Chapter 11 Announced - Part 5 - RSA Ruling

[ThenNow]

21 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

I have seen where the BSA has said 130 M  and others have used 100 M.

Everybody hold tight while I get this out.

That’s what I thought. This is where I’m all like, ya know, I go all Will Robinson Robot, “Does not compute. Does not compute...” There are a bunch of pretty bright people on this forum and not just a couple men of science and numbers. How do we even think about balking at 82,500 claims for child sexual abuse when:

1) Statistics indicate sexual abusers abuse approximately 100 victims in their period of active predation. Remember, sexual abuse is not limited to touching. It starts at elements that constitute “grooming” (did I just babble?), distribution of alcohol and pornography, and, etc.;

2) The stat is 1 in 6 men will be sexually abused. For our purposes, let’s say it’s 1 in 12;

3) BSA has had 115M minor Scouts since inception; and

4) BSA knew about 7000+ abusers that were revealed and no one knows how many abuser names were purged. That count indicated 12,000+ victims.

In light of this data, which I don’t believe is disputed, someone with a brain better than mine do the math. Please. We want you to prove that 82,500 claims of child sexual abuse over the 100+ years of Scouting is a fairytale concocted by bad lawyers and fraudsters. Call me when the numbers drop.

Edited August 30, 2021 by ThenNow

[johnsch322]

8 hours ago, MikeS72 said:

The IVF may not have been the best system in the world, but it was an attempt to keep people out of the program.

The IVF was reactive and not proactive.  Maybe slightly better than nothing but looking at what happened thru that period of time it was ineffective to keep the abusers at bay.

[johnsch322]

7 hours ago, MikeS72 said:

So how did at least 2 abusers get into my troop? - Did either have family in your troop?  Were either former youth members of the troop?  Not knowing the time frame, could also have been due to not having the background check system now in place; or could also have been due to having no prior record to show in a background check.  Could also have been a case of a CoR just signing off on them without checking references.  (although they would have to have been exceptionally stupid to list someone as a reference who would have incriminating information on them)

The abuse happened in the late 60's and neither had relatives in the troop.  

[MYCVAStory]

4 hours ago, Muttsy said:

You asked me a legal question and I gave you the LEGAL answer.  The only way for BSA to escape this cockroach motel is for the parties to get a number with the carriers that is achievable.  Fair? No. Possible? Maybe. 

On this we agree and I think you've made the point regarding the difference between equity and equality and the problem with bankruptcy dealing with sexual abuse.  Equality would mean that everyone gets the same settlement regardless of SOL for each "category" and other factors.  Equity though is connected to the BUSINESS of bankruptcy and the reality that each claimant became a piece of data related to value prior to bankruptcy.  Then, factor in that the pool of available funds is limited from the debtor and the insurers NUMBER ONE defense is that some claims are worth less because of the SOLs and the equity, or for many of us what is seen as inequity, comes into focus.  Parties are negotiating AND trying to come up with the right numbers.  If that isn't reached I hope the TCC will say so and object, and hopefully the Coalition will also, and who knows even K wil set aside his personal attacks on Jim Stang and support the victims who make up the TCC.  Or, will some jump at lowball number(s) when they hear the mantra "We want to put money in the hands of victims ASAP" as they smile knowing that their judge-denied bills will have a chance of getting paid sooner.  It's 3-D chess and one of those dimensions is time. You mentioned the money that was available with Asbestos.  Nice job referencing that but all should remember two things.  One, that dealt with physical damages that were more easily validated and calculated pre-settlement, and two, it has taken years and years.  Victims should think about what they can stomach but also for how long.  Some may be in it for the long-haul.  Many might not want to wait around for 5-7 years until all the insurance is litigated, appealed, and litigated some more as more of the money available to victims goes to more attorneys.  Again, all should remember that this is about the "equity" from a business view and the value of everyone's money over time.  It all makes me sick and as I write this I'm sipping tea with beet powder in it hoping that'll pull my blood pressure down since the meds were doing more harm than good.  But, it's reality.  But hey, we're a day closer to some settlement at least!

