Transgender policy change

[gumbymaster]

Good luck with that.  Again, you have completely missed the point.  Go back and read the new policy.  You keep talking about a "Birth Certificate".  In all my years of scouting, I have never seen or had a birth certificate given to me.  If mom and dad put on that application that Jane is Johnny and never say a word to you, how will you ever know until something happens.  Oh and by the way, you are not allowed to ask.

 

As others have said, while we may not use and have a Birth certificate, we should have their medical forms.

 

I completely disagree with "you aren't allowed to ask". That's not the way we do things.

If a scout has an allergy - we need to know so we can take the appropriate precautions.  If a scout has medical issues, behavior issues, psychological issues - we need to know so that we can (1) Provide for the needs of the Scout, and (2) Take appropriate precautions or provide adequate supervision.

 

Even now, we are a volunteer organization (at the unit level), and If, as a volunteer, I could not adequately handle or address the needs of a scout, I would work with the parents to either (1) devise a mutually agreeable plan, (2) recommend another unit that may be better suited to meet those needs, or (3) respectfully 'retire' (at least from that unit), as I am unwilling to accept liability for attempting to manage something I do not feed comfortable and qualified to handle.  While I would like to think the last option would be unfortunate for everyone involved and some not directly involved, if I had intransigent parents to work with ... life is too short.

 

We still need to know about a TG youth, because they will have some issues that we will need to help manage for them to participate.  I don't want to treat them differently, but I do want to know how best to accommodate their needs, as I would with any other scout with needs.

Edited February 6, 2017 by gumbymaster

[Col. Flagg]

I have read here before that some have turned down special needs Scouts because they may not be equipped to deal with their needs, perhaps causing a risk to the Scout and increased liability to the unit and adult leaders. Would not a girl boy joining Scouts pose a similar issue? Could not the same defense be used?

[TAHAWK]

Barry, if you are talking about lack of outdoor program experience, that is not a problem restricted to female Scouters.  

 

As more and more male Scouters are products of the deemphasis of the outdoor program in BSA Scouting, they too lack experience. Add the lack of any official BSA outdoor skills program beyond the "Introduction" in IOLS, and the thread is reinforced.  Decades ago, almost every house had a hand axe and chopping block because wood was used to start coal furnaces.  Every male from age 8-10 on carried a "pocket knife" well into the 60's. - 17 of 17 in my Third Grade class when the teacher asked if anyone could sharpen her giant pencils. There were no electric grill starters.  Scouts were expected to cook over an open wood fire well-into the 80's, with "chemical stoves" expressly discouraged in BSA literature.  Women could learn outdoor skills, as could men, if they were taught in any meaningful way.

 

I was told last weekend that any expectation that a Scout could light a fire with one "kitchen" match in dry, still, sunny weather using dry pine needles and dry pine cones was "silly." "It's cold" (28F).  This statement by a 11-year SM.  Male.  Marine.   The female Scouter helping to judge the event, thought otherwise - thought it was a fair test to get 100% of the points.  But she had far more experience in the outdoors.  Judging all male Scouters by this guy would have been prejudice.  

 

We are woefully short of adult help.

[NJCubScouter]

I have read here before that some have turned down special needs Scouts because they may not be equipped to deal with their needs, perhaps causing a risk to the Scout and increased liability to the unit and adult leaders. Would not a girl boy joining Scouts pose a similar issue? Could not the same defense be used?

 

As I and a few others have observed in this thread, based on the language of the BSA statement, it seems pretty clear that no unit will be required to accept a transgender boy as a Cub Scout or Boy Scout.  So no "defense" will be necessary.

[Col. Flagg]

As I and a few others have observed in this thread, based on the language of the BSA statement, it seems pretty clear that no unit will be required to accept a transgender boy as a Cub Scout or Boy Scout.  So no "defense" will be necessary.

 

I will believe it when I see it. It just takes one person with a reason and a lawyer to try to force change. And the BSA has a rather pathetic track record of sticking up for the local units when lawyers get involved. Time will tell.

