Screwup on the largest level

[Krampus]

I agree. I think remaking the scout redo requirements is the definition of pencil whipping. 

 

So now we are going to allow boys to earn awards before they are eligible? Should I tell my 17 year old he can finish his Eagle whenever he likes now?

 

C'mon folks. If we don't start holding people to rules and regulations you are going to grow old in a world where your doctor will "try" to save your life, but won't really put his heart in to it.

 

:et's have SOME pride, shall we?

[Hedgehog]

I'm not sure how you accomplish a do-over. 5-mile hike for Second Class was done when he was 9. But he got Hiking MB and did the AT when he was 10 and eligible to join. You gonna make him do a 5-mile hike when he's got the 50-miler? Same goes for First Aid. Got the MB at 10 when he was eligible to join but did Second and First Class first aid when he was 9. 

 

 

The miles for the 50 miler can count toward other requirements (Scout son counted  three days and 30 of those miles toward his backpacking merit badge).  The hikes for the Hiking MB can count toward the Second Class and First Class requirements but not toward other merit badges.

 

The First Aid requirements are "Satisfy your counselor that you have current knowledge of all first aid requirements for Tenderfoot rank, Second Class rank, and First Class rank."  There is no requirements that they need to be signed off on.  I suspect any merit badge counselor wouldn't rely on the sign off, but would have them show they know.

 

1.  

[Hedgehog]

New Committee Chair and relatively new Advancement Chair. Getting ready for some BORs on Monday and we were reviewing records. A kid wants a Life BOR.

 

And he's just turned 11.

 

Don't know how, but somehow he was registered when he was 9. And council must have accepted the application because he was on the council roster two years running. And I'm fairly certain that corrrect DOB is on the application. And although I haven't looked, I'm pretty certain the correct DOB is on his physical. Parents have no idea about Scouting and I'm 99.99999 percent they didn't have an idea about joining requirements. Dad is an retired fighter pilot from military. 

 

 

My suggestion for what it is worth.  Start by having a discussion with Dad. Explain the rules and that a mistake was made through no fault of him or his son.  Then explain the plan to get things back on track.  Stress that this could cause problems when he goes for Eagle and you want to fix it once and for all.

 

Next, have a Scoutmaster conference with the Scout. Explain the rules and that a mistake was made and it wasn't his fault.  Tell the scout that he is amazing for having accomplished what he had done so far.  Then (preferable with one of the boy's leading the discussion) go through the Tenderfoot through First Class requirements.  Anything that he "learned" can be demonstrated.  Anything that he did, would have to be after end of 5th grade (assuming he was 10).  It may not be the same event that he had credit for originally, but if he has done it since he gets credit.  Come up with a plan to have him "redo" any requirements that were done before he was eligible such as the exercise, cooking, orienteering, etc.  You could even make it so that he leads younger boys through those skills and events.  Make it a priority to have those done by the end of the school year.  Then do SM and BOR for Tenderfoot, Second Class and First Class all at once.  This is the only way that there is NO QUESTION when he comes up for Eagle.

 

I'm all for letting the boys take care of their own advancement, but this is an adult caused problem that requires an adult implemented solution.

 

Finally, this is a great teaching moment for the Scout (and the leaders and parents).  We can teach that rules matter.  We can teach that all problems have a solution.  We can teach the value in mastering skills rather than just doing them once (still working on that with our Troop).  We can teach what it means to be Cheerful in the face of adversity and what it means to be Obedient.  We can teach what it means to be Brave in the face of disappointment.  

[Sentinel947]

So now we are going to allow boys to earn awards before they are eligible? Should I tell my 17 year old he can finish his Eagle whenever he likes now?

 

C'mon folks. If we don't start holding people to rules and regulations you are going to grow old in a world where your doctor will "try" to save your life, but won't really put his heart in to it.

 

Let's have SOME pride, shall we?

Ultimately, neither of us work for the BSA, so this is an opinion forum. In the end, it's whatever his council or even National decides. 

