Restricting ASM's

[fotoscout]

We've been told that if a lone youth female in a Ventureing crew goes on an outing, there must be another adult female present. Even if the youth's father is on the trip.

The reason given is that there are "things" that the girl might not be comfortable talking about with her father. One could assign the same logic to this problem, and require that there be another female on the trip.

[Scoutmaster Ron]

Nielup..

 

The CC has never camped with the troop (she hates camping) only once in the 3yrs I've been with the troop has a committee member camped with us.

 

The troop has had a female asst s.m. and no restrictions were put on her. She has since left the troop apporx a year ago.

[Bob White]

Ron,

In case this wasn't made clear in the thread about troop by-laws, they do not mean a hill of beans to the BSA or the Chartered Organization, either by what they include or what they exclude.

 

Only the BSA sets rules for the BSA, and the Charter Organization through its institutional head, Charter Organization Representative or assigned Committee chair, can overrule ANYTHING as long as they don't violate BSA policy.

 

If the CO wants two females present, then they can say that. If the Co feels that having only one woman present is a potential problem, then they have the right to protect themselves against the problem. I don't see the problem myself, but I am not the CC so what I think is irrelevant in this situation.

 

The lone female leader, if a parent, can still observe the activities of the unit without participating in the overnighter against the wishes of the CO. Or another female can be found in the unit to join in the outing so that the rules of the CO can be respected.

 

This is another example of where the troop leaders forget that they serve the needs and wishes of the CO. The CO owns the troop, you volunteer to serve their scout unit. The CO agrees to follw the rules of scouting, and in this matter they have done nothing in violation of those rules. You can bring in the UC, the DE, or anyone else you want, but they have no authority in this matter.

 

The best thing to do here is to accept the CO's (and CC's) authority and follow their decision gracefully. Allow them time to get to know the leader involved and see that their concern is needless.

[Scoutmaster Ron]

I respect and hear what you're saying Bob, it's just very, very unfortunate.

[ScouterPaul]

Scoutmaster Ron

 

I would give you the same advice I would give to one of my scouts concerning a rule they didn't agree with.

 

A Scout is Reverent

"A Scout follow th erules of his family,l school, and gtroop. He obeys the laws of his community and country. If he thinks these rules and laws are unfair, he tries tohave them changed in an orderly manner rather than disobey them."

 

As Scoutmaster you can go the CC and persuade her to go to the IH and reverse the rule. If that fails tell her that you are going directly to the IH and talk to them about it.

[NWScouter]

If the unit feels they need a second female then it is their responsibility to come up with one but their rules cannot trump the guide to safe scouting, the parent can come anyway even if the troop can't find a second female. If a parent wishes to spend the night then they have the right. That is no different than the daytime observation. The bottom line is you can't exclude a parent.

[Eamonn]

Open To Observation?

We could fill at least six or seven pages debating what "Open To Observation." means.

At the National Jamboree parents and visitors are welcome to visit, but are asked to leave by a certain time. Is the BSA guilty of breaking their own rule?

While I don't agree with the Chartering Organizations rule. It is the rule.

If I were the Executive Officer of the Chartered Organization and I found out that people were playing silly games to get around my ruling I would have no alternative but to ask them to leave the unit. Being as I am the head of the Chartered Organization I would be well within my rights.

Eamonn

 

[NeilLup]

Hello Scoutmaster Ron,

 

Your CC is a female who doesn't camp. It sounds more and more like the situation I mentioned with the Navy and submarines.

 

I am reminded of some of the comments about men and women in Army basic training when it was suggested that some fooling around might occur. It was suggested that when you are working with a person who hasn't bathed in several days under terrible conditions with bullets flying, it isn't that erotic a circumstance. But it certainly does seem that your CC doesn't trust someone.

 

Most of the posts have been on the topic of "can the Sponsoring Institution do that?" I believe they can. As far as is it wise, I don't believe so but not everyone would agree with me. It would be interesting to have been a fly on the wall in the meeting of the CC with the Sponsor to learn whether words like "I really don't think that women should be SMs or ASMs" were said by your CC.

 

Perhaps the first campout that has to be cancelled because this woman's husband or another female won't go will resolve the matter. Or perhaps saying that you will be happy to abide by the rules if your CC or another female committee member will be the other female.

