Can Committee Members Go Camping with the Troop ?

[yknot]

Good point. I don't think I can take going down some of these rabbit holes again. 

Edited January 28, 2023 by yknot

[I_like_forks]

22 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).

Welp I guess this is the comment to finally bring me out from the lurker caves.

Besides just being straight-up sexist (this is 2023, we should be beyond this), barring men without kids wouldn't just (unjustly) exclude plenty of terrific volunteers, including myself, it would simply kill scouting.

I recently took a job as a DE in my council, and after going around meeting all the units and leaders, let me tell you 95% of units are surviving off the veteran volunteers that have been around for a while. They all say the same thing. They'd love to have some parent volunteers, but the fact of the matter is no parents are stepping up. So barring "grown men without children in the unit"? Instant death sentence. I don't blame the parents, you even said it yourself, your time is limited. Now more than ever it seems. But until something changes and parents can/do start actually volunteering, those veteran scouters without kids in the unit (or in rare cases, young men who were scouts and don't have kids yet such as myself) are what's keeping scouting alive. Trust me, in many cases they do want to retire and pass the torch to the next generation, but there's no one to pass the torch to. So IMO, these men should be rewarded for keeping scouting going, instead of criticized for the mistake of being born male and caring for the future of today's youth.

I could go on and on about statistics and the existence female predators and how the BSA could market YPT better to the masses, but my food is getting cold. I will say this though. As a member of the first generation raised surrounded by these negative stereotypes about men, the pervasive fear of "anyone can be a predator so assume everyone is", and the complete lack of independence until 14-16 because I might get kidnapped or x or y or z (which isn't helped by America's car-dependent suburban lifestyle but that's completely off-topic) in American culture is developmentally harmful. Especially for boys. Does it work to prevent abuse? idk. YPT certainly does but the stats the FBI puts out doesn't paint a pretty picture.

Edited January 28, 2023 by I_like_forks

[curious_scouter]

Maybe a bit more back on topic... how have your units handled this scenario:

New scout joins, often via crossover from cubs but sometimes as they move into town from away.  Parents want to join us on a few outings.  On the one hand as a parent - I get this.  I don't really care how much training and YPT a bunch of adult volunteers have had... I'm going to find it very difficult if not impossible to get comfortable with the idea of sending my child off into the outdoors with a bunch of people I don't know at all.  On the flip side, my established leadership is not wild on the idea of unregistered adults who could end up not understanding/espousing the idea of letting the Scout do and being "helicopter parents".  I get this also.

My compromise thus far has been 1) require YPT to attend 2) meet with said parent to set expectations, giving them the benefit of the doubt that they are adult humans and if I express my expectations and desire for adult behavior on an outing they will respect that.

I'm too new to know how naive this is

[5thGenTexan]

My kid won't go camp if I don't go and I am the CC for his Troop and my daughters.  They expect this committee member to be in two places. 

[yknot]

43 minutes ago, curious_scouter said:

Maybe a bit more back on topic... how have your units handled this scenario:

New scout joins, often via crossover from cubs but sometimes as they move into town from away.  Parents want to join us on a few outings.  On the one hand as a parent - I get this.  I don't really care how much training and YPT a bunch of adult volunteers have had... I'm going to find it very difficult if not impossible to get comfortable with the idea of sending my child off into the outdoors with a bunch of people I don't know at all.  On the flip side, my established leadership is not wild on the idea of unregistered adults who could end up not understanding/espousing the idea of letting the Scout do and being "helicopter parents".  I get this also.

My compromise thus far has been 1) require YPT to attend 2) meet with said parent to set expectations, giving them the benefit of the doubt that they are adult humans and if I express my expectations and desire for adult behavior on an outing they will respect that.

I'm too new to know how naive this is

All of scouting is supposed to be 100% transparent to parents even if they are not your ideal parents from a program standpoint. I don't really think any other position is acceptable today.

