YP/Program Quality

[InquisitiveScouter]

7 hours ago, ParkMan said:

I've never heard of anyone suggesting that you cannot work on advancements outside of a Scouting activity.  This is a very conservative reading of the text in the G2SS.  Yes, the G2SS could be clearer, but it is not as stringent as is being suggested.

If two Scouts who are friends get together and work on a requirement together, no-one is going to tell them to stop or that the activity doesn't count.  The problem is that if two scouts who are friends get together and something happens, a lawyer is going to try to pull the BSA into the lawsuit.

Feels to me that we need some sort of better tort guidelines on what constitutes negligence in volunteer youth activities.  Perhaps something that says that the BSA has some responsibility for safety, but so too do the parents.  A parent who blindly trusts the BSA and it's volunteers without doing parental oversight is themselves negligent.   

Bingo

[qwazse]

@ParkMan, if two scouts work on a merit badge (or 8 who happen to be in a patrol happen to hike someplace, or 8 venturers gather for ice cream and happen to discuss crew business, etc ...) and one of them abuses the other, BSA can disavow any liability since they weren't following YPT.

[SSScout]

We have, we hope, come a long way.

The "Youth Protection" policy is accepted as also being a "adult protection" policy.  It does work both ways. 

Once upon a time, there was a man who was (so he thought) happily married . The wife upped and abandoned the family.  The court awarded him full custody of their 4 year old daughter.  With the help of his extended family, (and ex wife extended family), he raised the daughter.  Weathered challenges at work, legalities, medical emergencies, school problems and other life stumbles. Along the way, he discovered that the daughter's school marveled at the situation. School staff home visits were "invited" , (and welcomed. Cookies and coffee).  Daughter's school friends had families that did not accept the idea of a single dad with daughter.  Friend cannot playdate with daughter, at her home, but at friend's home, that's okay.   When he remarried, presto, that hurdle was eliminated.  Daughter eventually "morphed" into a lovely young independent woman, and she found a life partner and came to understand and realize her past family dynamic. 

We Scout people are both cursed with our past history and blessed with our newly accepted education about such.  The new YPT (APT?) will serve well in the future, if the lessons learned can be kept in our consciousness.  Our knowledge of science (physics, chemistry, math, biology etc. etc.) has been hard won and forgotten at our peril.  Medical science has gone from "toxic vapors" to  careful sanitation and  "innoculation"....

So too will all our societal groups need to remember the hard learned lessons. .  Religious orders, schools,  Scouts,,,,,,   The realization of the evil inherent in some poor soul's need to degrade children  must lead to  an advancement, improvement  of our society.  

Pass the peach cobbler, please.   You want milk in that coffee?  

 

[Eagle1993]

10 hours ago, ParkMan said:

If two Scouts who are friends get together and work on a requirement together, no-one is going to tell them to stop or that the activity doesn't count.  The problem is that if two scouts who are friends get together and something happens, a lawyer is going to try to pull the BSA into the lawsuit.

100% agree.

I have never told scouts not to meet and work on advancement together.  Many times, I suggest scouts work together outside of our meetings in small groups (i.e., reach out to our Troop Guide to review your knots, etc.).  I see this like any sport ... would anyone tell a kid not to practice soccer with his friends?

My issue is that YPT is written in a way that scouts working together on low risk activities appears to require 2 adult leaders.  Technically one could argue that one scout should not call another scout to discuss their patrol flag design without two registered adults on that call as that call would be a scouting activity.

Currently, we do not interpret it that strictly but I could see others would disagree.   I wish they would update YPT/G2SS to allow flexibility of scouts meeting on their own for low risk activities.  In town patrol meetings, in town short distance hikes, etc.  I'm fine with requiring adults for overnight campouts or higher risk activities ... but let the scouts meet together without parents/adults breathing down their necks.  

[yknot]

What this thread illustrates for me is that it's clear that BSA's YP program is pretty problematic. I don't know if analyzing the program and any known statistics is part of the bankruptcy/reorganization process but any critic could easily prove that it's ineffective, inconsistent, and haphazardly applied. As important, if BSA does survive bankruptcy in some ways and continues to use a similar YP program without fixing it, there are bound to be more cases.  

[ParkMan]

42 minutes ago, yknot said:

What this thread illustrates for me is that it's clear that BSA's YP program is pretty problematic. I don't know if analyzing the program and any known statistics is part of the bankruptcy/reorganization process but any critic could easily prove that it's ineffective, inconsistent, and haphazardly applied. As important, if BSA does survive bankruptcy in some ways and continues to use a similar YP program without fixing it, there are bound to be more cases.  

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.

[John-in-KC]

Let me make this simple. 
 

Never, ever have 1/1 contact with a child not your own or in whom you have the deepest trust of the parents (my granddaughter is an example there)

Guard them, guard you!

[qwazse]

27 minutes ago, John-in-KC said:

Let me make this simple. 
 

Never, ever have 1/1 contact with a child not your own or in whom you have the deepest trust of the parents (my granddaughter is an example there)

Guard them, guard you!

Works for everyone except my friend who was exploited by her grandfather.

