"You seem to not have any written rules"

[Bob White]

If you agree that the use of vulgar language can interfere with the delivery of the program then yes the BSA program does say to send the scout home.

 

As far as who makes the judgement, if you recall the BSA Scoutmaster/assistant scoutmaster training, then adult leader has that responsibility.

 

Will I send a scout home who refuses to shower? More likely I will send him swimming. But if his behavior became a health issue that affected him or those around him then yes, he would go home. "A Scout is Clean".

 

 

[OldGreyEagle]

I think the approach that the non rule writers are advocating is a common sense case by case basis that allows the adult leader to make "field decisions" that would not be allowed in the existence of writtem rules. For example, lets take the example of the F bomb. When I joined the troop I serve, I noticed there was quite the language issue, with multiple F bombs being dropped. When I asked the other adult leaders about it, they said they didnt notice it, well heck I sure did. At the next outing, before the troop broke assembly I announced that the troops vocabulary would be limited to words they werent afraid to say in front of their mothers, because if I heard an offending word to me, I would have them repeat it to their mother when we returned. That seemed to work pretty well until the one scout said, "heck, my mom says that all the time". I then changed the statement to the troops vocabulary could be anyhting that was in my vocabulary and that I knew I was a veritable plethora of words and a virtual lexicon so expressing themselves shouldnt be an issue. It did of course mean I had to stiffle myself when emotional on a camp out, like hitting my fingers while driving a stake.

 

That seemed to work, when I heard an offending remark, I would say, what did you say? And the scout would quickly change the word to something else. One scout had a hard time breaking the habit, and I was always on him about it. Asking him did he really intend to say that. I dont think kids realize how often they use offensive language and when I pointed it out, they were surprised. With this scout it was a real habit, I knew he didnt really "mean" it, it just came out. But I worked with the scout, along with other adult leaders and finally the scout's behavior changed. Never did have to have the scout picked up, and all the scouts knew that offensive language would not be tolerated, the consequence was a conference with me and that seemed to be something to be avoided, much as I hate to say. Well, the langauge issue turned around and I commented that to my son, and he said, well Dad, its still bad, but the scouts know not to talk that way around adults. I was devastated at the time, for about 30 seconds then I said, well, at least they know whats proper and what isnt so we taught them something and they monitored their language when in the prescence of adults. I guess sometimes you have to take what you can get.

 

BTW, I did the above in the first 2 years of my service to the Troop. Now, if such a problem arose, I would know to take it to the PLC and have them handle it. This boy lead thing is hard to pick up, both at the boy and adult level, but when done right its a beautiful thing.(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

[mdutch]

BobWhite said: "As far as who makes the judgement, if you recall the BSA Scoutmaster/assistant scoutmaster training, then adult leader has that responsibility."

 

What percentage of your scouts have taken that class? If you don't have a troop policy, how are scouts expected to know that violating the scout oath or law will get them sent home. If you tell them verbally, what harm is there in writting it down. If you write it down, they can't use the excuse of "oh, I guess I wasn't at that meeting".

[Bob White]

I am not understanding your point meameng. Is it your belief that in order to do your job that everyone else must have taken the same training you did, or have a written explaination of what your job is and how you are supposed to do it?

 

If you have a scout attend Junior Leader Training can he only do his job if all the other scouts have also gone?

 

I really do not get your point on this.

 

BW

 

 

[FScouter]

I question how important it is that a Scout or parent knows in advance the consequence of not following the Scout Oath & Law. A Scout already understands that by being a member, he has agreed to live by the Scout Oath and Law in his daily life. It's part of the joining requirements and is written at the beginning of the Scout Handbook. Why would it be necessary to spell this out separately?

 

What would a Scout or parent do differently knowing in advance the specific consequence?

[cliffgolden]

 

On the subject of foul language, I remember a backpacking trip once.

 

I had always impressed upon the older boys in particular that they needed to set a good example for the younger boys, so they always needed to watch their language. Also we needed to present a good image of Scouting to the community. They always abided and didn't use bad language.

 

We were backpacking deep within the Cloud Peak Wilderness of Wyoming where moose are more plentiful than people. The language was getting pretty bad and I decided I needed to talk with them about it.