[johnsch322]

18 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

2) The stat is 1 in 6 men will be sexually abused. For our purposes, let’s say it’s 1 in 12;

lets try 1 in 100 and then maybe 1 in 300

18 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

3) BSA has had 115M minor Scouts since inception; and

At 1 in 100  115 M scouts =1,150,000 victims

At 1 in 200 115 M scouts = 575,000 victims

At 1 in 300 115 M scouts = 383,333 victims

Wow

 

Edited August 30, 2021 by johnsch322

[ThenNow]

8 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

26 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

2) The stat is 1 in 6 men will be sexually abused. For our purposes, let’s say it’s 1 in 12;

lets try 1 in 100 and then maybe 1 in 300

26 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

3) BSA has had 115M minor Scouts since inception; and

At 1 in 100  115 M scouts =1,150,000 victims

At 1 in 200 115 M scouts = 575,000 victims

To that I’m all like, “BAM! IN YO FACE!” 

Thanks, John. (They don’t know that you were a plant and we set that up. Came off beautifully. No we didn’t, but I ran numbers and knew it would be way better with the dramatic pause as we waited for the big reveal. I’m so clever. Pah.)

Edited August 30, 2021 by ThenNow

[yknot]

30 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

So, you want a disclosure statement at sign up saying that "your scout may be sexually abused"?

This, by the way, is the information currently on the registration form.

https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/524-406.pdf

Youth Protection Begins With You™. Child abuse is a serious problem in our society, and
unfortunately, it can occur anywhere, even in Scouting. Youth safety is of paramount importance to Scouting.
For that reason, the BSA continues to create and consistently improve its barriers to abuse.
The BSA is committed to providing a safe environment for young people. To maintain a safe environment, the BSA
provides parents and adult leaders with numerous online and printed resources and adult leaders must complete
Youth Protection Training (YPT) and renew their training as required. Parents who participate in Scouting activities
are highly recommended to complete YPT. To learn more about the BSA’s Youth Protection resources, go to
www.scouting.org/training/youth-protection/.
Mandatory Reporting
All persons involved in Scouting must immediately report to local authorities any good-faith suspicion or belief that
any child is or has been physically or sexually abused; physically or emotionally neglected; exposed to any form of
violence or threat; or exposed to any form of sexual exploitation including the possession, manufacture, or distribution
of child pornography, online solicitation, enticement, or showing of obscene material. No person may abdicate this
reporting responsibility to any other person.
Additionally, any known or suspected abuse or behavior that might put a youth at risk must also be reported to the
local Scout executive or the Scouts First Helpline (1-844-SCOUTS1 or 1-844-726-8871) if your Scout executive or
local council cannot be reached.
All parents must review the How to Protect Your Children From Child Abuse: A Parent’s Guide booklet in the
Cub Scout or Scouts BSA handbooks or at www.scouting.org/training/youth-protection/.
Youth Protection Policies
• Two registered adult leaders 21 years of age or over are required at all Scouting activities, including meetings.
There must be a registered female adult leader over 21 in every unit serving females. A registered female adult
leader over 21 must be present for any activity involving female youth.
• One-on-one contact between adult leaders and youth members is prohibited both inside and outside of Scouting.
These and other key Youth Protection policies are addressed in the training and at www.scouting.org/training/
youth-protection/.
To learn about the BSA’s other health and safety policies, please review the online version of the Guide to Safe
Scouting, the Scouter Code of Conduct, and the Sweet Sixteen of BSA Safety, which are available at www.scouting.
org/health-and-safety

This isn't full disclosure nor is it a real waiver. It says nothing about the unique risks involved in scouting nor does it mention anything about scouting's past experiences with child sexual abuse. If you take a drug, it outlines side effects. If you enage in a physical activity, it spells out physical injury or death. If you buy a ticket to certain entertainment venues, it will warn that bright flashing lights can precipitate seizures. 

