Former Youth Protection Director on the dangers in Scouts BSA

[malraux]

1 minute ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

There will be a lot of Cub families that will walk away. Not because they have something to hide, but rather they cannot afford the fees that BSA will be charging in order to do the CBC. I see the 72 Hour rule as a result of Cub Scouts, not Scouts BSA, Sea Scouts, and Venturing. And BSA will definitely need top change the parent policy, which will make it seem like we are hiding something.

Yep, that is my concern. The combination of cost and time will make it very difficult to recruit youth and get them on a campout quickly. And because in Cubs every youth has their own parent watching them, I don't know that the situation is as high risk as it is on a troop campout.

[Eagle1993]

 

9 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

 

According to the PDF's metadata, the PDF was created by Joelle Casteix. Maybe she reviewed?

https://www.snapnetwork.org/joelle_casteix

https://twitter.com/joellecasteix?lang=en

 

Yep ... she is a member of the Zero Abuse Project (MJ is now a board member there).

[Eagle1993]

8 minutes ago, malraux said:

Yep, that is my concern. The combination of cost and time will make it very difficult to recruit youth and get them on a campout quickly. And because in Cubs every youth has their own parent watching them, I don't know that the situation is as high risk as it is on a troop campout.

I think Scout BSA is much more dangerous than Cub Scouts.  Much of the abuse occurs between the ages of 11 and 14 (during Scouts BSA).  Also, parents are not present.

I could see BSA saying anyone staying overnight with a Scouts BSA unit must be a registered leader.  I expect that could be managed.

Edited October 12, 2021 by Eagle1993

[cgail]

https://www.andersonadvocates.com/boy-scouts-of-america-is-not-a-safe-place-for-children-today-congress-must-take-immediate-action/

[malraux]

Just now, Eagle1993 said:

I could see BSA saying anyone staying overnight with a Scouts BSA unit must be a registered leader.  I expect that could be managed.

Either a registered leader, or create a somewhat cheaper/steamlined background checked certification.

[CynicalScouter]

33 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Not really...we do this, for overnighters.  Wanna camp out with us? Gotta have a background check...

By the way: this USED to be called ScoutParent and evolved (sorta) into Unit Scouter Reserve.

[Eagle94-A1]

2 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

By the way: this USED to be called ScoutParent and evolved (sorta) into Unit Scouter Reserve.

Unit Scouter Reserve, and Unit College Scouter Reserve, actually split from Scouter Reserve, which is a district level POR like College Scouter Reserve.

On a different note, getting rid of the 72 hour rule gets rid of "family Scouting."

[Eagle1993]

1 minute ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

On a different note, getting rid of the 72 hour rule gets rid of "family Scouting."

That’s a win….

[malraux]

15 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

That’s a win….

Taking his recommendations of limiting age ranges in contact with each other also probably means splitting the scouts BSA program into 11-14 youth and 15-18 aged youth, similar to the scouts and venture scouts groupings in other countries.

[Eagledad]

5 minutes ago, malraux said:

Taking his recommendations of limiting age ranges in contact with each other also probably means splitting the scouts BSA program into 11-14 youth and 15-18 aged youth, similar to the scouts and venture scouts groupings in other countries.

Another nail in the Patrol Method coffin. Patrol Method works best with mature role models. Prepubescent scout are not mature enough for a mature program. 

Barry 

[malraux]

Looking to the north at how Scouts Canada does things, it seems in line with what Mr Johnson would envision.

Quote

1. Volunteers and Rover Scouts may not participate in Scouts Canada activities or wear a Scouts Canada uniform until they:
   1. Complete all volunteer screening^[1] and mandatory training requirements^[2]
   2. Are registered members of Scouts Canada
2. Parents and other adults^[3] who assist Scouters may not participate in Scouts Canada activities until they have completed the non-member volunteer screening^[4] and mandatory training requirements.^[5]
3. After assisting with five activities, parents and other adults must become registered Scouters to continue participation.
   1. Participation limit is cumulative and does not reset with each Scouting year.
4. Companies that provide hired resource persons (e.g. canoe guides) must confirm that employees provide clean police record checks and that references are checked.
5. We shall screen independent, hired resource people according to non-member volunteer screening requirements.
6. When transferring between Groups, volunteers must be interviewed to determine their continued suitability as a volunteer.
7. When a Scouter transfers between Sections or roles in the same Group, we recommend that there is a meeting to explain the Scouter’s new role and responsibilities.

https://www.scouts.ca/resources/bpp/policies/volunteer-screening-policy.html

 

Their volunteer screen procedures are also more strict. https://www.scouts.ca/resources/bpp/procedures/volunteer-screening-procedure.html

 

Of course, Scouts Canada has a yearly fee of ~$180. 

[Eagledad]

6 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

Another nail in the Patrol Method coffin. Patrol Method works best with mature role models. Prepubescent scouts are not mature enough for a mature program. 

Barry 

 

[CynicalScouter]

9 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

Another nail in the Patrol Method coffin. Patrol Method works best with mature role models. Prepubescent scout are not mature enough for a mature program. 

If a byproduct of the patrol method is child sexual abuse, then the patrol method has to go. Period.

[Eagledad]

1 minute ago, CynicalScouter said:

If a byproduct of the patrol method is child sexual abuse, then the patrol method has to go. Period.

LOL, really! Please expand. 

Barry

[johnsch322]

At this juncture if I was a a current scout leader I would have serious concerns about Nationals leadership abilities and their legal representation.  They negotiate a settlement with Hartford that has wholes so big in it you could shoot 18 wheelers thru it. They saddle up next to the coalition lawyers basically ignoring the TCC and now it appears they have a major PR disaster on their hands just when they put out a settlement that most claimants appear to totally dislike (at least I have not heard of one claimant giving support).  What is next?