Can Committee Members Go Camping with the Troop ?

[BetterWithCheddar]

Unpopular take: This is 2023. Grown men without children in the unit should not participate in overnight activities.

I'm fully aware this would exclude many terrific volunteers from participating in a key aspect of the program. By all means, they are welcome to volunteer in other capacities (staffing a day camp or training parent volunteers, for example). As a 30-something parent, I'd be highly skeptical of a male volunteering at the unit level if that person wasn't also a parent and I'm certain my wife shares my skepticism. And we all know moms drive the big household decisions (like whether kids get to participate in Scouting).

[Eagle94-A1]

2 hours ago, BetterWithCheddar said:

Unpopular take: This is 2023. Grown men without children in the unit should not participate in overnight activities.

 

One mentor of mine  never had children of his own. He came back from WWII, and the troop he grew up in needed a SM, and he filled the role. He served as SM of the troop until Uncle Sam called him to Korea. Came back from Korea, and resumed SM job because everyone wanted 'Sarge" back.  Stayed on for over 20 years. Even then he worked summer camp until health started failing him.

Man who made the biggest impact on me, more than may father, was my SM. He was  the role model for me growing up, and my role model now as SM. He also never had children of his own. HIs nephew's troop needed an SM, and he volunteered. He stuck with it for over 25, until a new job required him to move.

Prior to having children in the program, I was one of those "Grown men" without children in the unit participating in overnite activities. In some cases during those time, I had more knowledge, skills, and abilities in Scouting than most of the parents. And in some cases I was the one training those parents. Further, I had better rapport with the youth than the other adults because I was closer to their age and I had no children in the unit, so when issues arose, they came to me.

I can go on and on about the great Scouters who didn;t have children, but I will leave you with the following:

Not all units have the luxury of being selective of their Scouters. We are a small unit of 6 Scouts. Of all the registered Scouters, I am the only parent. One has no children at all as he recently aged out, but for current YP purposes, doesn't count. My predecessor as SM stuck on as an MC after his son aged out, and plans to stick around. His predecessor is a COR/MC whose kids aged out as well. The 3rd MC served on a variety of district and council roles after his son aged out 16 years ago. Always partial to the troop, but got tired of the BS I posted abotu on my council in another thread, and came back to the unit.

If you have concerns, maybe talk to the folks who know the person you have concerns about instead of letting your biases control you. That Scouter may be the best thing the troop has going for it.

 

 

 

[SiouxRanger]

2 hours ago, BetterWithCheddar said:

Unpopular take: This is 2023. Grown men without children in the unit should not participate in overnight activities.

I'm fully aware this would exclude many terrific volunteers from participating in a key aspect of the program. By all means, they are welcome to volunteer in other capacities (staffing a day camp or training parent volunteers, for example). As a 30-something parent, I'd be highly skeptical of a male volunteering at the unit level if that person wasn't also a parent and I'm certain my wife shares my skepticism. And we all know moms drive the big household decisions (like whether kids get to participate in Scouting).

So, in your mind, an adult male, registered leader, 4 Eagle Scout sons, all of whom aged out, wants to go on a campout. What is your rule?

[SiouxRanger]

On 1/25/2023 at 6:21 PM, nolesrule said:

The point of being registered is that they have had the background check and they have done their YPT certification. 

That is precisely the point.  If you are registered, then you have had/done both. Not registered, may YPT but unlikely background check. Registration is a a quick and easy way top determine compliance.

[SiouxRanger]

7 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

 

One mentor of mine  never had children of his own. He came back from WWII, and the troop he grew up in needed a SM, and he filled the role. He served as SM of the troop until Uncle Sam called him to Korea. Came back from Korea, and resumed SM job because everyone wanted 'Sarge" back.  Stayed on for over 20 years. Even then he worked summer camp until health started failing him.

Man who made the biggest impact on me, more than may father, was my SM. He was  the role model for me growing up, and my role model now as SM. He also never had children of his own. HIs nephew's troop needed an SM, and he volunteered. He stuck with it for over 25, until a new job required him to move.

