Scout with Criminal Record

[SeattlePioneer]

Another issue for unit leaders who are inclined to "work with" problem youth who have "issues."

 

 

Keeping problem children in Scout units means that the experience of other Scouts may be impaired. Fairly often, such children can be pretty cunning, showing a relatively sweet face to adult leaders but they may show quite another face to Scouts in the unit, especially younger and/or vulnerable boys.

 

It may be difficult to catch and document bad behaviors, and if one is inclined to excuse bad behaviors when they are documented, that means that problems are being ignored.

 

Not a formula for a successful Scout unit, in my opinion.

[SeattlePioneer]

The model for discipline and discharge in employment situations is often that of "progressive discipline." For minor offenses, that may involve a verbal warning, a written warning and then suspension(s) before termination. For serious issues such as assault, theft and such, discharge on the first offense may happen.

 

 

That's a pretty good model to apply to Scouting as well. It encourages problems to be documented and dealt with, not ignored. Dealing with disciplinary problems is a responsibility of adult Scout leaders in my view. Ignoring problems in hopes that they will go away is not responsible adult leadership in my view.

 

Too often, problem children tend to have their bad behavior indulgently ignored or dealt with ineffectively, in hopes that it will go away. That's often because the adult leaders aren't the victims of that behavior --- if they were, they might take it more seriously.

 

I recommend the progressive discipline model for Scout units. It puts everyone on notice that bad behavior must be corrected if a youth is to remain in Scouting. It puts the maximum amount of pressure on the boys to change his behavior --- which is what we want.

[BadenP]

Seattle

 

Excuse me but you don't know what the heck you are talking about. Your obvious prejudice and lack of personal experience only adds to the idiocy of your statement.

I have been a leader for an all high risk scout group and you know what they were less trouble than any "good kid" unit. If no one ever took the time to work with juvenile offenders and gave them an opportunity to see a better way we would need 10 times the number of prisons, which would bankrupt most state budgets. We aren't talking about murderers, rapists or major felons here but a kid who made a mistake due to a variety of reasons and want to try to get back to a normal life.

 

Your personal prejudices would prevent them from ever becoming a scout and trying to make that happen. As I said in a prior post that violates the Scout Oath, "to help other people at all times", and IMO that makes you a pretty poor excuse for a scout leader, and I truly mean that.(This message has been edited by BadenP)

[Twocubdad]

That was the edited version? Gee, I hate to think.

 

Since many of us idiots are more or less agreeing with SP, I suppose that makes a whole bunch of folks unfit to be Scout leaders. Hmmmm.

 

Or maybe we see "help other people at all times" in light of the dozens of other boys in the troop, not just the accused drug dealer. Or maybe the best way to help the one kid isn't in a program which encourages adults to step back and allow the boys to learn from their mistakes. There seems to be a case to be made that controlled failure isn't the best teaching tool for this Scout.

 

I don't see anyone here suggesting that kids like this one never become Scouts. And even this kid had the opportunity. But Scouting is a priviledge, not an entitlement. No, this isn't murder or rape, but that really where you draw the line? Dealing meth isn't like having a couple of loose-rolled joints in your sock either. We all should be able to draw that line where we see fit for our units.

 

Bless you for the work you do with boys like this. But don't damn the rest of us who don't have your training and aptitude.

 

 

[Beavah]

Yah, easy fellahs... I reckon there are circumstances when each of us would remove a lad, and ones where each of us would keep a boy that others want to remove. Here's some things to think about.

 

What is the experience of the adults? I think SP is right, eh? There are naive adults. Folks who have raised good kids and who themselves were good kids and who have never worked with "bad" kids. They should avoid gettin' into da "save every kid" / great white savior routine. Too easy for boys to pull the wool over their eyes. Kids livin' a harder life learn manipulation as a survival skill, and naive adults are easily manipulated. In my experience yeh need adults who were bad boys or otherwise know the genre.

 

What's up in da rest of the boy's life? Let's face it, scoutin' is a part time endeavor, eh? An hour here and there, an occasional campout. Nothin' we do in scouting is likely to overcome chaos or bad influences in the boy's daily life. So if the parents aren't supportive or the lad hasn't renounced the gang, you're not likely to get anywhere. In fact, "non-supportive parents" that enable a lad's bad behavior yeh almost certainly have to remove the lad.

 

Where's the boy at? Is he truly, tearfully remorseful for his choices and really tryin' to change, much as that's goin' to be a roller coaster? Or is he just "playin' the apology game" but not meaning it.

 

Finally, where's your CO and troop at? Frankly, if yeh have a bunch of SPs or E61s odds are yeh aren't going to be successful. The boys are going to live up to the (low) expectations of those around 'em. If his patrol mates and their parents send subtle signs that they think he's a delinquent, then he may well live up to that. So scouters and a CO that are truly committed to reachin' a hard lad have to be willing to tell a more up-tight family that they are not welcome if they don't buy into the mission. I wouldn't wait for 'em to leave on their own. They do too much damage that way. Yeh have a version of da "full disclosure" talk as soon as yeh sense a problem. Not full disclosure about the boy, that's not their business. Full disclosure of your mission for kids and your expectations of their behavior if they want their "good" kid to stay in the unit.