 

It's a shame that matters have come to this. Are you active with the sponsor? Can you speak to them and find out what they really think? And no, I don't believe that this would be violating lines of responsibility (I refuse to use the term "chain of command" for Boy Scouting as we are not the military and don't give commands.) Your CC already went outside normal good working relationships in a volunteer organization by presenting you this situation as a fait accompli.

[dan]

SMRon Your first post has the answer to this situation.

 

Now at least two other ASM's and 5 boys are talking about leaving this would be at least 1/4th of our Scouts.

This would send a message to the CO and COR. And possibly change the situation, or give birth to another scouting unit.

What is the COR? Church, Government or what?

[Twocubdad]

Eamonn -- Would you feel the same way if you found out that people were playing silly games by using you to approve rules to further their own private agenda?

 

SMRon -- what if you wrote a letter/petition and presented it to the CC, COR and IH? In it lay out you case against the rule: that it is unnecessary, that it seems to unfairly target only one ASM, that it is not something supported in BSA policy, that it is an extraordinary rule for a CO to have, and that, frankly, it is offensive. Signed by you, the three ASM and the five parents, I would think it would carry a lot of weight.

 

By putting your objections in writing to the entire chain of command, you can't be accused of playing politics. My hunch is that the COR & IH were sold a bill of goods and really weren't aware that what they were agreeing to was controversial.

(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

[Fat Old Guy]

"The reason given is that there are "things" that the girl might not be comfortable talking about with her father. "

 

What about boys not being comfortable talking to a woman about a problem that their having?

 

The official reason is a smoke screen. Society considers men to be untrustworthy around women so you need someone there for protection.

 

Think of this. A woman goes to see a male doctor and they usually have a nurse in the room with them. However, I went to see a woman doctor and she just said, "Drop trou" and there was no second many in the room for my protection.

[Proud Eagle]

I must say that both the rule and the reason given for it both seem very odd. It also seems that this was done in a somewhat rude manner. I have a feeling there is something we don't know about this situation, either because you don't know or don't think it is relevant enough to pass on. Otherwise it sounds like you have about enough specimens to start a funny farm between the unit committee and the charter organization.

 

I must however, make one other comment.

 

I think it is a very good idea for there to be at least one male adult on every overnight outing of a Boy Scout troop. I don't think this really needs to be a rule, but it should be the standard practice of every unit that is able to do so.

 

(Colorful illustration of the point deleted to avoid offending anyone's sensibilities, or reminding anyone of unpleasant camp experiences caused by improper hygiene.)

 

 

[Eamonn]

Twocubdad

I don't really understand your question.

The point that I was trying to make was; If I was the Executive Officer and I had a rule that people were breaking I would ask them to either follow the rule or take a hike.

In this case the CO has made a ruling and it seems to me what they want and don't want is very clear add to this the fact that the CO is well with in their rights to make the ruling. Trying to find loop holes to get around the ruling is not the way to deal with it.

If the rule is wrong you can ask that it be changed, obey it or move on.

I in this case don't like the rule and would ask to have it changed if the CO refused I would pack up my tent and see if another unit needed my services. Sure I would use whatever material that was available to make my argument. I wouldn't try to use a loop hole to sneak around what seems like a very clear ruling.

Yes there have been times when I have put my foot down only to find that someone has used my words to bite me in the tail. Heck dealing with kids of Scout age you know before you start that if there is a tiny loop hole they are going to find it and use it. But we are talking about adults.

Eamonn

 

[Twocubdad]

The point I was trying to highlight, E., is that the silliness and abuse of the rules cuts both ways. It sounds to me that the CC has her own personal agenda and used to CO to endorse it. I suppose I am assuming that the CO just rubber stamped the CC's rule and didn't fully consider it. Manufacturing a rule and using it to hammer one of the assistant leaders is no better than one of the assistant's using similarly underhanded tactics to subvert a legitimate rule.

[Hunt]

I don't think the loophole would work either--if a troop forbids lone female adults (or any females) from camping with a troop, wouldn't they just say to the single mom who wanted to observe that she can't--and if she insists, her son can't go either?

 

It occurs to me that this is an example in microcosm of a stupid rule that you might try to get changed, but if you can't, you might decide to live with it if the other elements of the troop are positive.