Parent Wars: The Helicopter Strikes Back

[Eagle94-A1]

No medical reasons for him staying with dad. And the kid is not afraid to camp, but is afraid to sleep away from dad.

We have one Scout with a medical condition already. No one, except the Scout himself, has a problem with him sleeping with dad. That Scout is working on independence from dad, and was in his own tent the entire week of summer camp. Precautions were made, and dad was in a tent next to him. But That Scout is slowly getting independence.

As for abandoning his buddies, yes. This past week, he abandoned his buddy. Previous camp outs he has abandoned anywhere from 1 to 2 Scouts, and in one case his entire patrol as they built a group shelter.

 

[perdidochas]

3 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

No medical reasons for him staying with dad. And the kid is not afraid to camp, but is afraid to sleep away from dad.

We have one Scout with a medical condition already. No one, except the Scout himself, has a problem with him sleeping with dad. That Scout is working on independence from dad, and was in his own tent the entire week of summer camp. Precautions were made, and dad was in a tent next to him. But That Scout is slowly getting independence.

As for abandoning his buddies, yes. This past week, he abandoned his buddy. Previous camp outs he has abandoned anywhere from 1 to 2 Scouts, and in one case his entire patrol as they built a group shelter.

 

IMHO, if he abandons a single buddy, it's a safety issue.  He needs to be told that he is responsible to his buddy. (two buddies or a patrol is a different thing).  The buddy system is a cornerstone in our scouting safety system. 

[LVAllen]

10 hours ago, perdidochas said:

He can help to set up his dad's tent.....

 

Parents are always welcome at activities. You can't ban them for anything other than YPT. 

Every aspect of the program is open to observation. That does not mean a parent should be permitted to interfere with the program.

[Eagle94-A1]

Update.

Meeting with the MC and Scout didn't take place. Another issue from summer camp, one that everyone thought resolved, took precedence and lasted all nite.

Going to be a long week.

 

[CalicoPenn]

On ‎7‎/‎8‎/‎2018 at 1:43 PM, Eagle94-A1 said:

I think that is one of the issues to be discussed. I told the SM my concerns regarding the Scout tenting with him and the MC's reliability when someone id depending upon him. At camporee, he was suppose to set up and run an event for me all day. Instead he got someone else to run the event while he went fishing with his Cub Scout son. He committed to running the event 6-8 months prior to the camporee. The fishing derby was announced the week before, and over the camporee chiefs objections. And as I have mentioned, he has left early from camp outs in the past. IMHO, I cannot rely on him. 

I'm going to defend the dad in this instance, and this instance only.  Yes - he committed to running an event at the camporee.  Then circumstances changed - the district/council announced that there would be a Cub Scout fishing derby that same day in the same place and dad has a Cub Scout age son.  Dad made a decision to spend the day with his younger son at the fishing derby.  Knowing he had a conflict, he did the responsible thing and found a replacement to run the event.  I think that point is being missed - he found a replacement - he didn't leave you in the lurch floundering around looking for someone to run the station or cancelling the station altogether - he found his replacement.   If he had to stay home for a family emergency instead and still found someone to take care of the event, we would all be lauding him as a great example for the Scouts.  Don't blame him because district/council pulled a boneheaded move leaving him with a difficult choice - and one in which, if I were in his shoes, would have prioritized spending the day with my cub scout son at a cub scout event too. 

Leeaving early from camp or taking his son out to a motel overnight during summer camp is a different kettle of fish.

[Eagle94-A1]

Sorry, I left a lot of details missing on the camporee situation.

Mom was there and fishing too. So all three of them were fishing, not just him and his son. I've been in the situation before, i.e. 2 events at the same time, and have gotten the wife to help out so I could keep the commitment. If the wife wasn't there, I could understand a little better. And I can understand medical emergencies. Guy who scheduled the Cub event had one and was not present. Also another staffer was in the hospital, and his display had to be cancelled. Thankfully I found out in advance, and was able to change things last minute.

Dad also  didn't do everything that he agreed to do. He was suppose to arrive early the day before to set up a bunch of different exhibits. Instead he showed up with the troop that nite. Set up was done by the replacement during the scheduled activity. Some of the things  that were suppose to be done were not. And so  patrols didn't see much of anything when they showed up. I overheard one PL telling another that the display was cancelled because nothing was there.

Another detail  left out was the person he got was suppose to help run another event. That event was short staffed as a result, and had lines waiting. In fact,  they had to send people away in the morning because there was too many folks. So while he didn't leave me in a lurch, he did cause headaches and complaints as a result.

