On my Honor - Documentary on BSA Sex Abuse Scandal

[johnsch322]

2 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

And what is the lesson?

Having the ability to see more than one opinion, good or bad.

Do you work with kids who were abused in scouting?

[Owls_are_cool]

13 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

Barry, your former 10-year Director of Youth Protection said, unequivocally, that "children are not safe in Scouting," that "[he] failed" to protect children, and apologized to survivors.

My son just got his drivers license as a freshman in high school, so he is less safe today driving himself to school and to baseball practice. However, in the long run driving is an important skill to have and the more he drives, the better driver he will become. As parents, we could bubble wrap our son, but in the long run, it will be bad for our son.

The program does put scouts in challenging positions, by design, so they grow in character. So by design the program is not as safe as sitting on the couch watching TV or playing video games. 

Did this Director of Youth Protection do nothing when made aware of a sexual predator abusing scouts? Then yes, he failed to protect children and should apologize. Did he let leaders continue to work with scouts after those leader's YPT lapsed? Then, yes. 

I can say that scouts are unequivocally safe from sexual predators in my unit, because we follow YPT. Adult leaders are vetted to the highest standard and we have removed parents from troop events that have bullied scouts. If I discover a sexual predator in any of our activities, I will get the police involved and do everything I can to get him sent to prison. 

 

[Eagledad]

10 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

Having the ability to see more than one opinion, good or bad.

Do you work with kids who were abused in scouting?

Do you work with any abused kids as a scout leader?

Barry

[johnsch322]

8 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

Do you work with any abused kids as a scout leader?

I feel like I am on a school playground and instead of answering a question I get the question asked back to me. No I do not work with abused kids as a scout leader. Are the kids you work with abused in scouting?

[Eagledad]

2 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

I feel like I am on a school playground and instead of answering a question I get the question asked back to me. No I do not work with abused kids as a scout leader. Are the kids you work with abused in scouting?

That's because we have presented our opinion several times and left ourselves to word games to try and get and advantage. I think each of us has made ourselves clear. And balanced.

Barry

[InquisitiveScouter]

20 Centuries of Catholic Church on review, but with obvious analogies to the century of BSA...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRsaxXrjk3w&ab_channel=playinhard

please take 20 minutes to view

 

[ThenNow]

47 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRsaxXrjk3w&ab_channel=playinhard

please take 20 minutes to view

You can start at 8:20 and get the relevant crux. 

[MYCVAStory]

2 hours ago, Eagledad said:

Scouting is a program that makes big positive differences to families with scouts. We need that.

I'd like to frame this discussion in a different way.  A lot of it is focused on the past of course.  The future can be seen as binary; it will get better or it won't.  For those who believe it will get better, and I know you hope in your heart it does, I'd like you to address the degree that "better" is good enough.  If the current plan goes through the reported YP violations will be known publicly.  There will be reporting for anyone interested on a troop-lvelel for the preceding two years.  The details are to be worked out but clearly we will have a MUCH better understanding of any REPORTED abuse at the most serious levels.  Given that, and given that we know victims will NOT report right away, if you are so convinced that Scouting need survive I'd like you to address the point where you believe it, or some part of it, should cease to exist because it CANNOT keep children safe.  What is that number or frequency?  What level of abuse?  Under what circumstances in the future can the BSA say "We have proven that we can keep children safe?"  What is satisfactory?  I don't ask these questions as someone who is supporting the destruction r continuance of the BSA.   It's an exercise to focus on the FUTURE.  What say you?  What's your "good enough?" 

[OaklandAndy]

1 minute ago, MYCVAStory said:

What is that number or frequency?  What level of abuse?  Under what circumstances in the future can the BSA say "We have proven that we can keep children safe?"  What is satisfactory?  I don't ask these questions as someone who is supporting the destruction r continuance of the BSA.   It's an exercise to focus on the FUTURE.  What say you?  What's your "good enough?" 

I would like to think "good enough" is when parents have accepted that the organization has proven itself as a reliable and safe environment for children. It doesn't matter how many policies or background checks BSA has, but whether the public believes that they are doing everything they can to minimize the risk to children. When they feel the same comfort of having the kids in scouts as they do in the classroom, then I would say we are on the right track. 

[MYCVAStory]

8 minutes ago, OaklandAndy said:

When they feel the same comfort of having the kids in scouts as they do in the classroom, then I would say we are on the right track. 

I'd suggest that has already been the prevailing opinion with parents.  And here we are.

[johnsch322]

25 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said:

The future can be seen as binary; it will get better or it won't. 

 

26 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said:

Given that, and given that we know victims will NOT report right away,

Both of these are the crux of the issue. Will it work or won't it? The amount of time (20 years or so) is the program worth it to take the risk?