Prior to having children in the program, I was one of those "Grown men" without children in the unit participating in overnite activities. In some cases during those time, I had more knowledge, skills, and abilities in Scouting than most of the parents. And in some cases I was the one training those parents. Further, I had better rapport with the youth than the other adults because I was closer to their age and I had no children in the unit, so when issues arose, they came to me.

I can go on and on about the great Scouters who didn;t have children, but I will leave you with the following:

Not all units have the luxury of being selective of their Scouters. We are a small unit of 6 Scouts. Of all the registered Scouters, I am the only parent. One has no children at all as he recently aged out, but for current YP purposes, doesn't count. My predecessor as SM stuck on as an MC after his son aged out, and plans to stick around. His predecessor is a COR/MC whose kids aged out as well. The 3rd MC served on a variety of district and council roles after his son aged out 16 years ago. Always partial to the troop, but got tired of the BS I posted abotu on my council in another thread, and came back to the unit.

If you have concerns, maybe talk to the folks who know the person you have concerns about instead of letting your biases control you. That Scouter may be the best thing the troop has going for it.

 

 

 

I regret that I have one Upvote to give for this post.

[InquisitiveScouter]

2 hours ago, BetterWithCheddar said:

Unpopular take: This is 2023. Grown men without children in the unit should not participate in overnight activities.

I'm fully aware this would exclude many terrific volunteers from participating in a key aspect of the program. By all means, they are welcome to volunteer in other capacities (staffing a day camp or training parent volunteers, for example). As a 30-something parent, I'd be highly skeptical of a male volunteering at the unit level if that person wasn't also a parent and I'm certain my wife shares my skepticism. And we all know moms drive the big household decisions (like whether kids get to participate in Scouting).

When we disguise our feelings as thought, we make all nonsense possible.

[SiouxRanger]

On 1/25/2023 at 10:15 PM, InquisitiveScouter said:

The CO approves and has authority over ALL adult leaders in their chartered Scouting program.  If the CO doesn't want someone involved in their Scouting program, they (through the COR) can direct them to leave.

Is the corollary that "If the CO approves the adult leader, they can participate in all unit activities?"  Or can/should the CO approve an adult leader for only certain activities?  "You can serve on Boards of Review, but not go on campouts."  (How finely can one mince the onion?)

[SiouxRanger]

14 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Prior to having children in the program, I was one of those "Grown men" without children in the unit participating in overnite activities. In some cases during those time, I had more knowledge, skills, and abilities in Scouting than most of the parents. And in some cases I was the one training those parents.

Amen. (Me not one "prior to" but certainly after they aged out.)

[SiouxRanger]

On 1/26/2023 at 8:22 AM, fred8033 said:

IMHO, rules are to cover guide to safe scouting.  The "should" and "role" is always my main concern. 

Could you please explain what you mean? I just don't understand your post and I want to understand your meaning. 

Thanks.

[SiouxRanger]

46 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Not all units have the luxury of being selective of their Scouters.

Yeah-me:  25 years in a small boat with the snarly dragon of the "Void of Skilled and Willing Volunteers." (The Void tries its best to suck the enthusiasm from the willing who show up to make a difference.  The Void looks a lot like indifference, but it is more pernicious.)

Our Troop has about 8 adults who are involved from time to time, and 4 our 5 who are there ALWAYS.

In my work life, I live in a world of rigid rules where a judge can sentence a defendant to life in prison or order an insurance company to pay an injured person $8 million.

I cannot get too "wound up" over the formalistic rules of unit operations, dichotomy between Troop Committee and the Scoutmaster corps, etc…

I take the YPT requirements VERY SERIOUSLY.  Rigid adherence is MANDATORY.

To my law clients, I say, "In my experience, everyone is just trying to get through the day."  Meaning, that their sibling, child, parent, etc… are not intentionally out to to "get them," just that their sibling…are totally incompetent and lost. And that has almost always been the case.  

All that being said, in my unit, having a shortage of capable and willing adults, many have served in many positions, and though now registered as a C, they held A and B positions for years.

So, whether preferred on not (Fred), we have many adults who are registered in one position but serve in two or more positions within the troop.

Fred, can you explain what "preferred" means?

When clients call about some work which has been delayed, I say, "I am dancing as fast as I can."