[curious_scouter]

I don't feel like transparency and pragmatic measures are mutually exclusive.  In fact, to borrow your phrase the only acceptable position these days is that Youth Protection comes first. 

If you as a parent feel obligated to observe and are unwilling to take the most basic Youth Protection steps - then I am sorry.  The protection of all the other youth is as important as your youth and I must decline your attendance, and therefor your Scout's.  I will not let anyone who has not minimally taken YPT attend an outing with our Troop.  If that person intends to attend regularly, I require them to get registered so we have the benefit of insurance, background check, and formal YPT tracking.  Under no circumstances would I just let someone walk in off the street and attend an outing where they have hours of potentially unsupervised access to the youth of my troop with no training.  That would be negligent IMO.

[I_like_forks]

Rumor has it anyways that come September the 72-hour rule is going out the window and everyone who wishes to camp overnight must complete YPT. Idk if the same rules are going to apply between cub scouts and SBSA though.

[yknot]

1 hour ago, curious_scouter said:

I don't feel like transparency and pragmatic measures are mutually exclusive.  In fact, to borrow your phrase the only acceptable position these days is that Youth Protection comes first. 

If you as a parent feel obligated to observe and are unwilling to take the most basic Youth Protection steps - then I am sorry.  The protection of all the other youth is as important as your youth and I must decline your attendance, and therefor your Scout's.  I will not let anyone who has not minimally taken YPT attend an outing with our Troop.  If that person intends to attend regularly, I require them to get registered so we have the benefit of insurance, background check, and formal YPT tracking.  Under no circumstances would I just let someone walk in off the street and attend an outing where they have hours of potentially unsupervised access to the youth of my troop with no training.  That would be negligent IMO.

We never registered a scout unless the parent also took YPT. Unit rule which solved that problem. 

[BetterWithCheddar]

15 hours ago, I_like_forks said:

Welp I guess this is the comment to finally bring me out from the lurker caves.

Besides just being straight-up sexist (this is 2023, we should be beyond this), barring men without kids wouldn't just (unjustly) exclude plenty of terrific volunteers, including myself, it would simply kill scouting.

Welcome. Great first post!

Please let me clarify - Like most others, I have no concerns about a long-tenured, non-parent volunteer participating in overnight events, provided YP is observed. However, you don't have to convince me that Scouting is safe - you have to convince Millennial mothers. And right now, that's akin to convincing people to board a blimp right after the Hindenburg disaster. I'm not sure how my statement could be construed as sexist. It's a response to observed behavior (with about 82,000 examples, right?). 

Allow me to provide some insight into how a typical Millennial marriage works: If my wife wanted to quit her job tomorrow, she would be praised for putting her family first. If I wanted to quit my job tomorrow, society would ask -  "what the heck is wrong with this guy?" My exclusive domain as a father is our investment portfolio, the lawn, and maybe how the basement is decorated. That's it. Mothers get final say on everything else. You could say that's also "straight-up sexist," but it's a common marriage dynamic of which the BSA needs to be cognizant.

The NFL has been wildly successful in recent years, despite political controversy, safety concerns. and ever-increasing prices of tickets and merchandise.  A big part of their success is that they know how to market to women (even though their product involves mostly men - not unlike the BSA!). Pink merchandise, pop concerts at halftime, and an emphasis on youth football safety - that's not a coincidence!

Bottom Line: Use your discretion and observe YP when deciding who camps with your unit. Most units do this and most units have no problems. However - I implore you to consider the actual decision makers and how they may perceive the participation of male volunteers who are not parents.

[mrjohns2]

2 hours ago, BetterWithCheddar said:

However, you don't have to convince me that Scouting is safe - you have to convince Millennial mothers.

Our troop had a hard time with planning September campouts due to school just starting. We started having that as a family campout that we invited the troop families and webelos families to. This gives the moms of the Webelos to spend a weekend with the adults in the troop. Nothing builds bonds like some campfire time.

