|
|
|
|
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| |||||||||||||||
Date: 5/26/2009 6:13:00 AM
From Authorid: 10754
With all due respect (and this is coming from both a certified AND licensed recreation therapist with extensive work with children with physical and cognitive disabilities), this does not look like an 'effort' to block your kid from participating. They are held responsible for all children, and if your child needs an assistant to accompany him, then of course they'll be in the position to make sure that whoever does so can be trusted around children - it is a liability issue, similar to background checks we run on all of our personal care assistants before they work with any of our kids with disabilities.  |
Date: 5/26/2009 6:30:00 AM
From Authorid: 23075
I agree with jay.  |
Date: 5/26/2009 6:47:00 AM
From Authorid: 10245
Sorry they didn't give you a whole lot of advance notice, but they have regulations for a reason. Remember when the news was full of stories about Boy Scouts getting molested by trusted leaders? You don't hear about that so much anymore... probably because they have instituted some regulations to keep those people out and utilize those regulations to keep everyone's kids safe.  |
Date: 5/26/2009 6:48:00 AM
From Authorid: 30747
I have to say that althouge I understand your frustration, I do think the troop committee handled this appropriately. Thier reasoning was fair and well explained but you are right that they should have taken care of that LONG before plans were made for that outing. That was certainly short sighted of them.  |
|
Date: 5/26/2009 6:56:00 AM
From Authorid: 46527
I see absolutely nothing wrong with their ruling. As for the tattoos, if a person chooses to have work that is likely to offend others, then they are choosing that they will be reacted to badly. I would expect anyone with such artwork to cover it around children, especially if they are there in any official capacity. As they say, they are willing to allow Mr Williams to accompany Ryan on shorter events.....which will give them time to get to know him and see how he is with Ryan. They are not saying 'NEVER'. It would not be reasonable to expect the scout leaders to accept your partner just because YOU say he is safe around kids.....think how you would feel if you were one of the other kids Moms.  |
|
Date: 5/26/2009 7:22:00 AM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 63201
I am going to respond to this and tell you all this.It was not about become a adult leader.This was about being a designated adult for Ryan, not a official capacity.They require a family member now to accompany Ryan to all campout activities.This negated the purpose of Boy Scouts, I was a Boy Scout growing up and it is about become independent young man under supervision by qualified adult leaders and scout masters. The problem Melissa is having is the timing of the whole deal. I took Ryan to the weekly meting, I went in as they were being informed concerning the Avation merit badge preliminaries and such.The head of the commitee gives me a map to the location of the campout.That was on Monday.They could have told me right then and there. Yet they didn't, they said to meet at he Scout hut at 5:30 pm Friday and we were all going to load everything excetra.I got here at 5:30, waited til 5:50 and decided to follow the map to the campsite.I drove all the way there, No One Was There.I drove all the way back to the scout hut and when I got here they were realy suprised to see me.The Scout master and the Troop Comittee President took me to the side and said "I guess Mellisa didn't get her email? They wait till they Morning of the event to tell us that I am barred from going and called my tattoos Offensive. So there is the rest of the story to show all ya'll this was more than a "regulation and liability issue". Do I think they are right in deny me, yea sure, I understand, kinda already knew it anyway.It's the way they went about it hat was wrong.No phone cal and no fair warning, they just decided the morning of the campout.That was what was extremly rude.The rest of Melisa's feeling are how she feels but Boy Scouts Organization is now so regulated that it is just another aspect of the clas war that is waged in the U.S. at a breakneck pace nowdays. Nuf said.  |
|
Date: 5/26/2009 7:24:00 AM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 63201
BTW that last reply was me; Bruiex, this computer either loggs one or the other in. |
|
Date: 5/26/2009 7:38:00 AM
From Authorid: 2030
Times change and scouting has changed, primarily because they have been under attack by everyone under the sun lately. No one other than a parent is allowed on camp outs and no one other than a certified councelor is allowed to be around the other boys un supervised. That rule wasn't just made up for your case. As for the Tats, well that is the way it is in society, and what you may not deem offensive many other people may. It is what it is. It sounds to me though that they left the door open. You have to realize here that many people are involved besides just you and your boys.  |