As a survivor this is what I wrestle with in forming my pro or anti views. This is why I am on the fence. I first hand know the devastating effects of CSA. I now have contact with many other survivors when just a few years ago I thought I was the only one. I correspond with others who's lives have been more upended than my own and believe there are countless others who no longer dwell on this earth because the pain was more than they could bear the burden of. 

I can see benefit for some but at what cost to others and yes I also believe there is still abuse happening. 

 

[OaklandAndy]

4 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

As a survivor

I completely understand. I myself was a victim from MST and while there is an age difference between MST and CSA, the effects are still the same. Is there still abuse occurring in the military? Absolutely? Am I still proud and will I support my specific branch? 100%. I've come to terms that it's not for me to decide for others how they should feel about the organization based on my experience, UNLESS, there is a gross consistent pattern of neglect. At the time, yes I wanted to burn the world down. But now, I'm doing my best to make sure no one else can be affected. 

[johnsch322]

1 minute ago, OaklandAndy said:

UNLESS, there is a gross consistent pattern of neglect.

I think this is an imperative thought. In the BSA history has taught us there was.

I am presuming you were over the age of 18 when you were in the military as I was but a child in the BSA does not get to make his decision to join BSA. He may have a desire to join but it is parents who sign you up yet the victims are the children. Hard statistics based on history should be presented to parents when they go to sign up their children should be given to them including the details of 82,000 claimants in the bankruptcy with the distinct possibility of many more. The rate of incidences in the past 10 years, 5 years and past year with a caveat that the full extent of CSA will not be known for 20 to 30 years. When I buy a bottle of aspirin I get more warnings of possible side effects than when a parent signs up there child.

[ThenNow]

1 hour ago, MYCVAStory said:

The future can be seen as binary; it will get better or it won't.  For those who believe it will get better, and I know you hope in your heart it does, I'd like you to address the degree that "better" is good enough. 

We agree on virtually every point raised, so understand these are some of my areas of musing. In places, I'll try to say what BSA National and the highly effective local expressions of big 's' Scouting might be thinking. I know. Dangerous.

We have to have a baseline, which we don't really have. That is on BSA National. Until the real data - sans what has not been reported and MUST be assumed to what degree I also don't know - there is no metric. For me, this is one of the critical issues to remedy ASAP to the best of the ability of those who research, unpack, analyze and report the existing data.

1 hour ago, MYCVAStory said:

If the current plan goes through the reported YP violations will be known publicly.  There will be reporting for anyone interested on a troop-lvelel for the preceding two years.  The details are to be worked out but clearly we will have a MUCH better understanding of any REPORTED abuse at the most serious levels. 

As I see it, this will create a focus that has not existed, at least in public. Units, Packs, etc. will know what's happening in their midst. It makes me crazy I can't yet know how many others my SM abused. It is one of the most compelling and central issues to my claim, history and understanding of what happened before, around, and after my time in Scouting. Focused detail on how "successful" local Scouting is at protecting kids must be a factor. What happens when a "franchise" is documented as breaking the rules and thereby generates lawsuits, health violations and brand degeneration? They are penalized, potentially get prosecuted, lose their rights and are either shut down or taken over by "new management." (Forgive the analogy which commoditizes and commercializes the issue. Best I can do in a pinch.)

1 hour ago, MYCVAStory said:

I'd like you to address the point where you believe it, or some part of it, should cease to exist because it CANNOT keep children safe.  What is that number or frequency?  What level of abuse?  Under what circumstances in the future can the BSA say "We have proven that we can keep children safe?"  What is satisfactory?

The trip lever for action has to be a low number of verified incidence. Perhaps folks like CHILDUSA are consulted and set this standard, I don't know.

"it, or some part" is key to me. I have come to respect that Scouting is local. What happens when a law is airtight, but law enforcement fails to apply it and allows crimes to be committed within their jurisdiction. Does the criminal justice system get shut down? Again, the legal parameters are solid. I am rolling these issues over in my little brain. I want to be fair, in a practical and moral sense. Does my two cents make sense to the sentient.

Edited May 6, 2022 by ThenNow
Forgive typos...on the run.

[OaklandAndy]

1 minute ago, johnsch322 said:

Hard statistics based on history should be presented to parents when they go to sign up their children

While I do agree with you to a certain extent, no business (non-profit or not) is going to tell you something some egregious. Nor would I tell a parent that. That's is not my direct history of Scouting, that's BSA. I would like to think that a parent would do their research about the pros and cons of any organization that involves kids. Nowadays, if you do a simply Google search, you'll find the dirt under the rug. 

I'm not avoiding the fact of what the BSA did. I'm presenting what our Cub Scout Pack can do for you and your family. That dark history of the BSA will always be there, but not what I personally choose to focus on. Irresponsible? That can be debated all day long. As for me, I choose to move on and let BSA clean up that mess. I'm here to serve our youth, not bail out the BSA.