BSA vs Other Programs/Society - Youth Protection Comparison

[CynicalScouter]

24 minutes ago, 5thGenTexan said:

45 minutes to an hour of online training with a couple of questions at the end with no way to prove the training taker is the actual applicant is a joke.  

Exactly! The Catholic Virtus program requires real, in person training.

And remember: BSA did not even BOTHER to get direct contact adults fully (90%+) trained as recently as 2018. It was only too happy with 67%.

 

Edited May 14, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[CynicalScouter]

6 minutes ago, mrjohns2 said:

I keep calling it YPT, but the question at hand isn’t YPT, but the results (output measures) of YP. So, YPT could be poor, but is YP getting the results we want/need? Due to the lack of transparency, we don’t know. 
 

The poor implementation of YPT makes one question the quality of the system even though it is just an “in process” type of thing vs. “result” type of thing. 

Yep. Let's see how many YP violations get reported and acted on. Oh, what's that, BSA refuses to report that data? Ok then.

[SilverPalm]

Even if YPT was objectively the finest youth protection program offered anywhere in the world, that doesn't mean it can't be better. There are no downsides to working to improve YPT.  None.

But if one kid gets spared because one more adult leader recognizes a bad situation developing and does something to stop it as a result of the improved training, then it would have been worth it.

I'm surprised BSA doesn't see this. Even if we surrender the contention that their program is the best in the world bar none end of story... that doesn't mean it can't be better.

This is a really easy, relatively painless ask from the TCC that doesn't involve selling camps or depriving future scouts of so much as a neckerchief slide. Why on earth don't they address it?

[vol_scouter]

1 minute ago, SilverPalm said:

Even if YPT was objectively the finest youth protection program offered anywhere in the world, that doesn't mean it can't be better. There are no downsides to working to improve YPT.  None.

But if one kid gets spared because one more adult leader recognizes a bad situation developing and does something to stop it as a result of the improved training, then it would have been worth it.

I'm surprised BSA doesn't see this. Even if we surrender the contention that their program is the best in the world bar none end of story... that doesn't mean it can't be better.

This is a really easy, relatively painless ask from the TCC that doesn't involve selling camps or depriving future scouts of so much as a neckerchief slide. Why on earth don't they address it?

Perhaps, it is because here and other places volunteers complain bitterly about taking YPT that I believe should be done yearly.  People here and elsewhere threaten to quit if youth protection gets more demanding. The organization is already weakened by membership losses. 
 

if those are the reasons, the BSA should follow your advice and let those people leave if they are not willing to get with the program and realize that there can be no program until we have all made Scouting as safe as possible.  There is no excuse.  We all must do the right thing to protect children. 

[yknot]

2 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

I do not see anyone on this forum saying that.  I see people comparing to other organizations to indicate BSA may be safer.  I see comments that if BSA is closed, kids may actually be more at risk.  That is not saying sex abuse is the cost of having BSA ... its the exact opposite.

Now ... are these stat comparisons fair ... likely not.  But I believe the clear intent is to understand how BSA's safety compares to other organizations with a clear goal of ensuring BSA is safer.  

 

I fully expect changes from this bankruptcy.  I believe BSA has been too timid sometimes acting on change (for example, requiring YPT to register).  However, I still see BSA as much more active in this space than GSUSA or sports teams I have been involved with.   Most unit leaders spend time considering YP aspects when planning events.  Every Eagle Scout project I review includes a discussion of safety and YP coverage.  This is drilled into us by the BSA.

So ... I expect changes and some of which are probably a bit overdue (more openness in reporting).  However, I have a hard time saying BSA doesn't take this seriously.

In my opinion, one large mistake BSA keeps making is believing that it is on a level playing field with other organizations when it comes to youth protection needs and refusing to acknowledge that it is not. 

1) There are some pretty consistent statistics that show 88% of all child abusers are male and BSA, even today, is largely male based. Girl Scouts is mostly female run. Sports, even when segregated by gender, are generally run in settings that include a lot of women.  

2) BSA is the only youth organization that promises a higher standard of character and morals and has designed its whole program around those core laws and beliefs.  Parents, children, and the broader community all expect a higher level of behavior from anyone involved in scouting. That message is inherent in its marketing and it infers to parents that your kids will be safer with scouts. BSA has also made concerted efforts to recruit all kids, not just the ones with vigilant parents. It encourages the view that scouting can be good for boys who are troubled or in need of a father image -- attributes that we know make such boys more vulnerable to predators.