|
Date: 5/26/2009 8:55:00 AM
From Authorid: 53284
I don't see this as an attempt to hinder your child from participating in scouting activities. If you wish to send an unrelated adult with your son, then he needs to be certified by the BSA. Big deal. Have him get certified. If he has offensive tats... Deal with it. I know people that have to wear long sleeved shirts when they do youth activities do to some offensive tats. I understand how we are all sensitive about our children and their access to activities but all families have to deal with some situations and/or accommodations so that their children can participate.  |
Date: 5/26/2009 9:12:00 AM
From Authorid: 62766
Maybe you can have Ryan join something else. I know it's probably so hard to swallow.  |
Date: 5/26/2009 9:20:00 AM
From Authorid: 36704
The timing could have been handled better but I don't know why you're shocked they denied Bruiex the right to go. Most parents aren't going to want someone they don't know around their children for their children's safety. The boy scouts were protecting the children for liability reasons as Jay pointed out. You know that he doesn't meet the requirements because he is a convicted felon. The fact that you were going to have him go with your son and the troop when he doesn't qualify, doesn't bode well for you. I think you're lucky they didn't let him go rather than the parents finding out about his past at a future time and having to deal with the fall out from a bunch of irate parents. |
Date: 5/26/2009 9:20:00 AM
From Authorid: 63241
Points are made all around. But I do agree with you that their timing STINKS...the day of the campout?!!! Your child was led to believe this was going to be a great day for him (perhaps losing a little sleep in anticipation of "The BIG Day" , to be told this on the actual day is a shame and shows no compassion to a young boy's feelings. Just so this never happened to another young boy, I'd write to the national headquarters about the entire issue...stressing the fact that they led your son to believe this was a go ahead up until the actual day. Where's the compassion for this young man's feelings?  |
|
Date: 5/26/2009 10:22:00 AM
From Authorid: 23075
Oh ya I forgot he was a convicted felon. Nothing personal, but i myself would want him to be certified by the BSA, and as for his tattoos, he can wear a long sleeved shirt, I mean I don't think they blocked him deliberately they are held responsible, and as for background checks, whoop dee doo....they are run a lot of the time when people want to get into certain jobs. Even here in Ontario if you want to go on a field trip with the school with YOUR child, you still have to have the check regardless. Get the check, get certified with the BSA if it is possible in his case, and move of from there. They didn't single him out deliberately there are rules to follow, why should they be any different for him. If you still feel this way,perhaps put Ryan into some other sort of activity. |
Date: 5/26/2009 12:20:00 PM
From Authorid: 61897
I agree with most responses here. They should have given you a more advanced notice, but the rest is totally justifiable.  |
Date: 5/26/2009 12:39:00 PM
From Authorid: 53961
It's always the kids who get hurt in the end...  |
|
Date: 5/26/2009 12:39:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 63201
Just to clarify, I get WHY they did this. Most of you are missing the point. I understand the liability issues and safety issues. But it's the TIMING that ticks me off. Having my son believe he was going to get in an airplane and earn a merit badge only to be told on the very day of the campout that he can't go, is no way to treat a child. They had 2 months in which to make a decision and tell us about this. Honestly I don't believe they truly care if Ryan is there or not, because my emails have gone unanswered. It just makes me so angry that they waited until the last minute to say "Oh sorry you can't go." He doesn't feel wanted there, and this just reinforced that fact. Maybe he'll go back and maybe he'll go to something else, we shall see.. |
Date: 5/26/2009 2:48:00 PM
From Authorid: 35178
I agree that their timing was horrible. However, I understand the necessity of having an adult that is not a parent meeting prerequisites before they can be considered a leader or responsible for a child's safety. The timing was certainly not fair to you or your son but they did what they had to do. The timing of everything and especially the news about his birthday party must have been devastating to him.  |
|
Date: 5/26/2009 3:16:00 PM
From Authorid: 53284
I would agree that the timing is bad. Sorry |
Date: 5/26/2009 5:26:00 PM
From Authorid: 62918
I'm sorry that you've had such trouble with the group. *hugs* to you and your son!  |
Date: 5/26/2009 7:11:00 PM
From Authorid: 19613
What sort of tattoos are they?  |
Date: 5/26/2009 7:44:00 PM
From Authorid: 47218
