Scout W/autism - Troop Asms Having Difficulty - Possible New Troop's Sm Called By Asms - Thoughts?

[CalicoPenn]

There is no violation of HIPAA here (and Moosetracker - ask whoever it was that told you that announcing you still need health forms from certain individuals is a violation of HIPAA to show that in writing, including that nurse that confirmed it - they won't be able to because it is nonsense (and that nurse obviously needs a refresher course in HIPAA and who it covers).

 

As usual, the always insightful and knowledgeable Pack has the right of it.

 

The HIPAA laws do not apply to most individuals (not part of a health care organization?  The laws do not apply to you).  They apply ONLY to Health Plans, Health Care Providers, Health Care Clearninghouses and Business Associates of those other three groups (for instance, it would apply to a business (and their employees) contracted to store the records of a doctor's office but it only applies to the records that are being stored).

 

It generally does NOT apply to:

Most individuals (it is not a violation of HIPAA to talk amongst neighbors about another neighbors cancer (unless, of course, you are involved in that patient's health care).

Schools, Colleges and Universities (Most people are surpised by this - but that's because most people have let people tell them otherwise and haven't done the research themselves to verify it)

Most government agencies on the federal, state and municipal level

Life Insurance providers

Employers (unless they are an employer that self-insures for health care)

Law Enforcement

Worker's Compensation Carriers

Boy Scout Units, Districts and Councils (there is nothing in HIPAA that would prevent the Council from disclosing to anyone that Scoutmaster John has a serious lung condition - instead, we trust that Council will follow the Scout Law and be courteous enough not to do so.

 

It does NOT apply to "everyone"

 

So forget about HIPAA - what we're dealing with is a couple of Scouters that just can't seem to understand why their way doesn't always work.

 

It's a shame you think moving to another Troop is the easiest answer - it seems to me the easiest answer is to stay with the Troop your in (where your son knows people, and people know your sons - is change really the best idea for your son to deal with?) and just make it clear that that these two leaders are to have nothing to do with your son - I suspect that the SM can make that happen.

[packsaddle]

Schools, Colleges and Universities (Most people are surpised by this - but that's because most people have let people tell them otherwise and haven't done the research themselves to verify it)

 

True, I think they get HIPAA mixed up with FERPA which does restrict disclosure of all kinds of private things about students.

[Gone]

Individuals? Where are you getting this nonsense? It only applies to individuals if they are part of a 'covered entity'. This has already been answered hundreds of times for churches who, during services for example, call out for prayers for so-and-so who is in the hospital with so-and-so disease or malady. That's public disclosure. They're not covered by this law. For Boy Scouts, this was answered here: http://scoutingmagazine.org/issues/0801/d-flin.html

 

There is HIPAA, the Privacy Act, amendments to the rule (Privacy Rule) from the Office of Civil Rights and case law that has challenged (and won) the application of the disclosure of PHI (protected health information) that all rolled up point to the courts upholding the the non-disclosure of health information by individuals and so-called "non-covered entities". Churches, for obvious separation and Constitutional issues, have been protected from the application of this case law....though some have tried to tear that down.

[imachristian13]

Some folks have been asking (in different words) "why is switching troops being considered?"

 

These 2 ASMs are the primary leaders of the Troop after the SM. In other words, when he can't be there, it is their show to run. Since they choose to ignore (or, to be fair, give up on) the training that they have had from us, our son finds himself in potentially dangerous situations. These choices typically provoke further escalation of our son's scenarios and, now that he is adult-sized, we don't want to see where that goes.  

Further, our son doesn't feel that he is welcomed by his fellow scouts simply because they have grown tired of dealing with him (as most teen boys would do whether dealing with NT kids or those on the spectrum). In order for him to stay with the current troop, we need to reset everything and that just doesn't appear to be feasible. 

 

If I had my own druthers, I'd sit down with the SM, other ASMs, and the scouts themselves and say "hey! we are trying to make it that my son can succeed at this. we know it's tough. what can we do to team up and make it work for all of us?" A lot of the kids are good and the ASMs are as well.  Frankly, it's one of the few times in his life that we want folks to treat him like he's different because it's the only way it can work.  

[Twocubdad]

First, Pack is correct.  HIPAA doesn't apply.  There is not violation of the law, so take the high horses back to the barn.

