YP/Program Quality

[HICO_Eagle]

On 3/9/2021 at 10:38 AM, MattR said:

Unfortunately, most councils are broke and all they see is money. That seems to be the root of all the problems.

At least the councils have the excuse of being broke.  I've long had the opinion that the only thing National sees is money, hence needless changes like uniform changes that seem designed to just make boys spend money (like changing green to red), program changes that didn't improve the programs but made boys and units have to buy new MB pamphlets or fill out more paperwork (but hey, someone's ego got the boost of making major changes).

Robert Gates showed just what he thought about local unit or even council autonomy when he decided to change membership rules without any discussion and in direct violation of what National had told the councils just a year before.

I keep monitoring this forum because I hope I'm wrong and Scouting will rise again but I fear the combination of the hate-mongers who've been targeting Scouting for decades and the ineptitude and corruption at National may be the last hurdle.

[DavidLeeLambert]

On 3/10/2021 at 5:43 PM, yknot said:

OK, well in my Council we can't do that. It's two deep at all times. We send four adults to summer camp. 

 

Under that definition, anything a scout is doing is then a scouting activity. A scout attends a town council meeting for Citizenship in the Community would then require two adult leaders to attend with him. Do your units send two leaders to town council meetings with scouts that are working on that merit badge? 

Last time a troop I was involved with did a physical visit to a city council meeting together, yes, at least two leaders were present.

One time I took three of my own children (one Scout, one Cub Scout, and one Girl Scout, at the time) to visit a city-council member and interview her. In that case, there was no other registered adult present, but I'm pretty sure there's an exception for a parent doing something with their own children.

At present my wife is also a registered leader, so we can be the "two adults" together at any meeting or activity. But GSUSA has a stronger rule: the two adults need to be unrelated.

[skeptic]

On 3/11/2021 at 9:54 AM, ParkMan said:

The problem is always one of perspective.  Many see as a solid program that is working and yet someone will always come along and point to something that improve safety.  Yet, may of these safety increases do come at a cost.  We will always be asking ourselves if the cost is worth the gain.  Since we're talking about kids and safety, we'll almost always say the cost is worth it - but we need to be honest that there's is a cost.

I would submit that the BSA's YPT program is not ineffective nor is it inconsistent.  Yes, there are places where interpretation can occur and in those places it is inconsistent.  But it generally is pretty clear on what is meant.  This will happen until the G2SS is 10 times longer.

All volunteer programs have the same question.  How much supervision and oversight is appropriate.  I don't believe there is a general consensus on this question for any group at this point.  Whether it's the BSA, GSUSA, sports, youth group, or any other youth program.

And we come back to the impossible expectations of a few that any protective program be 100% or it is not working.  Catch 22, especially in our society.  In many other parts of the world, you would not be likely to see the over kill that we see here.  We have noted more than once that much of the issue is with our legal system, one that is reactive rather than rational.  

 

[FaithfulScouter]

23 hours ago, DavidLeeLambert said:

Last time a troop I was involved with did a physical visit to a city council meeting together, yes, at least two leaders were present.

One time I took three of my own children (one Scout, one Cub Scout, and one Girl Scout, at the time) to visit a city-council member and interview her. In that case, there was no other registered adult present, but I'm pretty sure there's an exception for a parent doing something with their own children.

At present my wife is also a registered leader, so we can be the "two adults" together at any meeting or activity. But GSUSA has a stronger rule: the two adults need to be unrelated.

Glad you are following the rules, however many still aren't. We volunteer for an organization under extreme scrutiny for serious abuses.  Yet we still have adult leaders who are very casual in adhering to  youth protection.   

We have had a few Eagle Scout fundraisers & projects where not one registered leader was present.  Our Scoutmaster likes to brag to our CO about all of these projects, but the CO is unaware of the lack of supervision and adherence to youth protection policy..  And some of these fundraisers & projects had a lot of non-Scouting volunteers (both youth and adult) participating too.

We also have issues every year for summer camp where this Scoutmaster registers the Troop and hides the fact that he never has enough registered leaders (or even YPT adults) to attend.  And it's not like an announcement is made for additional volunteers, either. He just does not respect the need for YPT and the possible risks. Unbelievable...

[5thGenTexan]

Updated Youth Protection FAQs on 03/11

https://www.scouting.org/health-and-safety/yp-faqs/?fbclid=IwAR2rnvTZVJzg8WCmgTJuICYoX8whpnc3-yH44iv2rn3kzLVXKN2beUvTTAw#tr

[InquisitiveScouter]

6 minutes ago, 5thGenTexan said:

Updated Youth Protection FAQs on 03/11

https://www.scouting.org/health-and-safety/yp-faqs/?fbclid=IwAR2rnvTZVJzg8WCmgTJuICYoX8whpnc3-yH44iv2rn3kzLVXKN2beUvTTAw#tr

NOTE:

♦ Q. Are there times when youth can gather, meet or conduct activities without adult supervision?  

A. No. Two-deep adult supervision by registered adult leaders 21 years of age or over are required for all Scouting activities and must meet the leadership requirements outlined in Scouting’s Barriers to Abuse. This includes patrol activities.  

 

 

At least this one makes some sense:

♦ Q. Can I share a tent with my son or daughter who has special needs?

A. Youth and adults tent separately in the Scouts BSA, Sea Scouts, and Venturing programs. Youth who have a special need or disability who may require a parent or legal guardian to tent with them must develop a plan in conjunction with their local council Scout Executive to address their specific needs. 