What a bunch of prigs. #1- Totally inappropriate to communicate this to you in an email. Couldn't someone have called you on the phone to talk to you like a human being? #2- It's seeping with judgment of you and your situation. Check out some of this language- "for lack of a better word, keeper of Ryan"...What?!! What is Ryan- a zoo animal? They couldn't find a better word than that? How about "caretaker"? "Guardian"? Has anyone in your scouting group ever encountered a single parent with a non-married partner before? Are these the most uptight people in the world or what? This just all sounds vaguely antagonistic to me. I think it's really important for your son to be involved in constructive, confidence building activities, but maybe it's not such a good environment for him where the adults involved are sitting in covert judgment of you. I guarantee those attitudes get transmitted to the kids. Try to find a more sympathetic, understanding group to get involved in.  |
|
Date: 5/27/2009 7:20:00 AM
From Authorid: 19613
Bruiex sent me a link to some pictures of his tattoos. I don't see what's offensive about them at all, unless they're trying to make the ridiculous claim that the very presence of tattoos at all is offensive. |
Date: 5/27/2009 7:42:00 AM
From Authorid: 21764
 *hugs*  |
|
Date: 5/27/2009 8:11:00 AM
From Authorid: 2030
This is the Boy Scouts of America. Certain things just are not going to fly with them. Pot leaf tattoos being just the begining. It's not just this one boy they are concerned with, but all the boys, and all the parents. If anything real or imagined went down with someone who was not a blood relative of a child or a trained and approved adult leader you could imagine the outcry and if the situation were reversed I'm sure F.M. would be right in there as well. If your son has Aspergers and is bi-polar then this puts him as special needs and he does indeed need to have a parent or trained gaurdian with him on BSA overnight functions. Again Liability, Liability, Liability, blame the BSA, blame parents, blame an overly litigous society that thinks every upset to their little darlings is worth $1,000,000. But that's where it is. |
Date: 5/27/2009 8:22:00 AM
From Authorid: 13119
BCAR and Base said it best. It is how it is and Molly cat they have to put in writing otherwise it is their word against hers, they have to protect not just her son but everyone's sons.  |
Date: 5/27/2009 9:49:00 AM
From Authorid: 35720
I hate the BSA.  |
Date: 5/27/2009 6:54:00 PM
From Authorid: 30621
Things sure have changed since my son was in boyscouts. My boyfriend of two month(now my husband)went with him on campouts and all the meetings and no one had a problem. I do understand your anger because I'ld feel the same way. But, understand thier reasons as well, just dont know why they didnt say something sooner. Thier timeing would anger me more than anything.  |
|
Date: 5/27/2009 6:57:00 PM
From Authorid: 30621
I made a mistake. My son was in cubscouts at the time. |
|
Date: 5/27/2009 7:21:00 PM
From Authorid: 47218
That's baloney, Magoo. First off, I don't see how they need to document their explanation of their policy to her- what's going to make them liable is if her boyfriend is allowed to attend the trip without the background check, not whether the rules were explained to her. An email is hardly an appropriate form for legally binding communication. And besides all that- they could have called her AS WELL as written her the letter, if it was purportedly for legal purposes. No excuse, any way you look at it. |
|
Date: 5/27/2009 8:56:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 63201
I understand liability. Once again some of you are missing the point. Why did they sit there Monday night and give Bruce a map to the place and tell him to have Ryan at the scout hut at 5:30 if they knew they were going to discuss his companionship with Ryan Thursday evening? They could've given a heads up, but they wait until the day of the campout to take a chance that I MIGHT read an email. They could've said something Monday night, they could've called on the phone, but all I get is a silly little email that I didn't see until AFTER the fact. Funnily enough, Ryan still wants his Boy's Life magazine, which is a publication of the BSA. I might talk to him some more and see how he feels, or take him to a meeting and front them out face-to-face, I haven't made up my mind yet. |
|
Date: 5/27/2009 10:01:00 PM
From Authorid: 36704
I know it said in the letter they discussed it at the meeting but maybe they didn't, maybe some parent found out and threw a fit and they did it to be on the safe side. You'll never know until you ask them. |
|
Date: 5/28/2009 5:38:00 AM
From Authorid: 2030
I understand the point, I understood the point from the start. There isn't much debate that it was handled poorly. Your explaination can and will come only from whoever made the decision. |
Renasoft is the proud sponsor of the Unsolved Mystery Publications website.
See: www.rensoft.com Personal Site server, Power to build Personal Web Sites and Personal Web Pages
All stories are copyright protected and may not be reproduced in any form, except by specific written authorization