 

Secondly, let's say, hypothetically, that instead of being the Neanderthals we have concluded them to be, the troop leaders here are reasonable Scout volunteers with the best interest of all their Scouts at heart.  Let's further hypothesize that they could be dealing with more issues here than we know.  No matter how thin you make a pancake, it always has two sides.

 

Can no one envision a scenario where it would be a good thing for Scouters of good conscious, dealing with a problem, to share their concerns and experiences with the leaders of the second troop?  Why do we automatically assume the leaders of the first troop are "poisoning the well" for this Scout.  Why do we assume the leaders of the second troop are too obtuse to take information from all sides and form a reasonable understanding of the issues they will be facing?

 

Personally, if I'm the leader of the first troop, I'm going to make the call too.  If I'm the leader of the second troop, if I don't get that call I'm going to call myself.  I've done both.  Let's not forget we are all part of the BSA, not independent, competing entities.  Sharing information between units should be a good thing. 

[Eagledad]

@@Eagledad - Sorry - which person is the "CC" to which you are referring?  Beyond the local troop, I have spoken to the District Executive.  

Sorry, Troop Committee Chair. But I think you have have added more explanations to the whole situation since my question. 

 

Barry

[imachristian13]

First, Pack is correct.  HIPAA doesn't apply.  There is not violation of the law, so take the high horses back to the barn.

 

Secondly, let's say, hypothetically, that instead of being the Neanderthals we have concluded them to be, the troop leaders here are reasonable Scout volunteers with the best interest of all their Scouts at heart.  Let's further hypothesize that they could be dealing with more issues here than we know.  No matter how thin you make a pancake, it always has two sides.

 

Can no one envision a scenario where it would be a good thing for Scouters of good conscious, dealing with a problem, to share their concerns and experiences with the leaders of the second troop?  Why do we automatically assume the leaders of the first troop are "poisoning the well" for this Scout.  Why do we assume the leaders of the second troop are too obtuse to take information from all sides and form a reasonable understanding of the issues they will be facing?

 

Personally, if I'm the leader of the first troop, I'm going to make the call too.  If I'm the leader of the second troop, if I don't get that call I'm going to call myself.  I've done both.  Let's not forget we are all part of the BSA, not independent, competing entities.  Sharing information between units should be a good thing. 

Thank you for trying to steer back from HIPAA-land. 

 

We assume that they are doing this outside of good conscience because of past actions. We, further, know that they are doing so because they contacted the Second Troop's Scoutmaster before we even called ourselves to set-up a visitation. They, quite literally, had to call and say (to the effect of) "you might be hearing from one of our troop members named because he might want to come visit you...if he does, he has all kinds of problems."  

 

It is our role, as the parents, to guide the path of our child. If we go to the second troop and make an inquiry, I would certainly expect that SM to contact the SCOUTMASTER at our present troop for more information. We haven't even decided to leave our present troop yet - we are just weighing options and these folks are contacting other troops to warn them about our son.  

[moosetracker]

TwoCub -

 

I think quite a few people have advise the OP to still talk with the troop, and I have also suggested the OP to as the current SM to give the new troop leaders a call, especially since the OP has stated the current SM is a great guy and they and the other ASM are doing well dealing with their son.. That way the new troop will get a 3rd party view that may be more fair..

 

True, we only have the OP's side but in their shoes I would feel sabotaged if the person I was having difficulties with took it upon themselves to call ahead to paint a picture of me.. Since they are not the SM, there was no reason for them to do that.. Given the fact that they can not or will not try to work with the scout, they really have no ability to assess the situation impartially or fairly.

 

Sorry I was the one to bring up HIPAA, it was just my experience with it.. To be fair though I did state that even if violated this should be treated more as a reason to educate rather then throwing the book at them, and that in my opinion the fact they seem to contact the new troop in order to give them a poor, negative first impression before the OP visited should be the more serious offense.. 

 

PS. In some ways I don't understand this couples motives.. If they don't want to work with your son, I would think they would be delighted with you going to a different troop and would not interfere..

