Adult leadership requirement change - female

[Eagle1993]

This one snuck in when the other change was announced (about adults staying overnight).

A registered female adult leader 21 years of age or over must be present for any activity involving female youth or female adult program participants.  

So, what is the change?  In the past, "female adult program participants" wasn't listed.  So, my understanding, is if you have a female 18-20 attending an event, you need a registered female adult leader 21 years or older.  

[qwazse]

31 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

This one snuck in when the other change was announced (about adults staying overnight).

A registered female adult leader 21 years of age or over must be present for any activity involving female youth or female adult program participants.  

So, what is the change?  In the past, "female adult program participants" wasn't listed.  So, my understanding, is if you have a female 18-20 attending an event, you need a registered female adult leader 21 years or older.  

What it means @Eagle1993, is that if the proportion of females is nonzero, I could not meet collegiate adult Venturers for coffee without me finding 21+ registered female adult to join me.

It effectively makes it pointless to be a male crew advisor.

[InquisitiveScouter]

9 minutes ago, qwazse said:

What it means @Eagle1993, is that if the proportion of females is nonzero, I could not meet collegiate adult Venturers for coffee without me finding 21+ registered female adult to join me.

It effectively makes it pointless to be a male crew advisor.

Now that is just plain stupid...

Supposing those were assistant Scoutmasters for a Troop.  They are not over 21, nor are they "adult program participants."  So, it's ok to meet with them.  But, the second one of them let's you know they have registered with a Venturing crew, you are a YPT criminal!! LOL

Oh, the humanity 😛

 

[KublaiKen]

Wow, I totally missed that.

[qwazse]

14 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Now that is just plain stupid...

Supposing those were assistant Scoutmasters for a Troop.  They are not over 21, nor are they "adult program participants."  So, it's ok to meet with them.  But, the second one of them let's you know they have registered with a Venturing crew, you are a YPT criminal!! LOL

Oh, the humanity 😛

 

@InquisitiveScouter, keep complaining about it and those 19-20 year old ASMs will be reclassified as program participants.

I want to make it clear how much of my life involves deeply personal one-on-one conversations with 19-20 year olds of the opposite sex. It is very hard for some young adult women to navigation their world — many are facing abuse, caregiver burdens, financial stress — and they open up about it to very few people. They often look for second father figure and, along with their friends, arrange a meeting with him. Sometimes that person is me, often I can rope a second elder into that conversation, but often time is of the essence and we can’t ill afford time to screen that fellow qualified elder by sex.

This is how the real world works and will continue to work. By imposing this kind of restriction, BSA will remove itself further from meeting the needs of young adults.

[InquisitiveScouter]

17 minutes ago, qwazse said:

@InquisitiveScouter, keep complaining about it and those 19-20 year old ASMs will be reclassified as program participants.

I want to make it clear how much of my life involves deeply personal one-on-one conversations with 19-20 year olds of the opposite sex. It is very hard for some young adult women to navigation their world — many are facing abuse, caregiver burdens, financial stress — and they open up about it to very few people. They often look for second father figure and, along with their friends, arrange a meeting with him. Sometimes that person is me, often I can rope a second elder into that conversation, but often time is of the essence and we can’t ill afford time to screen that fellow qualified elder by sex.

This is how the real world works and will continue to work. By imposing this kind of restriction, BSA will remove itself further from meeting the needs of young adults.

Yeah, we are able to train them and put them into combat, but the 18-year-old (legal adult) cannot have a personal conversation at Starbucks with their Crew Adviser without another registered adult present?

No logic or sanity in that thinking at all...

That is one of those "rules" where conscience, principle, and ethics dictate ignoring the rule and doing the right thing.

I support you 100% @qwazse

And even if reclassified, I'll still ignore it 😜

Edited February 17, 2023 by InquisitiveScouter

[PACAN]

This is all designed to make more MBCs registered as paid adults.    I'm guessing they don't want all MBCs to be paid positions because a number of them that are MBCs only will walk away.   I wonder how many  MBCs are already dual registered.

[mrjohns2]

2 minutes ago, PACAN said:

This is all designed to make more MBCs registered as paid adults.   

