Debate over 72 hour rule - spun from bankruptcy thread

[scoutldr]

What policy is it that "allows unscreened adults to be in charge on overnight trips"??

[ThenNow]

16 minutes ago, scoutldr said:

What policy is it that "allows unscreened adults to be in charge on overnight trips"??

Is that the 72 hour dealio? 

[InquisitiveScouter]

1 hour ago, scoutldr said:

What policy is it that "allows unscreened adults to be in charge on overnight trips"??

None.  But unscreened adults can attend overnight trips.  They are confused on what the policies actually say...

[Eagle1993]

1 hour ago, scoutldr said:

What policy is it that "allows unscreened adults to be in charge on overnight trips"??

You only need to be a registered adult if you spend 72 hours with youth.   Exact policy below;

All adults accompanying a Scouting unit who are present at the activity for 72 total hours or more must be registered as leaders. The 72 hours need not be consecutive.

 

[yknot]

2 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

None.  But unscreened adults can attend overnight trips.  They are confused on what the policies actually say...

Actually, they are not. I think it's just a question of wording. Unregistered adults may not be in charge of the entire trip, but they are quite frequently put or left in supervisory positions at times while on trips. This happens all the time at summer camp and on camp outs.  

[mrjohns2]

10 minutes ago, yknot said:

This happens all the time at summer camp and on camp outs.  

Like everything, Scouting is local. Our council requires ALL adults attending camp to be registered. Our troop does not, but we rarely have an adult on a campout who is not registered. I can't think of one in the last year. 

 

1 hour ago, Eagle1993 said:

You only need to be a registered adult if you spend 72 hours with youth.   Exact policy below;

This is often debated, but it has been clarified. The national policy is that the event itself has to be >72 hours. The "consecutive" they mean the time the adult is at the event. They can't leave and comeback to reset the clock. It is not cumulative over time, though, so 48 hour campouts each month do not trigger this 72 hours. Those events, though, must have at least 2 registered adults over 21.

[yknot]

12 minutes ago, mrjohns2 said:

Like everything, Scouting is local. Our council requires ALL adults attending camp to be registered. Our troop does not, but we rarely have an adult on a campout who is not registered. I can't think of one in the last year. 

 

I think that's exactly the problem with YP that Michael Johnson and the TCC are pointing out. Too much of it is local and open to interpretation and loopholes. I am guessing Johnson and the TCC would like to see your Council's policy nationalized. 
 

[qwazse]

To be very clear … BSA allows parents to observe the activities of scouts and their registered adult leaders during routine overnights. This imposes increased accountability on the minimum 2 registered adult leaders. It’s a welcome thing. Do these TCC lawyers have proof that this is the source of most abuse in the past few years? Or, would they rather put our youth at increased risk for the sake of rhetoric?

[T2Eagle]

11 minutes ago, yknot said:

I think that's exactly the problem with YP that Michael Johnson and the TCC are pointing out. Too much of it is local and open to interpretation and loopholes. I am guessing Johnson and the TCC would like to see your Council's policy nationalized. 
 

What i would like to see is some evidence that either not having this policy today is the reason for abuse today, or evidence with some analysis that when implemented and taking into account things like what Qasze mentioned that it would make scouting safer overall.

I posted earlier how this works in practice, and remain skeptical that a background check for every parent who accompanies a unit would actually turn up any significant number of already arrested and convicted abusers while at the same time having both a large monetary cost and a chilling effect o the supervision of units by non registered parents.

[Eagle1993]

36 minutes ago, mrjohns2 said:

This is often debated, but it has been clarified. The national policy is that the event itself has to be >72 hours. The "consecutive" they mean the time the adult is at the event. They can't leave and comeback to reset the clock. It is not cumulative over time, though, so 48 hour campouts each month do not trigger this 72 hours. Those events, though, must have at least 2 registered adults over 21.

