Law Suits; And Now It Spreads

[ParkMan]

6 hours ago, David CO said:

Most kids don't choose to participate in scouting, and they don't feel that they are losing out on anything.  There are lots of good youth activities out there for kids to choose from.  If not scouting, they can do something else.  People don't need to support a dysfunctional BSA, as if there are no other good alternatives.  

 

I don't think that we are even remotely talking about the same here.  You seem to have a visceral dislike of the BSA and want to see it fail.  I believe that having a strong Scouting program in the USA is a good thing.  I'd rather see reform of the BSA so that it can really focus enabling successful Scouting programs in our communities.

[MattR]

5 hours ago, Eagledad said:

You may be right, but we had a lot of scouts with moms who used scouts to give their son more male role modeling. 

We did as well, but not nearly as high a percentage in the troop as that of the regular population. Scouts sells fantastically well to some people that know what it's about. For those that are unsure, all that added time and cost seems like a real barrier. If the BSA could crack that nut I think the national charter would carry a lot more weight. Rather than parents being so involved a mix of college aged kids and retirees could cover things. It could give some people on this forum something to do.

 

[David CO]

4 hours ago, ParkMan said:

I don't think that we are even remotely talking about the same here.  

I'm sure we're not.   

Edited August 22, 2020 by David CO

[David CO]

4 hours ago, ParkMan said:

You seem to have a visceral dislike of the BSA

I do have a visceral reaction to the child sexual abuse scandal at BSA.  No doubt about it.

[ParkMan]

6 hours ago, David CO said:

I do have a visceral reaction to the child sexual abuse scandal at BSA.  No doubt about it.

Does your dislike of the BSA as an organization all stem from the actions of the abusers years ago and the BSA not being more aggressive in stopping it?  I was under the impression you disliked the organization because of it's structure and distinction today.

Edited August 22, 2020 by ParkMan

[David CO]

5 hours ago, ParkMan said:

Does your dislike of the BSA as an organization all stem from the actions of the abusers years ago and the BSA not being more aggressive in stopping it?  I was under the impression you disliked the organization because of it's structure and distinction today.

I don't think they are two separate things.  The way BSA is structured played a big part in the way it responded to the child abuse.  BSA puts their institutional interests ahead of the needs of the kids.  So when the initial reports of child molesting reached national, their first reaction was to protect the institution rather than the kids.  

 

[Eagle94-A1]

5 minutes ago, David CO said:

I don't think they are two separate things.  The way BSA is structured played a big part in the way it responded to the child abuse.  BSA puts their institutional interests ahead of the needs of the kids.  So when the initial reports of child molesting reached national, their first reaction was to protect the institution rather than the kids.  

From the research I did a long time ago, I would disagree with the bulk of the cases.

The time period the bulk of the current lawsuit abuse claims occurred, the mandatory reporting laws were extremely limited, basically health care professionals and teachers,. And that is the laws existed at all. Remember the first mandatory laws came out in the late 1960s, and some of the current cases go into the 1950s. Those laws expanded who was a mandatory report was over time. And one thing those laws do is protect the person making the accusation. Without the mandatory reporting laws, you make an accusation, and could be hit with libel suit.

What was policy was the SE was suppose to counsel the family to press charges. If the family would not press charges, the BSA could not do anything legally. What the policy stated was that the accused was to have their membership revoked, and paperwork and documentation sent to the national office to be placed in the IVF, and Scouter applications were checked against it.

Was the policy followed all the time? Sadly no. Some councils would keep the individual registered. Usually these were well known and respected community leaders with a lot of influence and affluence.

Did people slip through the cracks and get reregistered? Sadly yes a few did slip through. But they are also cases where folks with similar names were rejected and had to prove they were not the individual in the IVF.

And did units not tell the SE of suspected abusers? Sadly yes. I read of a case where the Troop committee had a credible accusation, but the victim's family did not want to put him through a trial, especially against a well known and respected community leader. Instead of telling the council and getting him removed, they put him on probation, without telling parents or the council. If memory serves when he attacked another Scout, and that family pressed charges, the first family then came forward.

Please do not think I condone this behavior. In retrospect I realize I was being groomed by my CM, and when he became SM, my gut told me it was time to switch troop. I know 2 of his victims. While working at Scout camp, I was involved in a situation that was happening at the camp. Thankfully we had a LEO on staff to handle the perp, but the 3 kids were in terrible shape.