And then the straw that broke my back was him complaining about where I put him and how not many showed up in the afternoon. I politely told him that A) Thaat was why I did not want to place him in the location he requested, and wanted to put him in a more visible one and B) since the display was not set up at the start of activities, groups that went there thought it was cancelled and the word was spread.

So those are some of the reasons I just don't rely on him anymore.

[Jameson76]

On 7/8/2018 at 10:18 AM, Eagle94-A1 said:

I was not at summer camp the entire week, just the last night since I was picking up Scouts. But I had a chat with the Acting SM about incidents that happened this week regarding one of the helicopter parents. This is the one who allows his son to sneak into the tent with him. Dad who is a MC, allowed his son to sneak into his tent the entire week they were in tents. Then both of them went off site one nite to stay in a hotel.

This is the Scout who has been in the troop  over a year. All of the camp outs he's been to he has either A) snuck out and slept with dad, B) had dad stay outside his tent until he fell asleep, or C) whined and left early. SM has had 2 conferences with the Scout in regards to the matter for Tenderfoot and Second Class. Scout was suppose to stop the matter, and it was after the 2nd Class SMC that the dad stayed outside the tent. Since being given Second Class, he has continued to sneak in or whined about the camp and left early.

And then both of them left to stay overnite in a hotel. They didn't tell anyone they were doing this until they had arrived at the hotel. Mom and Cub brother showed up early for Family nite at camp. Apparently they got a hotel room nearby. When they had to leave, they went to the hotel instead of driving 4+ hours home. Understandable, but the dad and Scout should have remained at camp.

I've commented on the problem in the past and have gotten little to no support on the matter from the other adults. I've even caught hell on the topic when I mentioned that camporees are Boy Scout events, not family events, and only Webelos would be allowed. I was told the troop is "family friendly." But one of the ironies from this week is the person that made the comment is the acting SM from summer camp. I think he is slowly seeing how family camping is causing problems to the patrol method.

Another irony, one I am proud of, is the Scout with the documented medical condition. This is the Scout who must have a parent with him just in case. For a year, he was sleeping in dad's tent in case of an emergency. Last camp out the troop went on, he stayed his with his patrol mates! Then for summer camp, he stayed in a tent with another patrol mate! Grant you dad was in the next tent over. But this Scout is slowly getting what he wants; independence.

There are a lot of challenges here.  Basically this family may not be a great match for this program.

1) The current program of the BSA (corporate name) is not a family program.  It is at it's core a patrol method program.  The aims are of this are character development, citizenship training, and personal fitness.  There are 8 key methods to deliver the program; Patrols, Ideals, Outdoor Programs, Advancement, Associations With Adults (more on this), Personal Growth, Leadership Development, and Uniform

2) The parent (referred to going forward as Sikorsky) seems to feel the Scout aged program is really just more Cubs and not a different level and personal growth of the youth

3) Family friendly means many things to many people, that may mean accommodating later arrivals and early departures, whole families at an outing because...well because it likely not what that means

4) Leaving camp without checking out, without informing in camp leaders is wrong on many many levels.  That in and of itself is major cause for concern and warrants further action.  The SCOUT is part of the unit.  The leader in camp has responsibility in case of camp emergencies to be able to effectively account for all the members of the unit.  Leaving without notice is at the kindest level, inconsiderate.

 

For reference this this is the synopsis of Associations With Adults. Youth learn a great deal by watching how adults conduct themselves. Scout leaders can be positive role models for the members of the troop. In many cases a Scoutmaster who is willing to listen to youth, encourage them, and take a sincere interest in them can make a profound difference in their lives.

That is not intended to infer tenting with parents or leaving camp with parents

 

Also great story about the scout with medical concerns showing growth and independence.  We had a scout that has a genetic heart issue, took medication daily and also had to limit some activity as final diagnosis and treatment was finalized.  He was active in the troop, as leaders we were aware but did not make a big deal.  Went on most outings, high adventure, and really excelled and did not let the condition limit his experience.

Edited July 10, 2018 by Jameson76

[Eagle94-A1]

21 hours ago, Jameson76 said:

 

2) The parent (referred to going forward as Sikorsky) seems to feel the Scout aged program is really just more Cubs and not a different level and personal growth of the youth

Sikorsky, I like it. Adequate name since the original Sikorskies in Korea were used for recon and medevac. And it seems that dad is always coming to son's aid, even when it is hurting the son.

