Making Judgment Calls

[Eagledad]

Hi Sandspur

 

I'm not sure of Stoshes point other than giving an example of a worse case scenerio of a badly trained crew. In reality I think these kinds of situations and examples like Stoshes are rare. I can only think of one situation in my many years of scouting where I had to use my SM title to force a direction and that only had to do with transportation to camp. These things are rare because most folks are reasonable.

 

Still, you can leave it to a group, somebody has to take responsibility. Usually the somebody has enough experience and understanding of the folks involved to have a good idea of the troops limitations. I think you want a decision by consensus, and while I think good leaders listen to all the concerns, the person taking responsibility still has to make a decision. I found that consensus decisions typically only delay actions until somebody does finally stands up to take the responsibility. And the more folks included in the discussion, the worse it gets. I learned to keep such discussion limited to three or four of the most trusted.

 

But let me just say, most of us in this position do not take the responsibility lightly. My wife will tell you that the stress of responsibility aged me while I was SM. She use to say that she knew when we were close to leaving for summer camp or a high adventure wilderness trek because I was very cranky. Most of us are just as concerned for your son as we are for our own.

 

Interesting discussion because it raises concerns in situation that I think are very rare. The BSA does a pretty good job in guiding the troop in the risk of different activities.

 

Barry

[CalicoPenn]

"where we had to learn that while we may be good to go, the group may be good to go"

 

Oops - my bad (and my flying fingers).

 

This should read:

 

"where we had to learn that while we may be good to go, the group may NOT be good to go"

[Eagle732]

Whatever decision is made someone will second guess it.

"He who molds the public sentiment... makes statutes and decisions possible or impossible to make."

Abraham Lincoln

 

 

[sandspur]

Eagledad: I hope nothing I said indicated I thought any scout leader did not take the scouts safety seriously. I and my sons have been involved in scouting for many years and I have never encountered a scouter who did not take their responsibilities seriously.

I have entrusted my sons safety to the leaders in our troops for a long time and will continue to do so without a qualm.

By the way, some of the scouts/leaders from my troop (at the time) were involved in the tragedy at Little Sioux last year. Both of the senior scouters running that program and on site when the tornado struck were good friends of mine. I have trusted my sons to them and would do so again today without hesitation.

 

[acco40]

The Scoutmaster is the "face" of the troop. They should be the leader in charge on the outing. The SAs report to him. The Troop Committee does not "do" the outdoor program. If the Scoutmaster is not in attendance, they should have designated someone to act as SM in their absence.

 

Now, should a SM be a dictator? No. Should they listen to the advice of other? Yes. But ultimately, the decision should be theirs. Now, if individuals deem something unsafe - sure opt out. That's called common sense.

 

What I've seen at outings is that it rains, rains and rains. The temperatures are in the low 60s. Some of the Scouts have not come fully prepared for the weather. Some of the adults and Scouts mention that the troop should just call it quits and go home. The Scoutmaster says no. You as individuals are free to leave but the outing is not cut short - states the SM. Much gnashing of teeth ensue by some of the adults and Scouts. Is that a safety issue or comfort issue? Should the unprepared learn from their lack of planning or should "fun" be the driver?(This message has been edited by acco40)

[sandspur]

Acco40:

 

What you describe is more a comfort/fun issue. If you stick it out, bet those scouts without proper gear are more prepared next time!

As you are from Michigan, how about this one:

A storm front is moving in. We are well equipped for the weather but there is a 70% chance of an ice storm. The roads may become skating rinks and dangerous. We are scheduled to pack up and leave tomorrow morning. Do we leave early to avoid potential (but not certain) dangerous driving conditions tomorrow morning or stick it out?

No clear answer, but you are sure to have to make the best judgment call you can.

 

[Gunny2862]

acco40,

Thanks for asking...

That's been a key thought of mine as I've followed the thread.

 

I don't have any issue BEING or allowing the Scouts to BE uncomfortable in pursuit of learning.

I have huge issues about worrying about being UNSAFE.

 

I would like to think that I would make the correct Safety Call EVERY time - but realize that even with prior proper planning - of whatever methodology one uses - there will always be a factor ones isn't aware of. And sometimes that call is that conditions are marginal but not yet over the line so we're staying...

 

I have made hugely popular decisions about leaving, and unpopular decisions about staying, but those have also been the occasions where the boys who were there bonded tightly about having "survived" "the great rain-out of..." etc.

[CalicoPenn]

"A storm front is moving in. We are well equipped for the weather but there is a 70% chance of an ice storm. The roads may become skating rinks and dangerous. We are scheduled to pack up and leave tomorrow morning. Do we leave early to avoid potential (but not certain) dangerous driving conditions tomorrow morning or stick it out?"

 

This would be a good question for a go/no-go discussion at a roundtable or other training - and also for individual units.

 

If I were the PIC, and the 70% figure wasn't some randomly generated number but was estimated by more than one source (unless, perhaps, that source was a direct connect to the National Weather Service), I would cut the outing short and head on back early. Of course, this leaves another question. At what threshhold would I stay? 60%? 50% 40%. Tell me 10% and I'll take my chances, but north of 40? I'm probably leaving.

