How to Save the BSA

What follows is my three point plan for reversing the membership decline we have witnessed for the past ten years. This is written with the clear knowledge that it represents one point of view (your plan may differ) and is purely an exercise in seeking resolution to some difficult problems.

1. MEMBERSHIP STANDARDS
Allow chartered organizations to determine the suitability of Adult Volunteers according to their organizational goals and reading of the Scout Oath and Law. The GSA has already got this figured out.

2. TRAINING - MENTORING VOLUNTEERS
Rewrite training materials to include more 'why' with the 'how' . Institute a five year plan that culminates in requiring key volunteers in units to hold training certifications for their position. Reform the Commissioner service into an intensive program of targeted mentoring for volunteers and useful annual assessments of units.

3. RESTRUCTURE UNIT INFRASTRUCTURE
Make provisions for associated Packs, Troops, Crews and Teams to operate from one committee under the chartered organization. Reassess the responsibilities of Chartered Organization Representatives and Unit Committee Chairpersons to clarify their relationship with Unit Leaders.

In my experience boys never become Scouts or leave Scouting not because they find the basis of the program uninviting, they find the presentation of the program lackluster, overheated or grossly misdirected.

The fault is not with the youth, it is with us adults. We don't need new uniforms, new youth programs or other broad changes to the structure of youth involvement. We do need better trained, prepared and experienced adult volunteers.

The parents of our entry-level Scouts are between 25-35 years of age. I have had many of them tell me that they are disturbed by the BSA's stance on religion and sexuality. No doubt these will be divisive issues for some time to come.

By allowing Chartered Organizations to determine who they think is an acceptable adult leader within some broader language from the BSA parents can choose to associate themselves and their sons with units that reflect their values. They already do this with Churches and Schools, isn't Scouting broad enough to provide some choice in the matter?

I don't expect a call from Texas asking me to come down and strighten things out, but if they are interested I do have a plan.

Comments

[CA Scouter]

Hello Clarke,

As usual, I have to disagree with you on point 1, mostly.

You keep harping on GSA's "success" and I don't see it. I have a daughter in that program and I am seeing a program which barely looks like scouting and is so amorphous as to have no center. Also, I see a continual drain of Christian parents from that program, who have decided the leftward drift of GSA has gone too far for their girls to participate. I'll bet GSA's numbers are very discouraging also.

Actually, I could almost imagine accepting most of point 1, except that the left has made such a big deal of this, it has become a hill to die on. As someone who espouses traditional values, I would view reneging on these points a capitulation and rejection of my values.

Another point on GSA. From my vantage point, GSA is not neutral on points of religion, it is openly hostile and relentlessly secular. If it continues in its current path, my daughter may not get a chance to make gold.

[Walter Underwood]

The proper abbreviation is GSUSA, not GSA.

[Clarke Green]

I am not harping about the GSUSA's success. I have little experience with them and what little I know would not qualify me to comment on their success or failure.
I do admire their membership policies, I think they got that right.
Our challenge is to find common ground for people like you - someone who values traditional values - and a lefty like myself. We are both part of the BSA and share some basic values yet we are different.'
This isn't about waging a war, it is about an examination of our values and how they affect our practices. Let's not have any histrionics.

I have heard the assertion before that equates religious tolerance with hostility towards long standing norms in religious expression. Those of us who have a minority religious view (I am a Buddhist) have experienced a good deal of actual hostility. A Hindu Scout leader once led a vespers service at our camp and another Scout Leader brought the camp director to task over exposing the scouts to paganism and idolatry. To my mind Scout services should be totally non-sectarian (not just non-denominational Christian). Some folks take that as hostile rather than inclusive.

[Clarke Green]

Indeed it is, my bad.

[Louisville Scoutmaster]

Do NOT hold up the Girls Scouts as any kind of example for BSA to follow. They have made a real mess on that side.
You may like what you waqnt to call "inclusiveness" - which many of us view as no coherent policy at all.

You keep harping on the disre to add gays to Scout leadership. You keep complaining about your religious issues. Do you not understand that for many of us the choice to engage in homosexual conduct is a violation of our religious principles?

Even by your own standards above why should my church be required to allow a gay Scout leader?

One of the largest sponsors of troops are LDS churches. These are no where near Christian.