3) Family friendly means many things to many people, that may mean accommodating later arrivals and early departures, whole families at an outing because...well because it likely not what that means

Sadly, it seems as if the other adults believe in a continuation of Cub Scouts: whole families can come. I'm OK with Webelos, heck it is good for the tranistion process to start ASAP. But younger siblings, no.

I admit, I have a bias against family camping and Boy Scouts. We turned one of the most anticipated trips into one as a youth, and the parents and siblings destroyed the entire weekend. A year's worth of planning and a 14 hour round trip drive for a ruined weekend. Not only were teh Scout unable to do what was planned, the siblings caused several thousand dollars worth of damage to the place we were staying. Troop was never able to go back, and PLC banned family camp outs for years to come. As for other experiences with family camping, well read some of the threads I started over the past year.

4) Leaving camp without checking out, without informing in camp leaders is wrong on many many levels.  That in and of itself is major cause for concern and warrants further action.  The SCOUT is part of the unit.  The leader in camp has responsibility in case of camp emergencies to be able to effectively account for all the members of the unit.  Leaving without notice is at the kindest level, inconsiderate.

Agree. Found out he sent a text message to the acting SM and another adult, in an area where reception is extremely limited, once he got to the hotel. Thankfully the other adult got the text as the acting SM didn't get it until 6:30AM the next day. And I do not even know if he formally checked the Scout out of the camp. Inconsiderate is an understatement. Irresponsible comes to mind, but even that is understatement. How about asinine or idiotic?

And you don't have to tell me about camp emergencies I've been involved in 2 lost camper emergencies. One was easy, the kid found on the trial walking home before campwide notification. The second was 3AM in the beginning of a thunderstorm with 2 Scouts "missing" in the backcountry during the Wilderness Survival exercise. We were notified when we were pulling the group out and they were missing. Staff was activiated and we did a search for them in the thunderstorm. Thankfully the snuck out and went back to camp, and they were found within 15 minutes of waking up staff. But we had folks out for an hour or so in the backcountry searching for them untilk we could get contact.

One idea being floated around is doing a lost camper drill next time Scout sleep with dad. ?

For reference this this is the synopsis of Associations With Adults. Youth learn a great deal by watching how adults conduct themselves. Scout leaders can be positive role models for the members of the troop. In many cases a Scoutmaster who is willing to listen to youth, encourage them, and take a sincere interest in them can make a profound difference in their lives.

That is not intended to infer tenting with parents or leaving camp with parents

Also great story about the scout with medical concerns showing growth and independence.  We had a scout that has a genetic heart issue, took medication daily and also had to limit some activity as final diagnosis and treatment was finalized.  He was active in the troop, as leaders we were aware but did not make a big deal.  Went on most outings, high adventure, and really excelled and did not let the condition limit his experience.

Very proud of this Scout. I was his DL for a while, and have watched him grow from Tigers. Wasn't even aware of the condition until 2nd year of Webelos. I see him going far as he is fighting the problem. Patrol knows the issue, and is working with him. Heck the patrol have come up with ideas to monitor him in the tent that mom and dad have not thought about. Some of those ideas were used on the last two trips.

 

[WisconsinMomma]

OK, personally, I don't think this is your problem.  I know it is frustrating.  You are not the Scoutmaster, right?  This is not your problem.  This scout will have to start tenting if he cares about advancement.  

I hope your sons had fun at camp.  Try not to stress over stuff that is not your problem.  I am sorry but it's not worth your time.  If you are advancement chair, make sure you push back on advancement if stuff is getting overlooked. 

 

 

[Eagle94-A1]

10 hours ago, WisconsinMomma said:

OK, personally, I don't think this is your problem.  I know it is frustrating.  You are not the Scoutmaster, right?  This is not your problem.  This scout will have to start tenting if he cares about advancement.  

I hope your sons had fun at camp.  Try not to stress over stuff that is not your problem.  I am sorry but it's not worth your time.  If you are advancement chair, make sure you push back on advancement if stuff is getting overlooked. 

 While I am not SM, it is affecting the other Scouts in the troop. The Scout is already Second Class, a rank that not only I and several other adults disagree with him holding, but also other Scouts in the troop. I know the SM made a deal with him in order to sign off on that rank: from that night forward, he would be sleeping with his patrol and not his dad. That has not happened. The other Scouts believe he is being rewarded for his bad behavior, and it is affecting morale. It is creating a lot of resentment, and we almost lost one Scout over the issue. When something is affecting the number of Scouts that it is, it is my and other Scouters' problem that needs to be notified and rectified.