 

During this discussion they responded that there weren't any younger boys around, in fact no one's around, it's wilderness, so what does it matter?

 

I countered that it's about being a Scout, the 11th point of the Scout Law, it's part of who we are. Who you are, is what you do when nobody's looking.

 

One boy challenged me by asking; "So if we swear, are you saying you no longer respect us as Scouts?"

 

I took a minute to think about my answer, then responded, "No, it means that if you don't swear, I'll respect you that much more."

 

That was the end of the discussion, and the end of the swearing.

 

We went on to have a fantastic trip.

 

YIS,

Cliff Golden

Scoutmaster Troop 33

DeKalb, Illinois

[acco40]

Absolutes are rarely correct. Regardless of what one calls them, rules, guidelines, bylaws, etc. are not an anathema to Scouting. Let's say your troop, oops, the troop you are a member of, charges $25 per Scout for new members. Should that be written down and if so where? What equipment is provided by the troop? Tents? Tarps? Sleeping bags? Should that information be written down and again, if so where? If the troop charges dues, the amount and schedule - should it be written down somewhere?

 

Another example - In Troop 1234, where every member owns the field uniform, it is stated on every outing permission slip and stated verbally by both the youth and adult leadership that members are expected to wear their field uniforms while traveling to and from outings. Mr. Smith, the Scoutmaster, notices just prior to departure, that Johnny is not wearing his field uniform. He tells Johnny he is not living up to the Scout Law (obedience is not present). The Scout, a frequent reader of this forum, pouts and firmly tells Mr. Smith that "You can't make me wear the uniform, it is not a requirement and you can't add to requirements! You are a stupid Scoutmaster Mr. Smith, didn't your training sink in?" Mr. Smith views this as uncourteous, unfriendly, and uncheerful and does not provide transportation to the outing for him. On the next months outing, Mr. Smith can't make it and Mr. Jones, an SA, notices in the CO parking lot just prior to departure that Jack isn't wearing his field uniform and when asked, Jack states that he forgot and that it was packed away and that he would be sure to wear it home and on all future outings. Mr. Jones says okay and off they went. Now, at the next troop meeting Mr. Smith gets an earful from Johnny's mom stating that he picks on Johnny unfairly. As evidence, she states that Johnny wasn't allowed to go on an outing because he didn't wear his uniform but that Jack was allowed. That is unfair and shows a clear case of favoritism in her eyes.

 

Now, would a written guideline of some sort have helped or hindered the situation?

[Hunt]

I think meameng's point is that the scouts should be aware that unacceptable behavior will get them sent home. Certainly, resident camps, including Scout camps, typically have rules that indicate certain behaviors that will result in campers being sent home. These may not be exclusive lists, and most of the things are pretty obvious. Nevertheless, those lists convey information: behavior that is taken very seriously.

Now Bob is advocating a different idea--one that I don't really disagree with--that a leader may find it necessary to send a boy home for behavior that may not normally fit into a category of "really bad," but that is nevertheless disruptive enough that he needs to leave. That's fine with me, as long as the power to do this isn't abused. But I don't think that precludes saying or writing some guidelines in advance as to what the "really bad" behaviors are.

I'm imagining the following dramatic dialogue:

New Parent: Tell me, Mr. Scoutmaster, does this Troop have a rule against foul language?

SM: Well, we don't have a separate troop rule about that, but the scouts learn early on that foul language is contrary to the Scout Law.

NP: So what do you do if a scout uses foul language?

SM: We counsel him that his language is contrary to the Scout Law.

NP: What if he keeps on doing it?

SM: Well, we'll continue to work with him to help him understand why he shouldn't talk that way.

NP: So there's no consequence other than this counseling, even if he won't stop?

SM: Well, no, if his language becomes disruptive of the program, he'll be sent home.

NP: So if a boy repeatedly uses bad language, he'll be sent home?

SM: That's right.

NP: So that's your troop rule?

SM: No, we don't have a troop rule about language, we just go by the Scout Law.

NP: Okay.......

This is a bit facetious, but I don't think there is anything wrong with a troop policy that says something like, "Use of foul language is contrary to the Scout Law, and repeated use of such language at a troop event may result in the Scout being asked to leave."

[Bob White]

Allow me to act out the same scenario as I would based on the the values of scouting.