[Ranman328]

As others have said, while we may not use and have a Birth certificate, we should have their medical forms.

 

I completely disagree with "you aren't allowed to ask". That's not the way we do things.

If a scout has an allergy - we need to know so we can take the appropriate precautions.  If a scout has medical issues, behavior issues, psychological issues - we need to know so that we can (1) Provide for the needs of the Scout, and (2) Take appropriate precautions or provide adequate supervision.

 

Even now, we are a volunteer organization (at the unit level), and If, as a volunteer, I could not adequately handle or address the needs of a scout, I would work with the parents to either (1) devise a mutually agreeable plan, (2) recommend another unit that may be better suited to meet those needs, or (3) respectfully 'retire' (at least from that unit), as I am unwilling to accept liability for attempting to manage something I do not feed comfortable and qualified to handle.  While I would like to think the last option would be unfortunate for everyone involved and some not directly involved, if I had intransigent parents to work with ... life is too short.

 

We still need to know about a TG youth, because they will have some issues that we will need to help manage for them to participate.  I don't want to treat them differently, but I do want to know how best to accommodate their needs, as I would with any other scout with needs.

 

Are we now calling transgender a "Medical Issues"?  I read in earlier posts it is not a medical or psychological issue.  This is not an "allergy" or "physical disability".  This is a scout with the biological body of a female claiming on a membership form to be a male.  Again, you will never know and according to our District and Council per National, you are not allowed to ask.  I asked the same question, what do you do when you find out by looking over the medical form"  According to the new policy, that scout is to be treated based solely on what they put on that BSA application.  I agree, we as volunteer leaders need to know but according to the new policy, you will not and can not ask.  I also agree, I am not willing to put myself or family at risk over something I am not qualified to handle.  It appears this was poorly thought out and no one in "charge" thought about all the issues that could come about.  I think 10x the number of leaders and scouts will leave the program than what is brought in with this new policy.

[Eagledad]

Barry, if you are talking about lack of outdoor program experience, that is not a problem restricted to female Scouters.  

 

 

Correct, but it more than doubled the number of scouters without experience which almost overnight dramatically affected the dynamics of the troop program. So much so that new adult training courses replaced the old courses in 2000.

 

I admit, I found it ironic that one of the main pro patrol method forum members here also used the women leaders introduction as an example that not much of the program was affected. Truth is that adding women (non-experienced adults leaders) had a huge negative affect on patrol method. And as you pointed out (as I have for several years), it will never get better. 

 

I guess we could look at admitting any and all youth as acceptable because the program will never get back to what it was, but I'm an idealist. I will hold out to the end. It does seem we are getting close. But adding girls will be the last straw for me. 

 

Barry

Edited February 6, 2017 by Eagledad

[NJCubScouter]

I will believe it when I see it.

You're allowed to believe whatever you want. It doesn't necessarily make what you believe correct.

 

It just takes one person with a reason and a lawyer to try to force change.

I guess "try" is the key word there. To try is not necessarily to succeed. Quite frankly, I cannot imagine a parent suing to get his/her son into a particular unit that does not want the youth, if there is another unit available in which the youth will be welcomed. In the case of the 8-year-old from New Jersey, the parents sued because the BSA would not let their son into any Cub Scout pack. I haven't seen any more articles about that situation, but one would hope that the policy change resolved that lawsuit.

 

And the BSA has a rather pathetic track record of sticking up for the local units when lawyers get involved. Time will tell.

I am not familiar with that "rather pathetic track record". Can you identify what cases you are talking about?

Edited February 6, 2017 by NJCubScouter

[HelpfulTracks]

I have read here before that some have turned down special needs Scouts because they may not be equipped to deal with their needs, perhaps causing a risk to the Scout and increased liability to the unit and adult leaders. Would not a girl boy joining Scouts pose a similar issue? Could not the same defense be used?

That is my understanding from professionals I have spoken with.

 

As for NJCubScouters assertion that no defense will be necessary, I have seen many a well define and even legally valid policies tested in court, repeatedly.