 

This one does not:

 

Q. Can a leader bring their Scouts BSA son or daughter to an opposite gender troop activity?

A. No. Scouts BSA program integrity requires single gender units and single gender buddy pairs. 

Edited March 15, 2021 by InquisitiveScouter

[Treflienne]

16 minutes ago, 5thGenTexan said:

Updated Youth Protection FAQs on 03/11

https://www.scouting.org/health-and-safety/yp-faqs/?fbclid=IwAR2rnvTZVJzg8WCmgTJuICYoX8whpnc3-yH44iv2rn3kzLVXKN2beUvTTAw#tr

Quote

♦ Program Requirements

Q. Can buddy pairs be co-ed in Scouts BSA?

A. No. Scouts BSA program integrity requires single gender units and single gender buddy pairs.  

I'm glad BSA spelled this out.  The coed buddy pair question came up at summer camp pre-covid.  I do not like coed buddy pairs.

Edited March 15, 2021 by Treflienne
clarity

[KublaiKen]

1 hour ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

This one does not:

 

Q. Can a leader bring their Scouts BSA son or daughter to an opposite gender troop activity?

A. No. Scouts BSA program integrity requires single gender units and single gender buddy pairs. 

So you couldn't bring your son who is a Star Scout to a meeting of a girls' troop just starting out to teach knots to Scouts who have never tied one? That is absurd.

[Eagle1993]

1 hour ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Q. Can a leader bring their Scouts BSA son or daughter to an opposite gender troop activity?

A. No. Scouts BSA program integrity requires single gender units and single gender buddy pairs. 

Why is this youth protection?  They are mixing up "integrity of program" with "youth protection".  So if a Scoutmaster brings his Scouts BSA daughter to a Boy Scouts BSA Troop meeting, then that is a YPT violation?

OA election ... so how does a girl Troop hold an OA election if there is no girl youth in OA?  A boy cannot go to their meeting?  So no youth OA can be present at a Girl Troop meeting election until there is a girl in OA and then she will be the only one allowed at future Girl Troop elections?

No coed buddies .. fine, file that under YPT.  The other half of this is crazy to put under YPT.  

[InquisitiveScouter]

1 minute ago, Eagle1993 said:

Why is this youth protection?  They are mixing up "integrity of program" with "youth protection".  So if a Scoutmaster brings his Scouts BSA daughter to a Boy Scouts BSA Troop meeting, then that is a YPT violation?

OA election ... so how does a girl Troop hold an OA election if there is no girl youth in OA?  A boy cannot go to their meeting?  So no youth OA can be present at a Girl Troop meeting election until there is a girl in OA and then she will be the only one allowed at future Girl Troop elections?

No coed buddies .. fine, file that under YPT.  The other half of this is crazy to put under YPT.  

Ready!  Fire!  Aim!!!

[skeptic]

So how does that reflect on the camp staff that is coed and teaches both genders?  As noted, makes no sense.  Absolutely no reason a male scout cannot teach female scouts, as long as the adult leadership is in effect and they are not secreted someplace.  

[Treflienne]

7 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

This one does not:

 

Q. Can a leader bring their Scouts BSA son or daughter to an opposite gender troop activity?

A. No. Scouts BSA program integrity requires single gender units and single gender buddy pairs. 

This seems to address the issue of tag-a-longs. For example the boy (who is a scout in a different troop)  who tags along to his sister's troop's camping trip because (a) his parent is going on the trip, (b) the boy is not old enough to be left at home overnight by himself, and (c) there is no other parent at home or relative living nearby that he can be left with.

Inviting experienced scouts from a different troop (same or different gender) to a meeting or outing, because of their skills or experience, in order to help or assist in some way, seems quite a different kettle of fish. 

If only the FAQ were a little clearer it would be helpful.

[Eagle1993]

8 hours ago, Treflienne said:

This seems to address the issue of tag-a-longs. For example the boy (who is a scout in a different troop)  who tags along to his sister's troop's camping trip because (a) his parent is going on the trip, (b) the boy is not old enough to be left at home overnight by himself, and (c) there is no other parent at home or relative living nearby that he can be left with.

Inviting experienced scouts from a different troop (same or different gender) to a meeting or outing, because of their skills or experience, in order to help or assist in some way, seems quite a different kettle of fish. 

If only the FAQ were a little clearer it would be helpful.

The issue is they put this under YPT. A scout BSA youth is at least 10 but likely older.  If they said Cub Scout I wouldn’t have an issue or if they out this FAQ under program that would be fine.  This is a YPT FAQ.  

[scoutldr]

Following a few of the other Scouting pages on FB, there are MANY Scouts BSA units flagrantly violating the Co-ed policy.  Units separate on paper only, and they are adamant about it..."this is what works best for us, so bugger off."  Meeting together, camping together, same PLC, same Committee.  Reminds me of the early days of YP...units ignoring it because "that just doesn't work for us."  If this is so important in terms of safety, liability and optics, why do the Councils permit it?  And don't tell me they don't know about it.  THey will still look the other way if it means retaining members and units.  That's how we got in this mess.

[InquisitiveScouter]

19 minutes ago, scoutldr said:

Following a few of the other Scouting pages on FB, there are MANY Scouts BSA units flagrantly violating the Co-ed policy.  Units separate on paper only, and they are adamant about it..."this is what works best for us, so bugger off."  Meeting together, camping together, same PLC, same Committee.  Reminds me of the early days of YP...units ignoring it because "that just doesn't work for us."  If this is so important in terms of safety, liability and optics, why do the Councils permit it?  And don't tell me they don't know about it.  THey will still look the other way if it means retaining members and units.  That's how we got in this mess.

This is the dirty little secret for most councils...turn a blind eye until something happens.  And, even though our Scouter Code of Conduct says "I will take steps to prevent or report any violation of this code of conduct by others in connection with Scouting activities.", if you do (even anonymously), you are outed, ostracized, marginalized, labeled, shunned, etc....

We are not a self-policing group, even if touted as such.

Edited March 16, 2021 by InquisitiveScouter