I’d word it differently. This will make it so that people who were using the “free” MBC as a loophole will now have to pay. 

[KublaiKen]

It works until the Camping MBC actually wants to see a Scout in action. Registering all your MBCs into Troop positions is kind of the antithesis of one of the stated purposes of the MB program, isn't it? Too many of our MBCs are already ASMs.

[Eagle94-A1]

7 minutes ago, PACAN said:

This is all designed to make more MBCs registered as paid adults.    I'm guessing they don't want all MBCs to be paid positions because a number of them that are MBCs only will walk away.   I wonder how many  MBCs are already dual registered.

I am going to hazard a guess that it varies from council to council , i.e. the number of MBUs they offer. I know that some MBUs are hosted by organizations and colleges, and they want those expert MBCs. I would guess 85%+ are already registered in a paid position.

 

 

[HashTagScouts]

19 minutes ago, KublaiKen said:

It works until the Camping MBC actually wants to see a Scout in action. Registering all your MBCs into Troop positions is kind of the antithesis of one of the stated purposes of the MB program, isn't it? Too many of our MBCs are already ASMs.

If you have two other registered adult leaders there, I'd invite that MBC along any time they wanted to come. You're compliant to the registered leader requirement, while not putting burden on that MBC.

As @mrjohns2stated, this is to stop those who don't want to pay-to-play. I'd say it is 50/50 on unit leaders that I've discussed this with that have always treated MBCs this way vs those who were viewing it as a way to avoid their unit paying the registration fee beyond ASM #2/Committee Member #4.

[PACAN]

@mrjohns2....that's pretty cynical...loophole?  really?   MBCs have been "free"  for a long time and required to have YPT.  What's changed?

[HashTagScouts]

19 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

I am going to hazard a guess that it varies from council to council , i.e. the number of MBUs they offer. I know that some MBUs are hosted by organizations and colleges, and they want those expert MBCs. I would guess 85%+ are already registered in a paid position.

 

 

Would tend to agree with that for my area as well. in that other 15%, probably half are folks who were involved with a troop when their kids were youth in the program, so really not big #s of folks who are just "community members". 

[KublaiKen]

2 minutes ago, HashTagScouts said:

If you have two other registered adult leaders there, I'd invite that MBC along any time they wanted to come. You're compliant to the registered leader requirement, while not putting burden on that MBC.

As @mrjohns2stated, this is to stop those who don't want to pay-to-play. I'd say it is 50/50 on unit leaders that I've discussed this with that have always treated MBCs this way vs those who were viewing it as a way to avoid their unit paying the registration fee beyond ASM #2/Committee Member #4.

As of 9/1, you are not compliant if you bring that MBC, as they are specifically excluded from the list of registrations required to accompany a unit camping.

[HashTagScouts]

22 minutes ago, PACAN said:

@mrjohns2....that's pretty cynical...loophole?  really?   MBCs have been "free"  for a long time and required to have YPT.  What's changed?

Previous unit I was with, I registered as an ASM when my son joined the troop. Most meetings and campouts, there would be 8+ of us there that were identified to scouts/parents as ASMs. Second year my son and I were there several folks who were Committee wanted to step down, as their sons had aged out several years prior. CC asked a few parents if they would register to join the Committee, and only 1 agreed. CC asked if I would switch from ASM to Committee- I agreed, would still be registered and could still go along on campouts, so no big deal. Then we hit re-charter time, and Committee meeting discussed youth who were on the roster that we assumed would not be re-chartering (the usual "we haven't seen Fred since March" type of conversation). Then I saw the adult roster, and saw we only had about 1/3 of those "ASMs" on the charter. I had to question that, and the response was they are registered as MBCs because they really didn't come to everything, so why should they pay the fees. When I volunteered to be a part of the IOLS training team for the district, several of those "MBC ASMs" had looked at me sideways and couldn't understand either a) what IOLs was, and/or b) why would any adult go through IOLS. After seeing that adult roster, I understood then why these folks were so confused about IOLS. SM specific training? Nope, foreign concept. The unit ran because SM Tom knows what he is doing and he tells us what to do, so why do we need to need to go through training.