 

I'll agree that if he's actually learned the skills, redoing them should be pretty easy. If that's what the powers that be decide, I'd certainly not protest. I'll agree it's a workable solution to the problem. I don't agree it's the ideal solution to the problem. Hedgehog above me outlines a pretty decent way to correct the problem. I could be on board with that. 

Somebody screwed up, and put the Scout in the program before he was eligible. You know who wasn't responsible for that? The Scout. The Scout has demonstrated his ability to complete the requirements, even if he wasn't eligible. What is the purpose of requirements? To check off boxes or to learn skills? He's already learned them. 

 

Are you really comparing your 17 year old to a 9 year old? A 17 should have much better understanding of what he's eligible for and what he is not. A 9 year old likely has no idea what the age requirements are for being a Scout. Neither does most 11 year old children. Your 17 year old better well know that 18 years old is the end of the advancement program. I don't find a child to a man comparable. 

 

Ultimately, his parents screwed up, his troop screwed up, and the council office screwed up. Make them fix the problem. Not the Scout. Just my opinion. 

 

I don't buy the slippery slope argument. One fix to a single local problem does not make a National precedent and cause all the rules to be thrown out. 

 

I'm still amazed how nobody caught this. 

 

Sentinel947 

 

Edited February 22, 2016 by Sentinel947

[Krampus]

I'll agree that if he's actually learned the skills, redoing them should be pretty easy. If that's what the powers that be decide, I'd certainly not protest. I'll agree it's a workable solution to the problem. I don't agree it's the ideal solution to the problem. Hedgehog above me outlines a pretty decent way to correct the problem. I could be on board with that.

This should be no different than if you have a scout who gets signed off on a Star requirement before he has earned First Class. You cannot complete a requirement if you are not eligible. You can't complete your POR for Star if you are Second Class.

 

Somebody screwed up, and put the Scout in the program before he was eligible. You know who wasn't responsible for that? The Scout. The Scout has demonstrated his ability to complete the requirements, even if he wasn't eligible. What is the purpose of requirements? To check off boxes or to learn skills? He's already learned them.

Doesn't matter. We, as a society, have to teach the scout a lesson that sometimes OTHERS will screw up and YOU will get the shaft. It's called LIFE!! By giving him a pass we teach him that rules don't matter. Think of the life lesson this kid will learn about accountability. At his age rather than be bitter he'll probably say, "Okay, let's earn it again."

 

Are you really comparing your 17 year old to a 9 year old? A 17 should have much better understanding of what he's eligible for and what he is not. A 9 year old likely has no idea what the age requirements are for being a Scout. Neither does most 11 year old children. Your 17 year old better well know that 18 years old is the end of the advancement program. I don't find a child to a man comparable.

No, I am comparing the breaking of rules and process. If we break the joining rules and allow a 9 year old to start earning stuff, why not break the age-restriction rule on the other end and allow anyone after 18 to earn Eagle? Why have age restrictions if you are not going to follow them?

 

Ultimately, his parents screwed up, his troop screwed up, and the council office screwed up. Make them fix the problem. Not the Scout. Just my opinion.

It is called accountability. Who said kids should not be subject to it too? That's what the BSA program is all about. Why shield the kid?

[Sentinel947]

@Krampus 

 I'm sympathetic to the rules and process argument. I'm also sympathetic to the life lesson that is learned here. Again, if that's something the Council decides, I can get behind it and execute it. 

As for accountability, we should be holding kids accountable, but this Scout doesn't have anything to be accountable for. Since he wasn't the one who created the situation. Why aren't we holding the adults accountable? Lets talk about how you plan to make those who actually broke the rules fix the problem. 

Hopefully Cherokee Scouter comes back and gives us what the council decides. I bet this happens more often than people admit and I'd love to know what the powers that be decided. 