 

Hopefully someone in BSAmomWW's unit is havin' exactly that sort of conversation with her.

 

Beavah

[BadenP]

Twocub

 

What if when you were a kid you were accused of being a drug dealer or a thief who was picked up by the police for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, and some adult was spreading rumors about you, and all you really wanted to be was a boy scout but the SM told you you were scum and didn't deserve the chance? What kind of message does that send to the boy, how would that make you feel?

 

I said in my previous post that SP's scenario was idiocy, not the the leaders. However those leaders are guilty of violating the Scout Oath and no matter how you want to twist things around that is the truth, like it or not. Any scout leader who thinks that one kid with a spot on his record is going to decimate his troop is being naive at best or trying to justify his own prejudice against the boy because that is not the case, and I can tell you that from personal experience that you have nothing to fear except your own unfounded personal prejudice. So yes IMO, any scout leader who can not personally live up to the scout oath and law is not a very effective scout leader.

 

All it takes is a genuine desire to give a boy a chance and that boy will see you as someone who really cares and is willing to give him a chance, which establishes that bond of trust between you both that will last for a long long time. Being a scout leader requires you to take a chance sometimes it is not about always taking the easy way out when a situation comes up.(This message has been edited by BadenP)

[Callooh! Callay!1428010939]

Sanctimonious moral exhibitionism over good deeds cheapens them; as does reviling those who don't do likewise.

[Twocubdad]

Perhaps I spend too much time watching Breaking Bad, but dealing meth strikes me as a pretty serious charge, not a "spot on his record". Any leader who takes seriously the health and safety of the Scouts in his charge MUST consider the possibility that the charges against this kid are legitimate and there is at least a possibility it is an on-going problem.

 

But as to your hypothetical -- I'm struck by the phrase, "and all you wanted to be was a boy scout." What does that mean? That I want to continue to go camping? That I like having a place to hang out on Tuesday nights? That I have a new market for selling meth? Or does that mean I really want to demonstrate Scout Spirit by living the Scout Oath and Law in my everyday life?

 

If being a Boy Scout means the latter, I would have some work to do one way or the other. I would want to talk to my Scoutmaster and let him know what was going on (if nothing else, to get ahead of the rumor mill). I would want him to know what I had or had not done and what I planned to do about it. If all I want to do is be a Scout, I would ask his help to do my best to disassociate myself from the wrong places and wrong people who got me in trouble. Or if there were more to the charges, to do my Duty to Country and obey the laws in the future. I would want his help to prove my innocence or to help me get back on the right path.

 

And if I didn't have the courage or maturity to initiate that conversation myself, I would hope my mom would, or my lawyer, or probation officer, or even a nosey mom in the troop who brought my situation to my Scoutmaster's attention -- even if she did so with less than noble reasons.

 

There are many Scoutmasterly and Scout-like approaches to dealing with this situation. In the context of my suburban, cupcake troop, I feel like I could be fair with the Scout and balance the concerns of the troop with the needs of the Scout. But I readily admit that in the context of a inner-city LA troop my approach is probably out of line.

 

So with your experince dealing with troubled Scouts, BP, what would you DO? Here is your teaching moment. Give us some specific suggestions with verbs in the sentences. I've re-read the thread and all I've seen are criticism of other folks approaches and few details on your approach. In fairnes, you have said you want to give him another chance and build his trust, okay but what does that look like? How do you implement that second chance? Is it a passive, "I'll just keep my eye on things" or do you actively engage the Scout with a plan for dealing with the situation? What would that plan be? How would you engage the young man and his mom? If a passive approach is best, why do you think so?

 

Does actual guilt or innocence make a difference to you? How do you make sure this isn't an on-going situation? If it comes to light this guy is a hard-core meth dealer, do you change your strategy?

 

Where do you draw the line? Is there a point at which criminal behavior is incompatible with membership in your troop?

 

What steps do you take to ensure the safety of the other Scouts in the event that this isn't an isolated instance?

 

How do you allay the fears of the parents who watch too much TV and don't want their sons associating with even suspected meth dealers?

 

 

BP, I'm trying to be straight-up and understand how you would handle this and not being argumentative. Help me out.

[BadenP]

twocub

 

In answer to your question there is not one set method that fits all, each case is handled on an individual basis.

 

1) Meet with the boy and his parent, unfortunately this is where the problems seem to begin, single parent working two jobs to make ends meet rarely at home. I ask the boy point blank why he wants to be a scout, what does he think he will get or looking to get from the program, and what contribution does he bring to the unit.

 

2)Now that the dialog is flowing I ask him about the charges, was he guilty? why did he do it? Does he think he would ever be tempted to repeat it or do something similiar in the future? Were there any other infractions in his past for which he may have not been caught. How can he assure me that the other members of the unit would not be at risk with him being a member.

