Institutionalizing Adult-Run Elements

[Beavah]

Here's a good one:

 

Only adults have keys to the gear room/meeting place. Youth leaders don't.

 

 

[John-in-KC]

Hunt,

 

I agree with both your comments. Those are where adult participation jumps from "supporting youth" to "running youth."

 

Beavah,

 

Only up to a point on your last. Our Chartered Partner has an alarm system on their facility, which our units use. As I understand from our IH, the issue of who may be given a passcode to the alarm is in the contract. According to him, no minors.

 

How do we deal with that? The Chartered Partner has well and truly met their obligation of appropriate meeting space.

 

Our youth, particularly the Quartermasters, have had the combination to the Trailer. The first thing the new QMs did was change the combination.

 

(This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

[emb021]

"Only adults have keys to the gear room/meeting place. Youth leaders don't."

 

A CO may have an issue with non-member youth having keys to their buildings/rooms. Plus possible liability issues. So long as the unit adults are willing/able to opening up things for the youth, how is this an issue. When I was adult troop leader, I don't recall the kids getting their before the adults...

 

 

[Eagledad]

>>A CO may have an issue with non-member youth having keys to their buildings/rooms. Plus possible liability issues.

[Beavah]

Yah, I thought of that one after a recent email exchange with an international scouting colleague. In many other countries, it's completely normal for youth leaders and other senior scouts to have keys to their scoutin' facilities. Even to da point where they can take out boats and other gear on their own.

 

One interestin' side effect is that they also do more work maintainin' the gear and facilities because it feels like it's theirs, and they're able to do work on their own schedule.

 

No question dat many/most U.S. troops run into an Institutionalized Adult-Run element here. Just important that we call a spade a spade... and maybe reflect whether it really can be negotiated. Yah, 99% of them that squalk about "liability" don't know what they're talkin' about, and fewer still recognize that liability is something that we have to willingly accept in order to do anything worthwhile.

 

Beavah

 

[Venividi]

I like the key idea. The demonstration of trust in the scout speaks very loudly.

 

I agree with Eagledad that adult fears limit scout growth. Adults don't want to see scouts fail, and often expect scouters to step in and make sure that they don't. That limits opportunities. It brings to mind the first committee meeting that I attended after my son crossed over into boy scouts.

Some background is necessary: on the most recent campout, one patrol had forgotten to purchase food for the weekend. One of the ASM's overheard the patrol members talking about it on the drive to the campsite Friday night. The adults chose not to intervene, but rather to wait for the patrol to approach them with their problem. The patrol did so at breakfasttime the next morning. They discussed how to resolve the situation, and then one of the scouters drove the patrol to the closest grocery store, where the patrol corrected their error.

At the committee meeting, I watched as parents of those patrol members raked the SM over the coals. They demanded to know what the SM was going to do to prevent scouts from making such a mistake. One mother went so far as to say that if the SM couldn't guarantee that the patrol wouldn't forget to buy food, then she would send food with her son on overy campout. The SM explained that there was nothing that he should do; that it played out exactly as it should have. The majority of the committee accepted the SM's explanation, but there were parents that did not, and were livid that their sons ate breakfast late because the SM did not ensure that the patrol grubmaster had fulfilled his responsibility. They wanted more adult run elements, not less.