Having a family campout each year also helps those families who want all campouts to be family campouts. We can easily say "well, no, younger siblings can't attend a normal troop campout, but they are always welcome at the annual family campout in September."

[yknot]

2 hours ago, BetterWithCheddar said:

Welcome. Great first post!

Please let me clarify - Like most others, I have no concerns about a long-tenured, non-parent volunteer participating in overnight events, provided YP is observed. However, you don't have to convince me that Scouting is safe - you have to convince Millennial mothers. And right now, that's akin to convincing people to board a blimp right after the Hindenburg disaster. I'm not sure how my statement could be construed as sexist. It's a response to observed behavior (with about 82,000 examples, right?). 

Allow me to provide some insight into how a typical Millennial marriage works: If my wife wanted to quit her job tomorrow, she would be praised for putting her family first. If I wanted to quit my job tomorrow, society would ask -  "what the heck is wrong with this guy?" My exclusive domain as a father is our investment portfolio, the lawn, and maybe how the basement is decorated. That's it. Mothers get final say on everything else. You could say that's also "straight-up sexist," but it's a common marriage dynamic of which the BSA needs to be cognizant.

The NFL has been wildly successful in recent years, despite political controversy, safety concerns. and ever-increasing prices of tickets and merchandise.  A big part of their success is that they know how to market to women (even though their product involves mostly men - not unlike the BSA!). Pink merchandise, pop concerts at halftime, and an emphasis on youth football safety - that's not a coincidence!

Bottom Line: Use your discretion and observe YP when deciding who camps with your unit. Most units do this and most units have no problems. However - I implore you to consider the actual decision makers and how they may perceive the participation of male volunteers who are not parents.

It's a bit sexist to think these concerns are limited to Millennial women.

As far as the NFL example, female viewership has increased but youth participation has steadily declined and less than half of Americans now think football is a suitable activity for youth.  

[Eagledad]

Strange discussion. But, if forums do nothing else, they bring out extreme opinions. Over the years folks expressed extreme thoughts like, scouting was dying from lack of gay  adult leaders, then it was lack of gay youths, then it was female youths, and then to much god or not enough god or not enough camping, or too much camping and so on.

A few extreme opinions doesn’t mean reality. But it does drive interesting discussions. I don’t believe millennial mothers are the pivot point of BSAs success or failure. Helicopter parents are a real problem, but only locally.

I also don’t believe the few mothers who are afraid are anymore sexist than those of us who resisted bringing girls into the program because male scouts would be at a disadvantage for growth. 

interesting I had a discussion with a grandmother last week who is now anti BSA because of admitting girls. She believes scouts are safe on campouts, but she also believes boys are different from girls and need a different scouting experience.

Is grandma sexist? I don’t think so, she is experienced with life. But, I expect young parents on the front side of life may not relate.

As someone who has developed a lot of BSA membership trend data over the years, I consider myself somewhat an expert on future trends. I believe Covid has done more to upset the future of the BSA than gays, girls, god, and sexual harassment. Covid took the cruise control out of program and forced leaders to become more creative and active, or not.

I believe the future is going to be very dependent on just plain survival. Survival will depend on the passion of volunteers wanting a program so much that they will have to think out-of-box to keep their program growing. They won’t get help from the giant anchor of National. And they will have to contend with the juggernaut of the Cub program, which is a serious adult killer burning out leaders.

The troop program is easier to manage, but it does rely heavily on the scraps the Cub program leaves them for crossovers. But, the real issue with the troop program is that the majority of volunteers never had a youth scouting experience. That was a coming problem before Covid, but now their is less to temper its problems.

Adult are instinctively competitive. It’s a survival thing. The instinct of Scouts however, is games and adventure. Adventure and games develop the mind and body to be ready for competitive adult survival when the youth cross over into adulthood at about 14 years of age.

My point is if the adults don’t know how to have fun, they tend to drive the program toward less fun drive towards developing stature. Advancement and leadership will replace adventure and games. I see the future of the troop program becoming more of an after school club for pre teenagers.

