PLC Justice

[Twocubdad]

Until now our PLC has not handled behavioral issues. It's been a couple years since we've had a problem (knock on wood) and the last time around the PLC just didn't have the ability to handle it.

 

We've got an issue from the last campout and I'd like the PLC to handle. For anyone who has their PLC deal with behavioral problems, how do you handle it? What procedures do you use? How do you present the "case" to the PLC? Does someone serve as the prosecutor? What is the role of the adults? Does the troop committee sign off on the PLC's decision? Is there an appeal? What do you do if the PLC goes off reservation?

 

I don't particularly relish the idea of getting into a hokey mock trial thing, but there needs to be some organization. I also think it important that the PLC have some background as to how the troop has handled similar situations in the past, just from a consistency standpoint.(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

[Eagle92]

Can't comment too much as there are not a lot of details given.

 

But back in the day PLs were the "judge and jury" for most problems and they handled it, kinda like Captain's Mast in the Navy.

 

If it was more serious, the SPL would get involved. That happened 1 time, and the biggest reason for it was that the PL wes involved in the prank. Or should I say the former PL was involved. Again SPL was "judge and Jury"

 

 

SM and ASMs never seemed to get unless it was A) a SMC moment or B) so serious that they needed to get involved. Don't remember any B moments, and usually the SMC came after the PL or SPL had their moment.

 

Now I do know of one scout being sent home from jambo, but that has been told elsewhere.

[Twocubdad]

The infraction was a mid-range safety issue. If I were to make a recommendation it would probably be a rather-involved make-good project and probation. Hopefully that gives you an idea of the scope without going into all the gory details.

 

But what I'm really looking for are procedural recommendations for how to implement this with the PLC.

[SR540Beaver]

It's a committee and BOR issue.

[Beavah]

Yah, is there any question at all about da facts of the case, or is this just a question of law?

 

If there's questions about da facts (the things juries usually determine), then you're in a stew. While perhaps a good lesson of citizenship, I don't think yeh want to expose kids to the backwash that might come from playin' jury. Angry parents, upset friends...

 

If it's just a question of law... what the boys want to establish as norms and expectations for the troop goin' forward, then I think yeh can manage that. Have someone present what happened (adult or youth). Have the youth in question talk about what he did and especially why he chose to do it. Let the PLC ask questions. Then have the boy leave the room and let the kids deliberate on what their response should be.

 

I would seed the thing by giving the SPL a few options ahead of time that yeh think are in da reasonable range. And I'd stay around but be pretty quiet as an adult. Don't have a lot of other adults around, though.

 

Honestly, though, I'm sorta with Eagle92, eh? Are yeh sure that this isn't somethin' that should just be handled by the boy's PL? or da SPL? Especially since it's a "safety issue" rather than a community issue like theft. Safety stuff we ordinarily don't committee-ify. The fellows who know about safety and who are responsible for it just decide.

 

Beavah

[Lisabob]

In most cases I am with SR540Beaver that discipline should be a SM and committee issue, especially when things escalate beyond minor squabbles and when facts are disputed.

 

I have seen ham-handed attempts to have the SPL or PLC handle those sorts of issues and it often backfires. It isn't just angry parents/friends, but a question of justice and of understanding the appropriate use of disciplinary action.

 

For example: in my son's troop, one year at summer camp, several boys were major pains in the rear. They threw stones at others all week long, used foul language all week long, intentionally broke one guy's equipment, sexually taunted and harassed a young scout, and generally behaved terribly. I still do not understand why the SM didn't just send them home. I certainly would have. Things came to a head at the end of the week when one of the persistent victims got hit in the head with a rock one time too many and went out after one of the kids. A minor fist fight ensued. The SPL's solution (3 months later) was to ban both boys in the fist fight from an event that would occur 6 months later.

 

The parent of the boy who tried all week long to play by the rules was mad. To them, it made no sense that it took three months to decide there should be equal punishment, and that the kids who broke his stuff would not be expected to make restitution. The parent of the kid who was sexually taunted was mad. To them, the punishment was insufficient. The parent of the kids who had been chucking rocks, breaking things, and harassing scouts all week were mad. To them, they believed their boy(s) version of events and didn't think other boys should tell them what to do. The parents of everyone involved felt the SPL's choice to wait 3 months and then ban kids from an event 6 months in the future was too far removed from the problem behavior. The SPL's decision was over-turned. I'm sure this left the SPL feeling undermined. It also caused a lot of hard feelings among many adults.

 

Having witnessed that whole mess, I would say the poor SPL was not well equipped to recognize and handle the blow back that resulted. He did not understand that to be effective, discipline needs to be fairly immediate, progressive, and proportionate. He certainly wasn't prepared for some of the parent responses he got. I think he was set up to fail by the SM in that case. This should have been a committee issue from the beginning, though perhaps with some input from the SPL.

 

So if you plan to have the SPL and PLC handle disciplinary issues, tread very carefully. Be sure they get excellent guidelines first. And it will probably help if the parents of the accused scouts are on board. Otherwise, the chances of backfire are high.

 

 

[John-in-KC]

SR540Beaver, Beavah, and Lisa said it ahead of me.

 

To me, the questions are how experienced overall your PLC is, and how miserable is the parent likely to make your life?

 

We had a discipline issue a couple years back at Scout Camp. Dad's a union local president; SM is down in the trenches in another union. DAD (and Mom) came with enforcers from SM's union, frankly they didn't play nice. The SPL learned several new combinations of words, being on the receiving end of Dad's invective. Dad also broke every rule in the book about removing his son from camp.

 

You have to think about these things each time they come up: Do you really want your SPL getting foul and coarse language from a parent, and being publicly humiliated to tears? Do you really want to have a visit to the COR, with a parent on a rampage, wanting your head on a platter, because you let the kids handle it?

 

Safety of the youth has to be the watchword, imo...