 

New Parent: Tell me, Mr. Scoutmaster, does this Troop have a rule against foul language?

SM: Well, we don't have a separate troop rule about that, but the scouts learn early on that foul language is contrary to the Scout Law.

NP: So what do you do if a scout uses foul language?

SM: First I would expect one of the junior leaders to remind him of his promise to be clean and that swearing or vulgarity is a poor choice for a Boy Scout to make.

NP: What if he keeps on doing it?

SM: His junior leader will inform an adult, and we will have a counseling session with the scout to find out what the problem is, and to make sure he understands a more scout-like way to deal with the problem.

NP: So there's no consequence other than this counseling, even if he won't stop?

SM: If your asking if we wash his mouth or with soap or make him clean latrines, no. Our concern is his growth and his ability to make the fright decisions regarding his actions.

 

If however your scouts behavior gets to the point where it interferes with the program we call you and have you take him home, as we explained at our parents orientation.

NP: So that's your troop rule?

SM: No, thats is the instructions we are given by the Boy Scouts of America. But keep in mind that a boy who lives by the values already written in his Scout Handbook will not have to worry about the consequences of his actions.

 

NP: Okay.......

 

 

As I said the only rule you need is that scouts are expected to obey the Oath and Law, and Scouters will follow the program, policies, and procedures of the BSA.

 

BW

[OldGreyEagle]

Ok. let me try this,

 

A scout absentmindly picks up a hot mess kit, burns his fingers second degree worth and lets out a mighty f-bomb. His finegrs are bandaged and is admonished for his language, although maybe considering the circumstances there are more giggles than real anger. The next day a fellow member of the burned fingers patrol decides on staging a mini-coup and decides not to clean up although the duty roster has been clearly visible all week end. When the patrol leader asks his to clean up, the coup conspirator launches more F bombs about the patrol leader and casts dispersions about the scouts heritage. The SPL gets the same treamtent as does the Scoutmaster. Since its sunday, the troop packs up and goes home and the scoutmaster talks to the conspirators family about language and only tells the burn victims family about the burn. The next meeting the conspirator wants to know why his parents were told about the language and the burned victim's were not and that not fair. Well, if you had a written rule, no F bombs on a campout the conspirator would be correct. If the Troop instead handles things on a case by case basis, then the above is ok.

[cliffgolden]

>>>>>>>>>>

Well, if you had a written rule, no F bombs on a campout the conspirator would be correct. If the Troop instead handles things on a case by case basis, then the above is ok.

>>>>>>>>>>

 

Well said.

 

Written rules can bind us to specified consequences without taking into account the circumstances of the situation.

 

Some troops create a new rule every time they encounter a problem. It usually doesn't solve the problem. This is the same mindset that creates zero tolerence policies in school districts.

 

It's better to evaluate each situation on a case by case basis and then apply judgement. The leader then takes responsibility for whatever decision he makes.

 

It's too easy to hide behind rules instead of taking responsibility for our decisions.

 

No matter how many rules we make we cannot envision every possible scenario. Circumstances play an important role in determining how to react to each situation.

 

Making judgements include taking into account all the circumstances of a particular situation.

 

Fairness isn't treating everyone the same. I would expect more from an older boy than a new Scout. Each boy is different. Fairness does not usually manifest itself as an absolute rule.

 

cliffgolden

[Eamonn]

I like to think that I have a really good relationship with the people charged with educating my Son. The School Superintendent sits on the Council Executive Board, I recruited him. We normally sit together at meetings The Principle of the High School he attends is a Member Of The District at Large and we have a Elementary School Principle on the District Committee serving on the Membership Committee.There is another Elementary School Principle in the District who is an Eagle Scout.

A couple of years back OJ, attended an OA weekend and won a pie eating contest. The prize was a small pocket knife. He put the knife in his coat pocket and forgot about it. Monday comes and he toddles off to school with the knife in his pocket. He tells a girl that he has this knife in his pocket and asks her to put it in her locker. I never did work out why he just didn't put the darn thing in his own locker. Somehow, someway the girl informs a teacher that OJ has given her this knife.