So, lots to wonder and worry about. But, it will be the passionate adults who will drive the trends of the future program. Where are we going, I have no idea. But we need to fasten our seatbelts because it’s going to be a wild ride.

Barry

Edited January 29, 2023 by Eagledad

[BetterWithCheddar]

2 hours ago, yknot said:

It's a bit sexist to think these concerns are limited to Millennial women.

Child safety is a shared concern. My implication is that Millennial mothers drive household decision-making. (Including having final say on their child's participation in Cub Scouts).

I always get a chuckle when I hear a story about a well-meaning girl who writes to a detergent company to complain about sexist advertising. She's assuming that women are often featured in detergent commercials because the company believes wives do more laundry than their husbands. While this may be true in some households, the company is featuring women in their ads because women are more likely to BUY THE DETERGENT (or at least choose the brand). Laundry in my household is split 50/50 (my wife would say 60/40), but she's the one who looks forward to the weekly Target run.

In any case, I appreciate the dialogue. Rather than risk debating at nauseum, I'll concede my opinion on the matter is in the minority (but please understand it's not unique to me). All else equal, suburban moms would probably prefer that suburban dads are the ones to take their children camping.

Edited January 29, 2023 by BetterWithCheddar

[Jameson76]

16 hours ago, curious_scouter said:

Maybe a bit more back on topic... how have your units handled this scenario:

New scout joins, often via crossover from cubs but sometimes as they move into town from away.  Parents want to join us on a few outings.  On the one hand as a parent - I get this.  I don't really care how much training and YPT a bunch of adult volunteers have had... I'm going to find it very difficult if not impossible to get comfortable with the idea of sending my child off into the outdoors with a bunch of people I don't know at all.  On the flip side, my established leadership is not wild on the idea of unregistered adults who could end up not understanding/espousing the idea of letting the Scout do and being "helicopter parents".  I get this also.

My compromise thus far has been 1) require YPT to attend 2) meet with said parent to set expectations, giving them the benefit of the doubt that they are adult humans and if I express my expectations and desire for adult behavior on an outing they will respect that.

I'm too new to know how naive this is

Our unit welcomes ALL parents to come to outings AS LEADERS, not parents.  If a new parent wants to come, great.  You must take YPT, we make clear the scouts camp in one area and we as leaders camp in another.  This is not a parent kid campout that the troop happens to be at.  If said kid comes over to the adult area for X or Y, one of the leaders will likely speak with them and guide them to their PL or SPL.

We take very seriously the Scout areas and the leader areas.  Yes we stroll through, usually in groups of 2 or 3 to converse and observe, but they need to work as a group and they are handling and working all activities.

The adults main responsibilities are to drive Scouts there, make sure no gross safety violations occur, occasional headcount confirmation with SPL, remind youth leadership what time it may be at points during the day, bandage as needed, BOR as warranted, conflict resolution if needed, judge the cooking contest, show the Scouts how to pack the car / trailer, and drive them home.

[JSL3300]

My husband and I lead the Cub Scout pack that both of my boys were in prior to last year, when our oldest took the leap into Scouts BSA. The unit he chose is small and the SM and ASM are both older guys with no kids in the program. The older scouts were not overly welcoming and one of the boys that crossed with mine dropped after a couple of months because he felt bullied. 

We had a transparent conversation with one of the families from our pack that also picked that troop to cross into. We both revealed that we felt incredibly uncomfortable sending our boys into the woods with these men and older scouts. Because we all four led at the pack level, we already had YPT and what we decided is that one of the four of us will go on every campout until we felt comfortable letting them go solo. We didn't express exactly why we were doing this, but the SM and ASM have been completely fine with it and always check in to see if we're coming. 

I don't think it should be a policy that people without children in scouts can't go camping, but I do think it should be made obvious to parents that if they want to take YPT and camp with the troop that they are welcome. I don't think it's overprotective to be wary of a group that has had years and years of this type of history.