And, honestly, if whatever dollars from all of the grandparents in the world could heal that hurt, I'd pay it.

[yknot]

55 minutes ago, 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.

I understand what you are saying but almost all of us on this forum are looking at things from our scouting perspective when that is not the perspective that counts. We're different from a lot of volunteer programs because, fair or not, virtually no one trusts us and the coming headlines are only going to make that worse. We have to be like Cesar's wife. 

[Eagledad]

18 minutes ago, yknot said:

I understand what you are saying but almost all of us on this forum are looking at things from our scouting perspective when that is not the perspective that counts. We're different from a lot of volunteer programs because, fair or not, virtually no one trusts us and the coming headlines are only going to make that worse. We have to be like Cesar's wife. 

That is the extremism. I've talked to a lot of folks who are, were, and were never involves in scouting. None of them believe this is the BSA's fault as an organization. They believe we are getting a bad deal from ambulance chasing lawyers. So, whether some folks have lost faith the BSA, it certainly isn't "virtually no one". 

Barry

[InquisitiveScouter]

6 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

That is the extremism. I've talked to a lot of folks who are, were, and were never involves in scouting. None of them believe this is the BSA's fault as an organization. They believe we are getting a bad deal from ambulance chasing lawyers. So, whether some folks have lost faith the BSA, it certainly isn't "virtually no one". 

Barry

For the most part, people in our community love Scouts.  They love to see us in uniform.  They love to see us out and about, whether keeping youth active outdoors, or on a community service project.  Nearly every time...I mean EVERY time we are out, people come and talk to me either about their positive experience as Scouts, inquiring about what we are doing and why (the SPL's hate me because I always make him talk with these people  ), or thanking us for being a "force for good" in the world.

People get it...they know the value of good citizenship and character building.

[ParkMan]

1 hour ago, yknot said:

I understand what you are saying but almost all of us on this forum are looking at things from our scouting perspective when that is not the perspective that counts. We're different from a lot of volunteer programs because, fair or not, virtually no one trusts us and the coming headlines are only going to make that worse. We have to be like Cesar's wife. 

Right - and that's much of the problem discussing the YP program here on this forum.  People here are looking for the what they feel are weak spots and are amplifying them.  When people here start to think bigger picture, they start to let the worry creep in.  Are we enforcing it enough, are we making sure everyone is 100% trained at all time, and so on.  

We're all trying to find out how to make it perfect, but are glossing over the fact that it's already good now.  When I've explained YPT to parents, they are all generally quite happy with what we do.   That's why I give it a B-.

Edited March 11, 2021 by ParkMan
clarified a thought

[MYCVAStory]

A friendly reminder since the subject of Youth Protection may come up tonight:

NOTICE OF VIRTUAL TOWN HALL MEETINGS HOSTED BY THE OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF BOY SCOUT ABUSE SURVIVORS

The next TCC Town Hall will be held on Thursday, March 11, 2021, at 5pm PST/8pm EST. No registration is required.

Town Hall Zoom link

[MattR]

I was responding to the ch 11 thread but thought it better to put it here.

National's (non) management of ch 11 has been no surprise to me. Quality has never been a serious interest. Also, the numbers of abuses by year is what I feared. I agree it's proof that yp in the bsa needs to improve. 

I think the ypt issue and the lousy management are related. Rules alone won't fix these issues. The bsa, if anything, thinks simple rules will solve every problem. But most problems are people problems and the top down rule dumping that the bsa has will never be good at solving people problems. 

When and if it gets time to pull an improved scouting out of the ashes I think changing the top down model to a real servant leadership structure is one thing that has to be done. That is the only way I see abuse events will decline. It's too easy for units to ignore rules.

 

 

 

Edited March 12, 2021 by MattR
Gahh! I already did this. SW, grumble grumble

[HICO_Eagle]

On 3/8/2021 at 2:52 PM, yknot said:

True. But that is ancient history. Some version of two deep has been around since the 1980s. It predates me.
 

FWIW, two deep was not required in the late 70s/early 80s when I was a Scout.  Our troop went to summer camp with just one adult, the SM, at check in and in fact the SM was off-camp most of the week.  We (the boys) in fact knew that was illicit but wouldn't have been able to go to camp had we not participated in the scheme because we had no other options.  No other adult signed up to go with us and the SM (who didn't even have a boy in the troop) had a shop to run.  The rules in the Aloha Council at the time required one adult, period.

It absolutely was a thing by the time I joined a troop as an ASM in 1988 and the troop I joined was greatly relieved I was able to go to summer camp as the second adult.

The idea that 20% of volunteers were non-compliant seems a bit exaggerated unless it includes new volunteers who haven't got around to it yet and veteran volunteers whose training expires before they retake it.  We absolutely had to have 100% compliance with anyone registered at recharter (when I was still active with Scouting).

All of this disregards the fact that predators -- like most criminals -- don't obey the rules.  The fact that we have any significant number of cases since 1990 demonstrates something that should be intuitively obvious.  I regarded YPT and the G2SS as tools to help me -- the innocent volunteer -- steer clear of situations that could be litigious.  In today's age, that ought to be sufficient incentive for volunteers to take the training and abide by the guidelines.