 

Edited August 30, 2021 by yknot

[CynicalScouter]

8 minutes ago, yknot said:

you take a drug, it outlines side effects. If you enage in a physical activity, it spells out physical injury or death. If you buy a ticket to certain entertainment venues, it will warn that bright flashing lights can precipitate seizures. 

Would this then work?

“If your child joins this pack/troop her or she may be sexually abused.”?

”BSA will try not to have people sexually abuse your child, but we cannot guaranteed it won’t happen”?

Or are you suggesting what is known as an “internet danger” disclaimer or warning? That scouting is so Per se or inherently dangerous that anyone who agrees must acknowledge the inherent danger?

Edited August 30, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[johnsch322]

31 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

We want you to prove that 82,500 claims of child sexual abuse over the 100+ years of Scouting is a fairytale concocted by bad lawyers and fraudsters.

To have only 82000 victims the stat would have to be 1 in 1400 which would be a fairytale

31 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

1) Statistics indicate sexual abusers abuse approximately 100 victims in their period of active predation. Remember, sexual abuse is not limited to touching. It starts at elements that constitute “grooming” (did I just babble?), distribution of alcohol and pornography, and, etc.;

7000 known abusers with 25 victims is 175,000 with 50 is 350,000 which is a nightmare. So what would the stat for how many were caught vs got away with it?  Lets say 1 in 4 were caught that would be between 700,000 to 1.4 million a bigger nightmare.

Edited August 30, 2021 by johnsch322

[ThenNow]

2 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

To have only 82000 victims the stat would have to be 1 in 1400 which would be a fairytale

 

2 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

7000 known abusers with 25 victims is 175,000 with 50 is 350,000 which is a nightmare so what would the stat for how many were caught vs got away with it?  Lets say 1 in 4 were caught that would be between 700,000 to 1.4 million.

Yup. That’s what I’m talkin’ about, Willis. Now we’re cooking with Hickory!

[yknot]

9 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Would this then work?

“If your child joins this pack/troop her or she may be sexually abused.”?

”BSA will try not to have people sexually abuse your child, but we cannot guaranteed it won’t happen”?

 

I think it needs to be strong enough to counter the pervasive membership marketing messages of higher morality and character values that lulls parents into thinking their children are safe, or at least safer, in scouting. What exists now speaks about abuse in a general sense. The phrase that abuse occurs "even in scouting" subliminally furthers that false perception that scouting is somehow safer than anywhere else. The truth is we have no idea, yet BSA  has marketed itself that way for decades despite knowing it had a problem from at least the 1920s. 

 

[johnsch322]

16 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

 

Yup. That’s what I’m talkin’ about, Willis. Now we’re cooking with Hickory!

On my Traegar!!

[ThenNow]

33 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

7000 known abusers with 25 victims

Wonder what it would be with 12 victims…Hm. 
 

PS - My point in this exercise is to attempt to disabuse some of the notion that 82,500 is some unthinkable, absurd and clearly bloated number of victims. Is simply is not. Further, it’s most likely statistically quite understated.

Edited August 30, 2021 by ThenNow

[ThenNow]

2 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

On my Traegar!!

Might be time to upgrade that jalopy to a Recteq, my friend.  

[Eagledad]

19 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Would this then work?

“If your child joins this pack/troop her or she may be sexually abused.”?

”BSA will try not to have people sexually abuse your child, but we cannot guaranteed it won’t happen”?

Or are you suggesting what is known as an “internet danger” disclaimer or warning? That scouting is so Per se or inherently dangerous that anyone who agrees must acknowledge the inherent danger?

I don’t know, the scandal of a public school coach caught. abusing girls has been in our news all week. There is probably at least one sex abuse scandal in a public school every week somewhere in the US. That is a lot of scandals. So, let’s replace BSA in your example with “your child’s school” in all public schools and imagine how parents should respond. Should National Leaders shut down all local public schools? Inherent danger?

I’m trying to imagine 85,000 school teacher sex abusers. Even with all the press, that still seems like a lot.

Barry