3) BSA is the only youth organization that routinely takes youth into remote locations out of general public view with unrelated adults for overnight activities, many of which require some personal situations. I don't know of any other organization where kids are visiting back country latrine ditches with a buddy for example. 

There are other factors but these are some of the unique characteristics to scouting that require it to have higher standards for youth protection at a minimum. Just as in the workplace, physical safety standards are on one level for a retail establishment and at another more stringent level for a welding shop. Scouting is in the same kind of situation but it keeps trying to equate itself with team sports or 4-H or Girl Scouts.  

 

 

[SilverPalm]

2 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

Perhaps, it is because here and other places volunteers complain bitterly about taking YPT that I believe should be done yearly.  People here and elsewhere threaten to quit if youth protection gets more demanding. The organization is already weakened by membership losses. 
 

if those are the reasons, the BSA should follow your advice and let those people leave if they are not willing to get with the program and realize that there can be no program until we have all made Scouting as safe as possible.  There is no excuse.  We all must do the right thing to protect children. 

Look, if we're not willing to spend a couple hours a year to help reduce the incidence of child rape, then the organization doesn't need to survive.  That's a tiny price to pay to save someone a lifetime of hurt.

This wouldn't even be a big deal.  Set up a Saturday morning session in person or whatever.  If folks aren't willing to set aside two or four hours on a Saturday to help solve this problem, then maybe they don't need to set aside their Monday nights to come to Scout meetings either.

It astonishes me that people complain about something as important as YPT, considering how little time it requires in its current incarnation.

[CynicalScouter]

19 minutes ago, SilverPalm said:

It astonishes me that people complain about something as important as YPT, considering how little time it requires in its current incarnation.

Current online YPT = 72 minutes. If people cannot even be bothered to sit and watch 72 minutes, SELF PACED, in order to just have a basic awareness of what YP is and why BSA needs it, then BSA doesn't need them.

[qwazse]

1 hour ago, johnsch322 said:

I do not believe that could ever come to fruition.  Could you imagine the stories that would be told around the campfires.  I am sure the Boy Scouts would not welcome any of those conversations on their properties.

This is what I mentioned earlier about "demonizing" the other side. Never be so sure. My first YPT training was in camp was by a former camp director and involved a run-down of recent incidents. The instructor was as open as the law would allow him. If, legally, a survivor could give us a walk-through, he/she would have been welcomed  -- and supported as best we amateurs could.

A subsequent video training involved interviews with survivors.

So, there is evidence that BSA is in favor engaging survivors in practical ways would empower future scouters to create an environment that reduces risk even more than the current 100-fold below what children face elsewhere.

But, as we see above ... this kind of restorative justice isn't for everyone. If someone couldn't face returning to their old camp, would they be able to do so at another camp? Could a camp vet survivors? What if some have since become perpetrators? If the camp is long gone, could a willing survivor be welcome to visit a pack/troop and instruct its volunteers? What kind of standing committee would we need to assist victims, camps, and units in coordinating all of these issues? And, would it be possible to protect both sides from reprisals?

I think it is a solution that a number of folks on both sides would welcome. But, it might cost more to make it work than any current dollar settlement.

Edited May 17, 2021 by qwazse

[yknot]

2 hours ago, qwazse said:

 

So, there is evidence that BSA is in favor engaging survivors in practical ways would empower future scouters to create an environment that reduces risk even more than the current 100-fold below what children face elsewhere.

 

Without reputable sources, this opinion can pretty much be interpreted as demonizing as well because it belittles the position that victims have that the BSA was at fault. I think the only hard figures I have seen regarding child abuse are the claims made in the BSA bankruptcy, the Catholic Church lawsuits, and the U.S. Gymnastics cases.  Most everything else has been someone's personal extrapolation or questionable one off sources. 

Edited May 17, 2021 by yknot

[elitts]

15 hours ago, yknot said:

Without reputable sources, this opinion can pretty much be interpreted as demonizing as well because it belittles the position that victims have that the BSA was at fault. I think the only hard figures I have seen regarding child abuse are the claims made in the BSA bankruptcy, the Catholic Church lawsuits, and the U.S. Gymnastics cases.  Most everything else has been someone's personal extrapolation or questionable one off sources. 