 

[SiouxRanger]

On 1/26/2023 at 8:22 AM, fred8033 said:

Too often committee members work like ASMs.  That's not "preferred".   Sometimes it's necessary due to number of registered adults.    So on camp outs ... just like troop meetings, etc ... scouts work with scouts first; then with SM and the ASMs.  Ideally, scouts don't work with committee members.

Why "not preferred?"

And what is the issue if a Committee Member "works like an ASM?"

A scout needs a mentor, a scout learns, a scout passes his requirement, AND THEN some "rule" is offended?" (Yet, the Scout learned the requirement? Mission accomplished.)

An adult is needed to mentor scouts. In 25 years I've never heard a scout complain that he achieved a goal because he was mentored by a "mere" member of the committee.

 

[yknot]

4 hours ago, BetterWithCheddar said:

Unpopular take: This is 2023. Grown men without children in the unit should not participate in overnight activities.

I'm fully aware this would exclude many terrific volunteers from participating in a key aspect of the program. By all means, they are welcome to volunteer in other capacities (staffing a day camp or training parent volunteers, for example). As a 30-something parent, I'd be highly skeptical of a male volunteering at the unit level if that person wasn't also a parent and I'm certain my wife shares my skepticism. And we all know moms drive the big household decisions (like whether kids get to participate in Scouting).

It's a big country so it's probably not universal but around here parents are not accepting of adults without kids camping or interacting with kids. It's the same in sports. The only guy I know who was accepted was a pop warner football coach who made the draft but had four daughters.   

[BetterWithCheddar]

I will tread lightly with my follow-up post. I am fully aware of the many contributions of non-parent volunteers (having been the beneficiary of them myself as a youth). This is my perspective as the parent of a Cub Scout:

My wife and I are almost 40. We are politically moderate and live in the suburbs of a mid-size city. We have good jobs and sufficient disposable income to provide extra-curricular opportunities for our son, but our time is limited and we have to be selective about the activities in which he participates. You could apply this same description to the majority of parents in our community. By most accounts, we would all pass a "reasonable person" standard.

Not long ago, my wife and I endured a nightly barrage of "Abused in Scouting" commercials as we were settling down for bed. Had I not been a Scout myself, there is no way my wife would have signed our son up for Cub Scouts. There are a dozen other age-appropriate activities in which our son could participate that do not involve a high-profile sexual abuse scandal. 

I know there are many long-tenured Scouters on this forum. Please place yourselves in the shoes of a new scout parent and ask whether you would be comfortable sending your son or daughter on a camping trip with adult men who are not the parents of Scouts. Those of us who have been affiliated with Scouting are likely to say "Sure, that'd be fine, as long as we know the person and observe YP, etc." - but what is a 40-year-old mom with no Scouting experience going to say?

Last Fall, I took my Kindergartner to a 1-day event sponsored by our district. It warmed my heart to see so many volunteers I recognized from my youth. Many of them were parents of my Scouting peers who have stuck with the program in some capacity. One day, after my son is grown, I could see myself joining this district volunteer corp. However, I have no desire to chaperone overnight events that my son is not attending. First, that sounds exhausting. And, second, I would not want to put myself in a compromising situation where it could even be hinted that my behavior around youth was inappropriate.

While I see merit in everyone's rebuttal, I implore you to think of the average Millennial mother who gets to decide whether her child participates in Scouting. She is the one deciding the BSA's fate right now. You may know that the 60-year-old man camping with your troop has 4 Eagle Scout sons, but she may not know (or care).

Respectfully,

Better With Cheddar

[scoutldr]

Curious as to why just us males are assumed to be pedophiles?  I am also amazed that the "equity" warriors are not demanding that their daughters are also not penalized for not registering for Selective Service.  It seems to me that we only want "equity" when it agrees with our agenda.

[Navybone]

3 hours ago, scoutldr said:

Curious as to why just us males are assumed to be pedophiles?  I am also amazed that the "equity" warriors are not demanding that their daughters are also not penalized for not registering for Selective Service.  It seems to me that we only want "equity" when it agrees with our agenda.

Maybe more than a bit off topic?