[David CO]

12 hours ago, WisconsinMomma said:

You are not the Scoutmaster, right?  This is not your problem.

I agree.

[Oldscout448]

3 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

 While I am not SM, it is affecting the other Scouts in the troop. ..... When something is affecting the number of Scouts that it is, it is my and other Scouters' problem that needs to be notified and rectified.

Agreed 

[blw2]

10 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

 While I am not SM, it is affecting the other Scouts in the troop. The Scout is already Second Class, a rank that not only I and several other adults disagree with him holding, but also other Scouts in the troop....... When something is affecting the number of Scouts that it is, it is my and other Scouters' problem that needs to be notified and rectified.

also agreed

but

21 hours ago, WisconsinMomma said:

.....  You are not the Scoutmaster, right?  This is not your problem.  ....

 

 

this is correct.

A while back, when I was frustrated about some things in our troop not being what I considered to be "creating the ideal experience for the scouts", I was advised something by Clarke Green at scoutmastercg.  I think it's something that applies very often in lots of scenarios...and this is one I think.

If you are not the SM, or the CC (or some might also argue the Chart Org Rep too), then you going in and trying to solve a problem is kinda like you showing up at your neighbor's front door with a gallon of green paint, and telling him that his beige living room wall is the wrong color and you are here to help him fix that problem.

....When looked at in this way, it's helpful for your sanity, IMO, because it helps a person to let it go.

About the only things you can really do if a problem is identified, is to point it out, suggest some solutions...and then let it go..... if you're not happy...resign...and if a scout isn't happy, well that's a real shame because he may not benefit from what scouting could give him. (I'm reluctant to say they can move troops, because I think more often than not this may sound good and look good on paper, it is not at all realistic in many cases and not possible in others)...

....or I suppose another option for a scouter would be to gain the trust of the CC and CO Rep, and then volunteer to take a key 3 role

[SSScout]

in One of the good things about Scouting (at least it is SUPPOSED to be one of the good things) is that a Scout can earn the next rank at his own speed,  in his own way,  how he wants... 

The requirements are what they are.  If there are truly mitigating circumstances (physical,  emotional),  the requirements can be adjusted.  But to what extent?  The Scout Leaders (even the District and Council) need to consider seriously how those requirements should be eased or adjusted.  Hiking? Is the Scout wheel chair bound?  Swimming?   Nature ? Is the scout visually impaired?  It is the summit of judgement calls how the Scout Leader makes that call. 

If a Scout earns a rank, a badge, he/she should realize that every other Scout earned that rank, that badge, by demonstrating or accomplishing the same skills and goals.  The Troop and the Scout in question need to remember that "A Scout is Trustworthy".  Nothing is learned or gained if the requirements are short changed or earned by "blackmail" or behind the scenes "deals".  

The Scout in consideration (and his parents?) here need to be reminded of the above. If the Scout cannot, for whatever reason, camp by himself or with another Scout, a peer rather than an adult "partner",  than he has not fulfilled that requirement. (next thing, is that a requirement?) .  He may (MAY !)  earn that rank later than other Scouts. So be it.    I know of a Scout that bridged from Cubs,  joined the Troop, had lots of fun, camped, hiked,  and was not awarded First Class Rank (won't go into the details) until he was 17.   He did not earn Eagle, but he was a Scout in every sense of the word. He is now a cashier in a local bank.  Is it possible that too much is being made of this one Scout's  possible immaturity problem?   It is , ultimately, his problem , and not the Troops.   All we , as Scouters,  have is a responsibility to create and encourage OPPORTUNITIES.  Not every kid will avail themselves of those opportunities.   So?  

Edited July 23, 2018 by SSScout

[blw2]

On 7/23/2018 at 10:35 AM, SSScout said:

  I know of a Scout that bridged from Cubs,  joined the Troop, had lots of fun, camped, hiked,  and was not awarded First Class Rank (won't go into the details) until he was 17.

completely different topic than the issue in this thread..... BUT

my son was on this track at first.  He just had no interest in the rank or the patch.  He was having a great time and doing much of the work with enthusiasm...until something changed and he got bored and lost interest...ultimately quit scouts at the rank of Tenderfoot.  I was personally hoping for First Class (both rank and spirit), and would have called it a success, even at 17