 

I'll say Krampus, if you've made it this far in my post, that I'm starting to swing towards your point of view. I do think it's a reasonable. Especially if the parents and the Scouts agree, it's one way to fix the problem without involving the council. It's a good lesson to teach, if it's handled properly. If the Scout and his parents don't like that solution, It's on the council to make a decision. 

Sentinel947
 

[qwazse]

This should be no different than if you have a scout who gets signed off on a Star requirement before he has earned First Class. You cannot complete a requirement if you are not eligible. You can't complete your POR for Star if you are Second Class..

 

Taking things quite literally, these are the requirements that should be done for

• Life "While a Star Scout": 1, 4, and 5, and 6 (membership, service, responsibility and pedagogy),
• Star "While a 1st Class Scout": 1, 4, and 5 (membership, service, and responsibility),
• First Class "Since joining": 3 (participation)
• Second Class "Since joining": 3 (participation, including campsite prep)
• Tenderfoot "Since joining": none until this year.

If the kid's "all that", he will have met these requirements at the appropriate age benchmarks as well as before age 10. He'll still be holding a position of responsibility, doing whatever service projects are coming his way, and teaching skills.

 

But, run it by the boys. Explain the problem. Read requirements. Ask them what would be fair and right. Do that.

 

The only reason to call national is to make sure the record is set straight (if it needs to be) by the time the boy fills out his Eagle application.

[Krampus]

@Krampus 

 

 I'm sympathetic to the rules and process argument. I'm also sympathetic to the life lesson that is learned here. Again, if that's something the Council decides, I can get behind it and execute it. 

 

As for accountability, we should be holding kids accountable, but this Scout doesn't have anything to be accountable for. Since he wasn't the one who created the situation. Why aren't we holding the adults accountable? Lets talk about how you plan to make those who actually broke the rules fix the problem. 

 

Hopefully Cherokee Scouter comes back and gives us what the council decides. I bet this happens more often than people admit and I'd love to know what the powers that be decided. 

 

I'll say Krampus, if you've made it this far in my post, that I'm starting to swing towards your point of view. I do think it's a reasonable. Especially if the parents and the Scouts agree, it's one way to fix the problem without involving the council. It's a good lesson to teach, if it's handled properly. If the Scout and his parents don't like that solution, It's on the council to make a decision. 

Sentinel947

By ALL MEANS let's hold the adults responsible. The SM and TC should step down if they missed this AND let it continue. How can you have an SMC without reviewing someone's ENTIRE record? The council folks that accepted the application without checking it and validating (assuming it was correctly filled out with the wrong data) should be re-assigned and not have a role that requires any such validation work. Mom and dad should not be allowed to hold any role that requires sign off on anything since they couldn't read and understand the BSA joining rules.

 

In terms of the Scout, no he himself did not break any rules, per se. He's following what mom and dad allowed to happen, what the SM/TC did not catch and what council allowed to happen. BUT, just like the Miss Columbia didn't make a mistake, she was nevertheless de-crowned. Not her fault, but right is right. Same here. The Scout is not to blame, but he should not benefit from someone else's mistake.

Edited February 22, 2016 by Krampus

[fred johnson]

So now we are going to allow boys to earn awards before they are eligible? 

 

The trouble is once the council registered him and the troop accepted him, he was eligible to earn advancement.  The mistake was accepting him as a boy scout.  That was the mistake.  The original poster never discussed cheapening the requirements or lowering expectations.  

 

I was just reminded that the scout wants a Life BOR when he's 11 years old.  To be honest, that's fine.  PORs and Active require four and six months.   That's 10 months.  The scout was eligible at 10 years old.  So there is no need to delay.  

 

IMHO, confirm with council.  Focus little on the issue.  Focus on providing learning and growing experiences.  Get the kid out doing things.  

[Krampus]

You can't be eligible to earn anything if you are not properly a member. The join requirements were NOT met. A mistake was made.

 

If your tax return comes back with a 10,000 refund but you actually owe $500, do you get to keep the 10K. Give back only $9,500? Or do you give back the whole 10k AND pay the $500 you owe?

