Former Youth Protection Director on the dangers in Scouts BSA

[Eagle94-A1]

@CynicalScouter, I think my comment went over your head, so I will clarify.  You stated there were  3 options specifically:

1 hour ago, CynicalScouter said:

1. Continue to operate the patrol method and accept as a given the current level of child sexual abuse and subsequent lawsuits.
2. Modify the patrol method to ensure scout safety. That means no more scout-only activities (as already has occurred with needing two-deep leadership). That means tearing Scouts BSA in half (11-14/15-18).
3. End the patrol method.

And you would be :

Quote

I'm happy to hear if you have a 4th option.

My comment is that the Patrol Method  circa 1910 to 2012 is already dead. Option 1 is not acceptable. Option 2, Modifying the Patrol Method occurred from 2012 to 2018, and scout on Scout abuse occurred.  Patrols camping on their own ended in 2012  and were only allowed day activities up until 2018. IMHO modification does not necessarily mean splitting the program, as that was tried once in the 1950s and did not work (Explorer Scouts anyone?) Option 3, End the Patrol Method did occur in 2018 as BSA now requires 2 registered adults over 21 at all activities. 

So my comment reflected that Option 3 is the current status, yet apparently problems are still occurring. The only possible optionis the complete dissolution of the BSA. Is that what you are advocating for?

On a different note, with the rise of female adults abusing youth, specifically the two recent cases of teachers abusing students in the news, among others, has anyone at National thought about revising the TP policy requiring 1 male over 21 years whenever boys are present?

Edited October 12, 2021 by Eagle94-A1

[CynicalScouter]

15 minutes ago, qwazse said:

All one needs to do is substitute "patrol method" for "nuclear family" and we've sanctioned the state's removal of children from parents to "prevent" whatever ill-effects some classes of parents may have on their offspring.

Thanks . Next time I need an example of a slippery slope fallacy, I've got a fresh example.

https://www.txstate.edu/philosophy/resources/fallacy-definitions/Slippery-Slope.html

There is nothing even CLOSE to a) a voluntary organization and how it opts to voluntarily organize itself and b) government taking kids away from parents.

But thanks, again, for this.

As for the rest.

15 minutes ago, qwazse said:

Another harsh reality: if we really want to promote transparent reporting, we have to remove the threat of litigation. More carrots, fewer sticks.

No, you mandate reporting or you start shutting down programs. Period. "Oh, might be sued." Too darn bad.

The Catholic Church managed to do it.

The USA Gymnastics manages to do it.

Why not BSA? Because it doesn't want to. Hide, hide, hide.

And removing the threat of litigation means that children who have been sexually abused are denied recourse in civil courts and limited to criminal-only.

So, you want to deny sexual abuse victims their day in court? That's what "we have to remove the threat of litigation." means. It means child sex victims get no access to civil court.

That might be what you want. It sure isn't what I want. And how on EARTH is that fair? "Sorry child, you can be sexually abused, but if you try to sue to cover your pain and suffering, too darn bad."

 

Edited October 12, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[johnsch322]

21 minutes ago, qwazse said:

Another harsh reality: if we really want to promote transparent reporting, we have to remove the threat of litigation. More carrots, fewer sticks.

Litigation is the only reason that BSA has even acknowledged a problem.  Without litigation everything would be set back to 100 years ago.

PS of all the statements I have read this might be the most ludicrous.  Is there a trophy for that?

Edited October 12, 2021 by johnsch322

[ThenNow]

17 minutes ago, qwazse said:

Another harsh reality: if we really want to promote transparent reporting, we have to remove the threat of litigation. More carrots, fewer sticks.

“When carrots fail to work, get a bigger stick.” I think Teddy Roosevelt said that. Oh. Wait. That was ThenNow. Let attribution be given where attribution is due. Sorry Teddy. You’ll have to stick with the other stick with which you are eternally stuck. 

[CynicalScouter]

3 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

Litigation is the only reason that BSA has even acknowledged a problem.  Without litigation we would be back 100 years ago.

Right, think about what he is saying: "BSA should only have to report data on sexual abuse of children if it gets civil immunity."

That's insane. Without the threat of civil litigation, BSA would still be doing what it had been doing: hide, obfuscate, deflect.

And just as a reminder to @qwazse: if it has NOT been for civil litigation (and in particular the case in Oregon), BSA would NEVER have been forced to admit to the IV files, much less released parts of them UNDER COURT ORDER so we could have even the hint of what was going on with BSA and child sexual abuse.

Civil litigation is the only thing that will get BSA to cooperate UNLESS we start to see criminal charges against BSA officers (Mosby in cuffs?) of the organization as a whole (and yes, corporate entities can be indicted for things like criminal conspiracy to hide child sexual abuse)

[InquisitiveScouter]

Anyone seeing a live feed yet for the conference??

 

NVM...got it

Edited October 12, 2021 by InquisitiveScouter

[CynicalScouter]

2 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Anyone seeing a live feed yet for the conference??

 

[CynicalScouter]

Comment: "They [BSA] pushed him [Johnson] out."

Yep. He was fired/terminated. And that will be what BSA will run with: disgruntled former employee.

Edited October 12, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[ThenNow]

I am by NO MEANS singling myself out here, but I have to say his mention of Eagle Scout BSA child sexual abuse survivors made me cry. I haven’t felt this validated in a long time. Maybe only when I allow myself to acknowledge that my wife and kids continue to love, trust, respect and welcome me. Yikes. Didn’t anticipate his combined passion, tears/vulnerability and tenacity. 

[ThenNow]

Can we anticipate a speedy and easily available transcript? I’m thinking so without question.

[Eagle1993]

7 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Comment: "They [BSA] pushed him [Johnson] out."

Yep. He was fired/terminated. And that will be what BSA will run with: disgruntled former employee.

My issue ... who did they backfill him with?  Who is the director of youth protection that took over?  I can't find one.

[ThenNow]

6 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Comment: "They [BSA] pushed him [Johnson] out."

Yep. He was fired/terminated. And that will be what BSA will run with: disgruntled former employee.

Good bloody luck with that, BSA. Anyone who reads the transcript, and especially if they watch the video, will conclude they are grasping at straws and/or a life preserver. 

[CynicalScouter]

Just now, Eagle1993 said:

Who is the director of youth protection that took over?  I can't find one.

Yep. And I even pointed this out last week. There was no announcement. No indication. Nothing.

[CynicalScouter]

The question is: will media pick this up or not and how much? This could be the lead story on CNN, and BSA's toast.

Edited October 12, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[CynicalScouter]

"Many of these reports were kept secret from me."

Wow.