fred8033 Posted September 1, 2020 Share Posted September 1, 2020 13 minutes ago, ASMwquestions said: The COR shared w SM who shared w committee member... COR sharing with SM seems appropriate. SM's job is to protect scouts. The SM is the guy around the scouts. He needs to know and maybe know rough general reasons. As for committee member, it depends on committee member's role. ... I'm not hearing any obvious issue. Things seem reasonable ... without knowing anymore. There will be grumbling. People won't be happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASMwquestions Posted September 1, 2020 Author Share Posted September 1, 2020 5 hours ago, NDW5332 said: Was the committee member the letter was shared with the Committee Chair or just another member? If it was Council that removed the ASM, then at the very least the Troop's Key 3 needed to be advised, along with the IH (if the COR was not the IH). Depending on what the accusation was that resulted in the ASM's removal, it may be prudent to advise select committee members of the situation - such as if it was financial impropriety or theft, the Treasurer may need to audit the books. If the accusation was abuse, then necessary YPT and G2SS precautions will need to be enacted. Committee member was just a member/treasurer but accusation was not financial so in my eyes letter should not have been shared. Only fact that ASM was no longer with troop should be shared in my opinion. Sharing more than needed is how rumors start and lives ruined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T2Eagle Posted September 2, 2020 Share Posted September 2, 2020 This dead horse isn't really worth beating, but, nothing here is out of the proper chain of command. In scouts the ASMs report to the SM. The SM reports to the committee. The Committee , led by its chair, reports to the COR. Part of the committee's responsibility is selecting the ASMs. So if they're responsible for recruiting and selecting ASMs they would logically be involved in knowing why someone is no longer an ASM. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShootingSports Posted September 4, 2020 Share Posted September 4, 2020 Context is important. Privacy about a DUI and loss of license, while still driving their kid? Privacy about domestic abuse or drug dealing? Privacy about a medical condition. Also, while not an ASM, still a parent in the Troop? Danger to themselves or others? You really need to be much more specific if you are seeking moral/ethical guidance on disclosure. A recent bankruptcy was caused by this very issue....... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now