the buck and no one wanted to be the person who escalated the situation. Penn State should have been a clear cut.

 

Use your conscious about this one. But if you don't want to pursue it, just leave it be and don't complain that others didn't take action.

 

[fred8033]

Hypothetically...

 

- Were laws broken?

- Was it hazing or emotional abuse or some other type of abuse?

- Was it a safety violation?

- Did the SMs set-up the situation or responding to a situation created by others?

 

To be honest, specifics are needed.

[CalicoPenn]

You say non-sexual YPT violations. So what kind of YPT violations are we, hypothetically, talking about here? Was it only reported to the Council or did someone notify the Chartered Organzation as well?

 

Physical? With witnesses? File an assault and battery complaint with the police and have the Scoutmaster arrested. Sue the Council and, if they were informed as well, the Chartered Organization for not handling it appropriately.

 

Emotional? Tough to prove - find a new unit.

 

Violations of a technical nature (ie...not putting up a curtain between the Scouts and the Adults in a one room cabin). Sounds like a discussion with the committee to make sure that YPT guidelines are being followed. Find a new Troop.

 

All hypothetical of course

[Taserdoc]

Please don't take this wrong, and correct me if I am wrong but,

 

Am I really reading this correctly? The first thing that comes to mind is that someone is "stirring the pot"???

 

That is a scary response at best. As volunteers in this program, I thought that the safety and welfare of the Scouts was of the upmost importance. Am I wrong?

 

Do our Scouts now have to worry about reporting issues because they may be viewed as "stirring the Pot"? That is the last thing that I would think.

 

I am not saying that this is what is going on but, I realize that some people actually believe that all Scouting professionals have the best interest of the Scouts in mind. Remember that they have a career, and pension to worry about. Isn't it possible that at least a few feel their loyalty is to the organizaton. If they don't protect the organization, they stand to lose everything.

 

I agree that most are good people, but there are a few that are not. Look at the News headlines lately.

 

I appreciate the responses from everyone, but I would love to hear from Council or District Committee members on this one. I think they have a better idea of how things really work at that level.

[KC9DDI]

I'm hearing a hypothetical axe being ground in the background...

 

If you don't have any first hand hypothetical knowledge of the situation, my advice would be to leave it alone. If you want to reach out to the Scouts who apparently lost friends and offer them a place in your unit, that would be a nice gesture - but there's really no reason to get involved in other people problems, especially these types of problems.

 

If you do have first hand hypothetical knowledge of the situation, and know that it was handled in a way that a crime was committed without being reported to the authorities, or in a way that continues to place youth at risk of harm, you need to be talking to legal authorities, not anonymous folks on a forum.

 

If it's just a case of not liking how a hypothetical situation was handled by the council... Nothing wrong with putting your concerns in writing and forwarding them to the SE. But carefully consider if the amount of knowledge you have on the situation gives you any credibility to comment.

 

Taser - Unfortunately, some very bad people do occasionally use perceived "YPT Violations" solely as a way of stirring the pot, or in a personal vendetta against another leader.

 

Yes, safety is the #1 priority, but the #2 priority needs to be treating our adult leaders fairly if any allegations are brought up. The only facts we know are that 1) Allegations were made; 2) Nothing happened. "Nothing" might be the right thing to do in this case. Hard to tell without knowing more.(This message has been edited by KC9DDI)

[Eagle92]

Hypothetically, you need to follow your conscious. If you think more needs to be done, then report it. If you do not, then don't.

 

But be prepared to deal with the hypothetical consequences as a result, both good and bad.

 

Hypothetically say there was an issue at camp, and hypothetically the CD freaks out over it. Say that you don't and you keep reminding the CD what must be done. Be prepared for the hypothetical negative consequences.

[Basementdweller]

If the scout was hit by the SM call the law.

 

If the scout was touched inappropriately call the law

 

Sexual things call the law.

 

Beyond those to things......Not sure what to tell you.

 

 

No your professionals do not have you or your scouts best interest in mind.

 

 

Funds and membership numbers are what matters.

 

 

Far as your hypothetical nonsense it is impossible to offer advice with out more info.

 

The above is the way I would handle it......Notice no DE or SE involved......

 

[fred8033]

Taserdoc - Vague hypothetical questions get vague answers.

 

Units leaders see a lot over the years. All scouts push limits. All. Some scouts get attitude and might push limits in a bad way such as blaming others for their failures or accusing scout leaders. It does happen. That's one reason for two deep leadership. So that one leader can stand up and defend another leader.

 

So don't get offended when we ask about someone stirring the put. To be honest, some of the worst stir'ers are parents of scouts who think their scout was slighted.

 

Best way to get a good answer is to give more specifics.

 

 

[Taserdoc]

I understand, and agree with what most are saying but I think everyone is missing one very important part of this;

 

The Scoutmasters were "cleared" without interviewing any of the Scouts or their parents, (the complaintants), PRIOR to making their decision.

 

No interview? No "investigation"?

If this is not a cover up, then how is this possible?

 

All hypothetical Scouts involved were model Scouts with no prior issues.(This message has been edited by TASERDOC)(This message has been edited by TASERDOC)(This message has been edited by TASERDOC)(This message has been edited by TASERDOC)

[Tampa Turtle]

Yeah kinda hard to know. If it was safety --like using a unapproved stove--well I think it might be just a warning to the SM's. If it was sexual --yeah well that was covered by others.

[Taserdoc]

hypotheticaly, lets say bullying, emotional abuse, and no 1 on 1 contact. hypotheticaly