Edited June 1, 2015 by moosetracker

[CalicoPenn]

Twocub - I think one of my problems with this is that it's really a coversation that should have been had SM to SM after the lad visited the unit and only if the visited SM asked for information.   What happens now if the current SM contacts the potential new SM and says that the Scout is a great kid and the Scout and Parents have worked really hard and well through the issues - the ASM's have essentially undercut that conversation. 

 

I think the other problem I have with this is that this ASM is also the Unit Commissioner and I just have a problem with a Unit Commissioner or any other District Level person actively working to sabotage a Scouts ability to succeed in Scouting. 

[scoutldr]

Please keep in mind that not all volunteers have the training, temperament, or desire to be part of the "therapy" for kids with disabilities.  That doesn't make them bad people.

[Gone]

Please keep in mind that not all volunteers have the training, temperament, or desire to be part of the "therapy" for kids with disabilities.  That doesn't make them bad people.

 

No. But doing what these people did does make them bad people.

 

Since when is working with kids with disabilities "therapy"? Really? Pretty lame comment.

Edited June 1, 2015 by Bad Wolf

[imachristian13]

Hi again everyone.  

 

@@scoutldr certainly has a point. We, as parents, work hard to make sure that we don't put people in places that THEY can't handle. We spend a lot of time working on strategies for our son to self-manage his needs so that these types of incidents have become few and far between. In the case of these 2 ASMs, however, we have worked directly with them to put steps in place for their benefit (as well as our son's). When they want one of us to be on site for an event, we are there. (We are there at every meeting already). We have taken additional steps to better understand how to help THEM to work with our son. Finally, we had always given them the benefit of the doubt on his issues until we realized that they weren't following the guidelines that they helped to create.  

 

It's a difficult scenario...no doubt.  

[andysmom]

Please keep in mind that not all volunteers have the training, temperament, or desire to be part of the "therapy" for kids with disabilities.  That doesn't make them bad people.

No, it doesn't make them bad people, but going out of their way to pass on their presumably negative opinions to another troop about this young man and his family do not make them nice people.

 

My son has Aspergers and ADHD.  We had past issues with an ASM in the troop that my son wanted to cross into.  We made an appointment with the SM and CC of the troop to sit down and discuss our concerns.  We told them that we didn't want our son to have to deal directly with this particular ASM for any reason and explained to them specifically why.  My husband became an ASM (which I understand you have been trying to do) and has accompanied my son on every outing so he could intervene when a problem arose.  The ASM that we had the problem with apparently had problems with others as well because he stepped down from a leadership position and has not been allowed back.  We spoke with all the direct contact leaders about my son's issues and they have been excellent with my son.  We have had to step in a couple times, but it is becoming less and less frequent  and the experience has been amazing for my son.  My husband is now SM and advocates for scouts with special needs.  We encourage reluctant parents to give scouts a try and have welcomed scouts that have been basically driven off by the other troop in town.  

 

I am very curious about what the SM and CC have said about the situation.  Another thing you may want to consider is asking the DE or DC if there is a troop in your area that they could recommend who might have leaders that are better trained or at the very least open about being trained.

[imachristian13]

@@andysmom

 

The SM and CC are just not reacting to this much at all. I'm not sure why. We are trying to connect with them today in fact. The DE and DC have recommended the two other troops in the area that might be options and we are pursuing them at this time.  

 

It's so frustrating.  If this troop would have some vision for kids like these, especially in terms of organizational scenarios (our meetings are very haphazard as are our activities), it would be so much better for everyone involved.  

[WAKWIB]

imachristian13:

    My short answer is to forge ahead in finding an appropriate troop for you son. Folks are gonna talk. Ignore all that, and don't waste your time trying to fix it. My hope would be that the potential new Scoutmaster is keeping an open mind on this and will reserve judgement about it until he has the time to meet your family and observe your son over a period of time. I've often said that kids on "the spectrum" just take longer than most kids to grow and adjust to their brains, and your son will likely change positively in a number of ways in the years ahead.

    I've seen a number of kids with Autism/Asperger's do fine in Scouting.  In theory, it should be the one safe place where they have the opportunity to grow and excel. In fact, I had the privilege to attend an Eagle Court of Honor for one such fellow about a month ago, and I'm sure there were times when some might have said, "he ain't gonna make it." He did, and I'm confident your son will follow that trail as well.

   My prayers are for his success!