 

Doesn't matter who made the mistake. What matters is "was he eligible"? The answer is no. Period....unless you have the power to change the BSA join requirements.

 

If BSA erroneously gave someone Eagle, would they take it back? In a heart beat.

[fred johnson]

If BSA erroneously gave someone Eagle, would they take it back? In a heart beat.

 

BSA ... Actually, no.  It depends.  

 

Our role as leaders is NOT to be a gatekeeper or to keep an accountant keeping a spreadsheet.  It's about teaching life lessons.  Here we have a scout in a bad situation.  It is absolutely wrong to say "too bad ... ya got to start over".  The right thing is to look back and now say "how to we make the situation whole?".  Having a scout as for a Life BOR and respond by saying whooops we made a mistake, ya need to start over.  That would be the absolute worst response.  

 

As for the 11 year old scout, there may not be anything that must be done.  

[meschen]

My two cents: this isn't an advancement issue. As far as advancement for the youth goes, if a Scout did the work, it is legitimate. He was awarded his Scout rank. Once he's been awarded the rank, there are no do-overs or take-backs. Furthermore, it is unfair to punish a Scout for the errors of an adult leader. There are no other age requirement for any other rank, so there is no reason with withhold those ranks.

 

This is a guide to safe scouting / age appropriate activities issue. Letting a Scout join early means he is allowed to participate in activities "inappropriate" for a "Webelos." If he is injured, that opens up questions as to legal liability. If you have made the DE, Committee Chair and Chartering Organization Rep aware of the situation, you've done your duty.

[Krampus]

BSA ... Actually, no.  It depends.  

 

Our role as leaders is NOT to be a gatekeeper or to keep an accountant keeping a spreadsheet.  It's about teaching life lessons.  Here we have a scout in a bad situation.  It is absolutely wrong to say "too bad ... ya got to start over".  The right thing is to look back and now say "how to we make the situation whole?".  Having a scout as for a Life BOR and respond by saying whooops we made a mistake, ya need to start over.  That would be the absolute worst response.  

 

As for the 11 year old scout, there may not be anything that must be done.  

 

In your opinion it is "wrong" to say start over. There are many who feel it would be wrong to let it stand without enforcing the rules.

 

There are two life lessons the Scout can learn. First, is the one you profess: It's not your fault so blame someone else and benefit from the mistake. Second, it's not his fault BUT sometimes you get the shaft when it is someone else's fault and YOU still suffer. The first one produces a person who is like all the other blame-stormers out there who won't take accountability for anything. The latter produces someone who knows right from wrong and preservers in the face of adversity.

 

I'd want my kids to be the latter. We have a whole society of the former. 

[fred johnson]

Your examples are strongly biased.  The kid doesn't even know there is an issue.  It's the adults.  The question is not who the scout is blaming as much as do the scouts create further hardship based on an issue from over a year earlier.  IMHO, it's more a lesson about taking care of others.  Loyalty.  Courteous.  Trustworthy.  

[Krampus]

So his mom and dad screwed up and the best example we can give him is not hold anyone accountable for their mistake? What does that teach him? Since when did adherence to the rules and obeying the laws become a lesson we didn't want our kids to learn? 

 

How about this Fred, what about ALL THE OTHER KIDS that obeyed the rules? How courteous is your approach to them? Trustworthy? The trust was broken when mom and dad failed to read the joining requirements. What about honesty? Missed that lesson did we? How about loyalty to ALL THOSE OTHER KIDS who played by the rules?

 

When we start picking which rules we want to live by you start down a slippery slope. There's nothing biased about anything I have said. It is YOU that are biased toward one scout. *I* want to apply the rules even to EVERYONE. If that is biased then we have a very different set of definitions. 

 

I want a level playing field for everyone. I want accountability for the parents, council and unit leaders. That's not bias, that's playing by the rules. Scout's follow rules. This is the very first rule a Scout needs to follow. Break this, what else are we going bend or break?