[TAHAWK]

Serious statistic.  What is the source?  Not easy to find information of something almost  thirty years in the past.

 

Also, I find no evidence that the changes in SM basic training thirteen years after gender restrictions were totally removed  were caused by an influx of female Scouters.  For me, the biggest change was that the syllabus language of "Working with Youth - the Patrol Method"  lost all references to the Patrol Method, the word "patrol" appearing only once.  At the time, we were given an explanation but it boiled down to "This is better."  

 

As you know, the big outdoor program deemphasis was in 1972 --  in the all male all the time days.  It is said that blunder was reversed when BSA realized the damage and brought Bill back but some aspects of the "Improved Scouting Program" lasted until 1989.

 

Outdoor program training as changed in 2001 had the same objectives (Scoutcraft through First Class level)  as the former course, albeit with wholly inadequate time allowed to teaching/learning (a BSA tradition) - the same objectives as the first version of Wood Badge for that matter (with a solid week to cover the material).

 

I never said "it" will "never get better," whatever "it" is.  I hope.

 

As for the Patrol Method, those few at National Council who seemingly were trying around 2000 to do away with the Patrol Method are gone, although ignorance about the Patrol Method remains.  I have already posted that the Scouting.org article that gave over annual planning almost entirely to adults, including the Troop Committee, COR and UC,  has been recently stricken.  The Handbook says a troop is a collection of patrols.  Real advocates for the Patrol Method are around, and in high positions.  I never thought it was hopeless and see signs of progress.

[TAHAWK]

That is my understanding from professionals I have spoken with.

 

As for NJCubScouters assertion that no defense will be necessary, I have seen many a well define and even legally valid policies tested in court, repeatedly.

Indeed, Satan (and his minions) were sued in Federal District Court, although the case was dismissed for lack of service of process on the defendants.  Anyone can sue about anything.  If only the loser had to pay the legal fees of the defendants.

[HelpfulTracks]

Indeed, Satan (and his minions) were sued in Federal District Court, although the case was dismissed for lack of service of process on the defendants. Anyone can sue about anything. If only the loser had to pay the legal fees of the defendants.

Question:

If looser had to pay and Satan had lost, where would they have sent the bill?

 

That is just to interesting to leave alone ;-)

Edited February 6, 2017 by HelpfulTracks

[NJCubScouter]

Indeed, Satan (and his minions) were sued in Federal District Court, although the case was dismissed for lack of service of process on the defendants.  Anyone can sue about anything.  If only the loser had to pay the legal fees of the defendants.

Yes, the full opinion, such as it is, is at https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_ex_rel._Gerald_Mayo_v._Satan_and_His_Staff

 

I especially like the line about the instructions to the U.S. Marshal for service of the complaint.

 

And yes, anyone can sue anyone, but some lawsuits are more likely than others. At the time the time of the change in the adult leadership policy, almost two years ago, there were dire predictions in this forum of a flood of lawsuits against religious CO's. I haven't heard of a single one.

[TAHAWK]

Predictions are best written on the wind.  

[Eagledad]

 

 

As for the Patrol Method, those few at National Council who seemingly were trying around 2000 to do away with the Patrol Method are gone, although ignorance about the Patrol Method remains.  I have already posted that the Scouting.org article that gave over annual planning almost entirely to adults, including the Troop Committee, COR and UC,  has been recently stricken.  The Handbook says a troop is a collection of patrols.  Real advocates for the Patrol Method are around, and in high positions.  I never thought it was hopeless and see signs of progress.

After working this general area of scouting for so many years, I learned that experience (good or bad) has the most impact for how adults run a unit. It's nice that National supports Patrol Method, but as simple as the method appears in print, in reality requires a great deal of discipline to direct. Those who have the experience jump into patrol method without much thought. Those who don't have the experience require proof to even trust it. And they typically don't have the patience to wait for the proof. I have watched this over and over through the years, even on the forums. Today is as good as patrol method boy run scouting will ever get.

 

Barry