True.  For example, at summer camp, we have many adults that come for portions of the week who are not registered adult leaders.  

To be honest, I think summer camps need to tighten up a lot.  I have many concerns how they operate today.  

[johnsch322]

1 hour ago, qwazse said:

To be very clear … BSA allows parents to observe the activities of scouts and their registered adult leaders during routine overnights. This imposes increased accountability on the minimum 2 registered adult leaders. It’s a welcome thing. Do these TCC lawyers have proof that this is the source of most abuse in the past few years? Or, would they rather put our youth at increased risk for the sake of rhetoric?

Interesting that you want TCC lawyers to show proof when it was the former person in charge of YPT that pointed out the fact and found it to be not acceptable. If it was the source of even one abuse I would say that it is a policy that should not be in effect. If other organizations do it why can’t BSA?  As I have mentioned before my wife while we were in Canada had to get an RCMP background check before she could go on an overnight with my daughter. We paid for it and had no complaints about it. 

Edited October 23, 2021 by johnsch322

[InquisitiveScouter]

Wow, the fact that there are several different opinions about the policies regarding unregistered adults here among us "experts" shows the exact problem I was highlighting to Johnson when he ID'ed me back to my local council as someone who was asking questions.

For the record...unregistered adults absolutely can attend outings or overnight camping trips under the current policy, however, there must ALWAYS be at two registered adults over 21 on the outing.  That you or your local council may interpret this differently and impose stricter rules is fine, and that is within your/their purview, but the National policy, as written, allows this.  This is what Johnson was pointing out.

[PeterHopkins]

On 10/23/2021 at 11:28 AM, yknot said:

I think that's exactly the problem with YP that Michael Johnson and the TCC are pointing out. Too much of it is local and open to interpretation and loopholes.

There aren't really loopholes taken advantage of by local councils. Local councils can enact policies more restrictive than the Guide to Safe Scouting, but not ones that are less restrictive.

A neighboring council near me requires Youth protection Training will not expire during the upcoming registration period. So, if someone took YPT in November 2020, it will expire in November 2022, and they need to take it again before registering for calendar year 2022.

My council does not allow Cub Scouts to camp on council property without a parent.

Several council, including my council, will not allow a direct contact leader to register or reregister unless the person has completed training for the position. In my council, the requirement is waived, if the person has been in the position for less than the months at the charter renewal date. So, if someone registers as a Lion den leader on September 25, 2021, that person needs to be fully trained to reregister for calendar year 2022.

[PeterHopkins]

On 10/23/2021 at 11:38 AM, qwazse said:

To be very clear … BSA allows parents to observe the activities of scouts and their registered adult leaders during routine overnights. This imposes increased accountability on the minimum 2 registered adult leaders. It’s a welcome thing. Do these TCC lawyers have proof that this is the source of most abuse in the past few years? Or, would they rather put our youth at increased risk for the sake of rhetoric?

If we assume it's true that the presence of unregistered parents increases the accountability of the registered Scouters, wouldn't we get even more comfort as to the safety of the youths at an event, of those parents were background checked?

[InquisitiveScouter]

6 hours ago, PeterHopkins said:

If we assume it's true that the presence of unregistered parents increases the accountability of the registered Scouters, wouldn't we get even more comfort as to the safety of the youths at an event, of those parents were background checked?

Yes! IMHO, this falls under the "duty of care" umbrella for the registered adults, seeing as how 40-50 percent of abuse is by relatives (hence no tenting with parents after Cubs), and another 40 percent by acquaintances. (Final ten by strangers.)

Too many adults I know want to use the checks as a crutch, though.  As if a person having a clean record indicates they are not a potential threat.  Background checks are just one piece of the puzzle...a "barrier,"  But, very often, abusers do not have a record "...and they know it."

https://www.pennlive.com/midstate/2011/11/how_effective_are_background_c.html

https://abusepreventionsystems.com/the-safety-system/background-checks/