 

[ParkMan]

On 8/22/2020 at 1:27 PM, David CO said:

I don't think they are two separate things.  The way BSA is structured played a big part in the way it responded to the child abuse.  BSA puts their institutional interests ahead of the needs of the kids.  So when the initial reports of child molesting reached national, their first reaction was to protect the institution rather than the kids.  

 

They may not be different, but they get to the nature of someone's dislike of the BSA and our prospects in the future. 

• For those people who so strongly dislike the BSA, I suspect there is no path forward that keeps the BSA in place as an organization that provides a Scouting program.  If someone is upset about what happened years ago, then there is a chance a reformed BSA that demonstrates it's commitment to youth safety can win their trust. 
• For those who strongly dislike (dare I say hates) the BSA as an organization, then I find it improbable that those people can find a way to support the BSA.

 

[CynicalScouter]

25 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

They may not be different, but they get to the nature of someone's dislike of the BSA and our prospects in the future. 

• For those people who so strongly dislike the BSA, I suspect there is no path forward that keeps the BSA in place as an organization that provides a Scouting program.  If someone is upset about what happened years ago, then there is a chance a reformed BSA that demonstrates it's commitment to youth safety can win their trust. 
• For those who strongly dislike (dare I say hates) the BSA as an organization, then I find it improbable that those people can find a way to support the BSA.

It comes down to the bankruptcy judge. If National can convince the judge to avoid liquidation, then BSA shambles on as a shell of its former self.

As I mentioned previously, there's a massive presumption against Chapter 7 liquidation where the entity is looking to simply restructure (Chapter 11).

 

 

[fred8033]

On 8/22/2020 at 1:02 PM, Eagle94-A1 said:

From the research I did a long time ago, I would disagree with the bulk of the cases.

I fully agree.  People don't realize how far society has changed in the last 20 years and how different since 1970.  Mandatory reporting laws were very minimal until very recently.  Everyone hesitated to raise accusations against respected leaders.  1980s was still the era of stranger danger.  The nature of abuse was not understood.  ...  No part of society was setup to handle it.  ... Heck, it was 2006/2007 that a local music school realized it was a good idea to put glass windows in music instruction rooms.  It took multiple incidents of abuse to drive change.  

[David CO]

2 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

It comes down to the bankruptcy judge.

You're absolutely right.  Nothing we say on this forum will have any effect on the decision.  

[ParkMan]

11 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

It comes down to the bankruptcy judge. If National can convince the judge to avoid liquidation, then BSA shambles on as a shell of its former self.

As I mentioned previously, there's a massive presumption against Chapter 7 liquidation where the entity is looking to simply restructure (Chapter 11).

 

 

Yes and no.

Legally, structurally, and financially yes - the bankruptcy judge has the primary impact.

However, in the hearts and minds of volunteers and members, the bankruptcy judge is a smaller factor.  What I expect will be just as destructive to the future of the BSA is how the active volunteers support the program.  The more of us that lose faith the more challenging it will be for the program going forward.  If the BSA has a committed group of volunteers it can recover from anything.

[MikeS72]

37 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

If the BSA has a committed group of volunteers it can recover from anything.

Thank you.  My thoughts exactly.

[Eagledad]

I believe the policy changes just in the last ten years have driven the more (experienced) dedicated volunteers away. Not so much because changes had to be made, but because there is some effort to discount those experienced volunteers opinions. From the volunteers perspective,  I believe the desire to save the BSA would have been very different 10 years ago. Certainly 20 years ago. I use the differences of subjects and level of traffic on this forum as evidence.

Folks keep saying scouting has to change. But to what? Who will drive or protect the changes to keep it to something significant with value. Who will prevent the program from just becoming an after school youth program that parents use as a safe place to hold their kids until they get home from work. Or is that what this generation wants from Scouts?

Barry

[Eagle94-A1]

53 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

I believe the policy changes just in the last ten years have driven the more (experienced) dedicated volunteers away. Not so much because changes had to be made, but because there is some effort to discount those experienced volunteers opinions.

THIS!

Further, it got quite nasty. Getting called a "Conditional Scouter" was mild compared to what people had been called who had concerns and questions about the changes. You had folks with years of experience who not only had their experience called irrelevant and outdated, but also were cursed out, told to leave, etc. Check out some of the facebook discussions of the time.  Locally We lost several longtime volunteers with decades of experience because of treatment by other volunteers, and the council pros. And no one has replaced them still. And nationally we lost a bunch. What are the volunteer stats now?