 

3) Plan of Action and Contract- an individualized plan that lists what actions I expect from the boy, what I would do if he slips up, and a contract that is a bond of trust between the boy, myself, and the unit which he and his parent sign along with myself and the unit committee, and ASM's/Advisors. The details of the offense are NEVER spelled out in the contract or action plan.

 

This is an oversimplified example of the whole process but in all my years, and not counting the LA inner city troop, I have had over 25 at risk youth in my troops/crews, and believe it or not none of them ever broke that contract, had to be kicked out, harmed any other scout, or quit scouting in the process. I always have set a high bar for these kids and they have always come through. None of the youth have been convicted of deadly crimes like assault with a deadly weapon, rape, attempted murder, etc. and none of them have been repeat offenders. The details of the offense are not shared with the parents, boys for obvious legal reasons.

 

All the youth in the troop/crew are given a contract to sign which spells out in detail what is expected of them as a member of the unit and the consequences if they fail to live up to those expectations, which includes behavior, and creating a safe environment. To show you it does work one of these so called high risk youth in my crew recently completed his Eagle, graduated from high school with a 4.0 GPA, and has been accepted to West Point this fall. Imagine if an adult scouter had said no to him in his time of need. I think you all can tell by now that this is an issue very close to my heart, and it is very difficult for me to sit back and allow some of the misinformation about these kids being spread in this forum that is plainly false.

 

Addendum: Every at risk youth is also given an adult mentor while in scouting, and I as a trained counselor am always available to all the youth for some one on one time.(This message has been edited by BadenP)

[Twocubdad]

Sonofagun! That's pretty much the same way I would have handled it and, in not so many words, close to what I posted last Tuesday.

 

I would also add that you have to honestly and carefully assess the responses. Do you believe him? Is he sincere or just telling you what you want to hear? Are his parents supportive or dismissive? And more important than what he tells you, what does he SHOW you? Does he walk the walk or just talk the talk?

 

And that takes time. I don't think you have this conversation the morning after an arrest. For one, the Scout and his family have more pressing concerns. And I think it wise to let the legal process work, (but given the speed at which the justice system works, not necessarily through to a final legal conclusion.)

 

The only Scout I've ever dismissed from the troop walked through that process a couple times, giving all the right responses. But his on-going behavior clearly demonstrated he had no intention of following through. The troop leaders couldn't trust him to follow instructions or obey basic rules -- including those related to his and other's safety -- so it was time to end the relationship.

[SeattlePioneer]

 

 

 

 

Of course the little darlings will never lie to you.

[Hal_Crawford]

Runaway. Arrested for being a pick pocket--case dismissed. Known gang member. Caught breaking and entering--not prosecuted. Know associated of a violent murderer.

 

Show of hands, who would accept Oliver Twist in their troop? Based on the above most of us wouldn't but if we read the rest of the book that could change the story.

[BadenP]

SP

 

In my own experiences NO none of them ever lied to me and not one of them failed to live up to the expectations given to them. That is what a bond of trust is all about. So how about quit trying to pick a fight because you already lost the argument. Just worry about your own troop, and good luck to you.

[Beavah]

Yah, BadenP, I think you and SeattlePioneer are talkin' about two different kinds of people, eh? That often happens here.

 

You're talkin' about yourself, someone with decades of experience workin' with youth, including youth at risk. Someone with that kind of experience can usually see right through a lad who is trying to manipulate you or pull da wool over yer eyes, eh? Even see right through abused kids, who tend to be accomplished liars by way of self-defense. When yeh have someone with that kind of expertise, the kids recognize that lying is unlikely to succeed, and they also recognize and respect the person who is savvy enough not to be lied to and therefore take him at his word when he sees some good in 'em.

 

SeattlePioneer is, I think, talkin' about a parent scouter who is not that experienced, who came from a well off two parent home, who runs a well off two parent home and who has only dealt with "good" kids because that's all they choose to associate with under ordinary circumstances. So no experience, eh? Those kinds of folks are easily hoodwinked by kids who aren't like their own, and often overreact or under react to lads demonstrating challenging behaviors. When they under react, they let da program get out of control for the other boys; when they overreact, they fail to reach the acting-out boy and just drive him away.

 

It's best of course if yeh have expertise like you suggest and can thread the needle, eh? But if yeh don't, of the two, it's better for da program if they overreact. Or at least recognize the limits of their own competence and direct the boy and his family to somewhere else that is better equipped.

 

Beavah

[Eamonn]

For a long time the debate if Scouts is for every boy? Has been going on.

Have to admit that I never really looked at it from the adults point of view.

I agree that some leaders are better working with certain types of boys than others.

This doesn't make the ones that do work with them better leaders or the ones that can't worse.

My take on this "Is Scouting for every Boy?" Thing is to change it a bit.

For me I'd say that every boy should have the opportunity to be a Scout.

What he then decides to do with this opportunity is then up to him.

Ea.