 

[Eagledad]

>>"A storm front is moving in. We are well equipped for the weather but there is a 70% chance of an ice storm. The roads may become skating rinks and dangerous. We are scheduled to pack up and leave tomorrow morning. Do we leave early to avoid potential (but not certain) dangerous driving conditions tomorrow morning or stick it out?"

[Eamonn]

I think many of us can post times when the decision that we have made as the person in charge have been right on the money.

Some of us might be willing to post times when we have been just plain wrong.

I don't think this thread is about that?

I think it's about how we reach the final decision.

I don't have a problem asking people what they think or what they think we should do?

Feedback is a gift.

Sometimes even if I am the Skipper /SM/, I might not be the person in charge of what we are doing.

A few summers back we took the Ship Sea Kayaking, the trip was booked with a guide, who knew the waters better than I ever will and is far more experienced than I am.

When I send the details of the trip to the Scouts and their parents, I made it clear that while we were on the water this person was in charge.

Still this guide who was really great came up to me several times and asked what route I thought we should follow? Some routes were harder and some longer than others.

I was of course willing to trust her and willing to place my Scouts (YES MY) in her hands.

Eamonn.

[Stosh]

"I'm not sure of Stoshes point other than giving an example of a worse case scenerio of a badly trained crew. In reality I think these kinds of situations and examples like Stoshes are rare."

 

Gotta love these distorted observations by those who don't comprehend the point.

 

First of all the crew members that are not allowed to participate are those that have not acquired the necessary skills to do the job safely. It has nothing to do with "badly trained". On the contrary, the high standard of training is what is keeping the boys from risk.

 

Secondly, if it is rare that high quality training before sending a scout out is rare, then there are a ton of problems just waiting to happen.

 

I would think that if a scout was highly trained in kayaking, was trained in navigation, safety, and equipment usage, that this does not automatically mean that if the boy can't paddle from point A to point B safely, there is something wrong with the training. It's a little like rank advancement, demonstrate a knot, let the boy stumble through it a dozen times and when he accidently provides the knot tied correctly, give him credit. Well, to me that is poor training and a substandard level of accomplishment. I want my boys to tie the knot every time I ask so that when it comes time for me to make a judgement as to whether or not they can handle a risky task, I can be reasonably sure they will be okay. If not it is my responsibility to pull the plug and say no, not this time.

 

If I have an ASM that says he can handle a canoe and is a MB counselor for canoeing, can he prove himself on a lake? calm river? white-water? I know my limits, but do I really know the limits of those around me? Just because they have credentials doesn't mean the will be worth a nickel in an emergency situation. With what information do I take this into consideration when making a judgment call? It's a matter of what do I assume and what do I know. I go with what I know and assume nothing when it comes to my boys.

 

I don't put my boys into dangerous situations unless I KNOW he can handle it.

 

I have had boys walk off the reenactment field because they ended up standing next to an adult that was not acting in an appropriate manner. Not only was this boy trained correctly and to the highest standards, he could then in turn apply that knowledge to keep himself safe when I couldn't keep an eagle-eye on him every second. It takes more than training to get a boy to that point.

 

Fulfilling requirements means more than just showing they know what they're doing, but taking that information and applying it means they can use that information to their benefit, other than just a patch on a shirt and a handshake at a COH.

 

Stosh

[Hal_Crawford]

A few years ago our troop canceled participation in a district event because of snow on the roads. Drivers and SM were concerned about whether the roads would be safe once they got out to the country.

 

The irony was that it was the Klodike Derby. As one of our senior scouts said, "...wait, let me get this straight, we canceled the sled race on account of snow?" In retrospect it was the wrong call as other units that did participate had no problem but I respect the decision to err on the side of caution. And really, is erring on the side of caution ever really the wrong call.

 

[Stosh]

Wrong call?

 

1) What was the distance to the Klondike? If it's just around the corner, maybe it wouldn't be a problem getting there 50 miles of driving?.

 

2) What was the terrain like? Flat? hilly?

 

3) What kind of roads would they need to cover? Rural gravel that hasn't been ploughed, freeway?

 

4) What kind of vehicles are involved? 4-wheel drive, SUV, sedans?

 

5) Do any/all of the drivers feel confident?

 

6) # of vehicles? 2? 10? Any pulling a scout trailer?

 

I wouldn't try and second guess any SM decision without knowing the whole story and all the differing factors that he/she had to consider to make his/her decision. Without knowing the whole story, I'm going to assume the SM made the correct judgment.

 

Stosh

[Beavah]

Cancelin' events because of possible snow and ice on da roads?

 

Southerners should really learn how to drive, eh?

 

Yah, good example of da need to look at the experience of da whole group. It's necessary to tailor the decisions based on that, eh?

 

With drivers not used to snow & ice, yeh have to back down even if one or two drivers are just fine with it. With kids who aren't trained/experienced enough to handle things on their own, yeh have to back down even if da adults themselves are fine with da canoe trip.

 

B

 

[Eagledad]

>>Cancelin' events because of possible snow and ice on da roads?

 

Southerners should really learn how to drive, eh?