The school has a zero tolerance policy on knives. I get a call and rush from work to the school. Everyone said that they knew that it was just an oversight on OJ's part. They all agreed that he was a twit for not just putting it in his book bag and saying nothing. But the rule was the rule and the penalty was a three day suspension. The Superintendent found out what had happened and called me to apologize but he added the rule was the rule and there is a zero tolerance policy.

OJ has learned not to take knives to school. Which is a good thing, I don't want kids carrying knives. But everyone was apologetic, everyone said they knew that it was just unfortunate but the rule was the rule.

I hope that I never am placed in the situation that these people were placed in and have to apologize for enforcing a rule where one size fits all and I have to overlook the individual.

OJ, served his time, missed a junior high school dance and while admitting that having the knife at school was dumb, he has no respect for the dumb rule.

Eamonn.

[Prairie_Scouter]

There was a fairly well documented story on the news a couple of years ago about an asthmatic girl at school who shared her inhaler with a fellow asthmatic when that person was having a particularly bad attack and didn't have access to her own inhaler. The school praised the 1st girl for possibly saving the other girl's life, and then proceeded to suspend her on the basis of the school's zero tolerance drug dealing policy.

 

I suspect that the administrators at that school felt the same way as the people in Eamonn's example, and this story further amplifies the need for care to be used when establishing rules. This, I think, applies especially to rules about Scout behavior. Putting together a very black and white rule may put the leadership in a position where they have, in effect, given away their ability to make "judgement calls".

 

On the other hand, I don't see anything wrong with establishing well-written rules that may duplicate some BSA rules, for the purpose of clarification and amplification. There's an old adage in sales that you need to make 3 contacts to make a sale. Sometimes Scouts, and Scouters, need to see things several times, perhaps written in slightly different ways with same overall intent, in order to have it "click".

 

The main thing to remember, I think, is that BSA has been at this for almost 100 years, and has probably seen most situations and established rules and guidelines to cover them. Good training will help leaders know where they have a bit of wiggle room and where they don't. For example, in cases of suspected abuse, there is no wiggle room at all. In the case of, say, swearing, there's probably quite a bit of wiggle room to handle the situation as the leaders see fit.

[acco40]

The "anti-troop rules" camp seems to be concentrating on rules that govern behavior. Fair enough, the Scout Oath and Law cover those fairly well. But again, nobody attempted to answer my questions in a previous post: "Let's say your troop, oops, the troop you are a member of, charges $25 per Scout for new members. Should that be written down and if so where? What equipment is provided by the troop? Tents? Tarps? Sleeping bags? Should that information be written down and again, if so where? If the troop charges dues, the amount and schedule - should it be written down somewhere?"

 

Troops meet on different nights. Should your troops meeting night be written down somewhere for prospective members?

 

Just because some go overboard with rules doesn't mean that rules, guidelines, etc. should not be used at all.

 

On a political note - I wonder what all of those posters, who I view as somewhat "right" on the political spectrum, feel about mandatory sentencing by judges. If you feel SMs and SAs should be given leeway in their judgment, why not judges, who have much more training than the average Scouter, be free to do the same?

 

P.S. Eamonn, be glad your son does not go to school in Michigan. A student with a knife gets a mandatory STATE WIDE expulsion from school for one year (we call it the you have to go to school in Ohio rule) for any student in possession of a knife. When I was a Bear Den Leader I asked the school principle if we could do the whittling activities at school, after hours (evening) with one on one adult/Scout supervision. Obviously the answer was no.(This message has been edited by acco40)

[Hunt]

I agree with the last few posters, which was why the "troop rule" I posited for foul language was: "Use of foul language is contrary to the Scout Law, and repeated use of such language at a troop event may result in the Scout being asked to leave." It makes clear what behavior is undesirable, states what the consequence may be, but still leaves discretion to the leaders to consider the circumstances. To my mind, it is entirely consistent with what the handbook says, and with what both Bob White and OGE say the process should be.

But just to be clear, let me ask some pointed questions to those who are against troop rules:

1. Are you saying that it is somehow wrong to put in writing for the use of parents and scouts rules that have already been promulgated by BSA (such as those in the Guide to Safe Scouting)? Or is the objection just to rules that go beyond what BSA has laid down?

2. Is anybody saying that it is somehow wrong to put into writing troop procedures on mundane matters such as meeting time and place, permission slip policy, troop neckerchief, etc.?