I've argued this point before.  There's plenty of actual evidence showing that the incidence of child sexual abuse is much higher among the general population than it is within Scouting (based upon known cases in Scouting).  Here is the quickest one I could find.

  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4311357/

 

[yknot]

43 minutes ago, elitts said:

I've argued this point before.  There's plenty of actual evidence showing that the incidence of child sexual abuse is much higher among the general population than it is within Scouting (based upon known cases in Scouting).  Here is the quickest one I could find.

  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4311357/

 

Yes, and that's exactly what I'm talking about. Statistics such as this that include girls can't be used for comparison to abuse that occurred in boy scouts because it has with a few exceptions largely been committed against boys in our organization. While anecdotally believed to be underreported, the sexual abuse rate among boys is a fraction of what it is among girls. Finally, this is an international report and cannot be used to compare to US or European rates because of cultural differences, largely regarding girls, such as you see in parts of Africa and South America. 

It is possible that boys are actually safer in boy scouts, but there are no valid studies that actually compare the rates of abuse among boys in scouting to abuse rates among boys in the broader world and can support that. Until there are such studies, the only hard numbers we have to go by are what has been reported to the places I noted. 

[ThenNow]

54 minutes ago, elitts said:

There's plenty of actual evidence showing that the incidence of child sexual abuse is much higher among the general population than it is within Scouting (based upon known cases in Scouting).

I'm not sure what the point is because:

1) Are we taking the world - with far different standards and imbedded cultures of abuse - as the "acceptable" baseline or reasonable element of comparison?

2) Are the legal systems in those countries set up in such a way as to have rigid standards and penalties - criminal and civil - for proven cases of abuse or has they had hundreds of years of "winking" at sexual abuse, even if their laws are similar to the US? The sex trade is rampant in some of these.

3) Are we comparing nations to one organization with both a history of abuse and the knowledge of that abuse?

4) Do these nations have reputations for and self-promotion of having higher standards of morality, honesty and integrity?

I could go on, but these are good and relevant questions for the moment.

Edited May 18, 2021 by ThenNow

[vol_scouter]

I presented the peer reviewed study by Shakeshaft in 2004 of schoolchildren in the USA that was used in at least one official USA government report. There are issues of comparing what has been Jorge a male organization to a coed study.   I believe that the rates of abuse difference between males and females is not an order of magnitude whereas the difference between Scouting and the schools is two orders of magnitude.

So one is probably safe to say that Scouting is an order of magnitude to maybe two orders of magnitude safer than the schools.

This does not absolve the BSA from the harm done but it does put it into perspective.

 

[ThenNow]

45 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

So one is probably safe to say that Scouting is an order of magnitude to maybe two orders of magnitude safer than the schools.

Again, "schools" vs one single organization is apples to turnips. Also, I'm sure you're aware of the variance and scale of difference in safety between public schools in Memphis and, say, those in Pleasanton, CA. Compare MI State with Elon University in NC. Which level of "school" do you mean? How many have on duty law enforcement and/or metal detectors? Our oldest son went to middle and high school in a pretty affluent counties and school districts and had them. That's a bit of a deterrent. These are simply not relevant or apt standards of comparison. As you also know, I'm sure, school counselors and teachers have a much higher rate of reporting than almost any other population group. Your statement may be "comforting" to recite, but not viably or objectively. 

Edited May 18, 2021 by ThenNow

[yknot]

23 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

I presented the peer reviewed study by Shakeshaft in 2004 of schoolchildren in the USA that was used in at least one official USA government report. There are issues of comparing what has been Jorge a male organization to a coed study.   I believe that the rates of abuse difference between males and females is not an order of magnitude whereas the difference between Scouting and the schools is two orders of magnitude.

So one is probably safe to say that Scouting is an order of magnitude to maybe two orders of magnitude safer than the schools.

This does not absolve the BSA from the harm done but it does put it into perspective.

 

I made similar points about that report as well in the Councils thread. There has been a significant amount of research done on child sexual abuse in the U.S. to confirm that there is in fact a significant magnitude of difference between male and female CSA. Some routinely cited figures report 1 in 5 girls vs. 1 in 20 boys. At that rate, or anything close to it, it means the study you cited is claiming that a vast percentage of American school girls would have had to have been assaulted at some point during their school day. Seems unlikely. 

It could be true, but my point is without a well crafted study comparing apples to apples it's not that useful or factual.