If you want more Buddhist leaders then go recruit some. Get your temple or whatever your worship group is to be a chartered org. But don't tell my group that we have to leave our principles at the door so that you can have yours.

[Clarke Green]

These are all things that we all feel strongly but we can keep the discussion civil. I'd appreciate it if you would consider this in future comments.

A careful reading of the post and my subsequent comments explains that I am not holding the GSUSA up as an example of program excellence. I am saying that they have a cogent, inclusive leadership policy.

At no time have I suggested that the BSA require any Church or other chartered partner to accept gay leadership. What I am asking is that those chartered partners who do not have a problem with gay leadership be allowed to have them work with their program.

I am not telling you to leave your principles at the door and exchange them for mine. Scouting is big enough for your principles and mine to peacefully coexist. Scout troops, sponsors, scouts and leaders come from different backgrounds yet can unite around some broad common goals.

[CA Scouter]

Hello Clarke,

I'm sorry you've experienced hostility concerning religious beliefs. The troop my sons belong to has no association with a religious congregation, so all of our prayers are as non-sectarian as possible.

I think the atheism isssue could be more easily finessed than the other issue. As I believe you've noted BSA, recognizes Buddhism as a viable "faith", although many expressions of it are agnostic or atheistic. So I think this is an issue where people of good will could work something out.

On the issue of homosexuality, I still have to scratch my head. You actually have parents of young boys who are upset that their sons don't get to have gay leaders?

[CA Scouter]

Clarke,

On your other proposals, it looks as if you'd be moving toward a much smaller parent involvement, because of your emphasis on training.

Also, it would be great to reinvigorate the role of the chartered org, but I'm not sure how. Your idea of consolidating committees to run packs, troops and crews seems like alot of work for one committee.

In my personal case, my sons attended my parish pack, but then joined a troop other than the parish's troop (it was highly dysfunctional and I followd Andy's advice about seeking a troop providing the program). I wouldn't have wanted the parish troop's committee running the parish pack; we would have had dysfunction all around.

[Andy]

Something you all have to realize is that the debate is what is hurting scouting the most. Weather you agree with the BSA's position or not, by doing what they did, they put us all right in the middle of the debate. Allowing charger organizations to choose their own membership requirements (which is what Clark suggested to begin with, he never stated that any troop should be forced to accept homosexuals, only that they would be allowed to) we can perhaps remove ourselves from a debate which does nothing positive for the scouts themselves.

Also the debate here has sidetracked us all from one of the best ideas I have herd in a long time to help the BSA. Point 3, of putting multiple units (a pack, troop and crew) under one comity and charter org. This could help reduce attrition between boy scouts and cub scouts and help make the ventrue program more accepted by scoutmasters. I think this is a great idea.

[BSA Goldminer]

Clark and CA
I thank everyone for sharing their thoughts on this matter. I am the director of a BSA Camp and I see all sorts of different trends, in all the areas you have discussed, coming through the door over the years from parents reflected through their scout children. My staff and volunteers that work at the camp must be fully aware of the values both spiritually and morally that the BSA requires from a registered adult leader. I can't have anything less on my staff. To do so would erode the foundations of the scouting program and ALL that it stands for. Without this foundation everything else in the program is put at risk. The reason the BSA Program has withstood the social and moral changes this country has gone through is because of this core foundational stand. My stance in the troops I work with is, that if a parent so strongly believes in their own beliefs and they totally conflict with the BSA program I strongly suggest that they find a different program for their children. We are not here to convert children from their parent’s belief structure into the BSA’s. Before I sign up a parent as a registered adult leader I interview them to see “IF” they are a match for OUR BSA program not theirs.

[Louisville Scoutmaster]

Your blog - your rules.

My comments were civil. Your skin is too thin.

But don't worry. I will not be back. And I will no longer recommend this site to others.

[Clarke Green]

Truly sorry to see you go.

[Clarke Green]

Dysfunctional units exist because their leadership is either untrained or willfully ignorant. These leaders usually answer to no one because Chartered Org. Reps. are untrained or inexperienced.

Our volunteers need more training and oversight than they currently receive. A well presented program is what attracts and retains Scouts.

A group committee would hopefully be made up of experienced, trained volunteers. They would need a lot of help to keep things moving but a strong program would draw many more volunteers than a weak or dysfunctional one.

[Scouter in Denver]

Clarke,
I like your suggestions and think they represent a perspective held by many scouters. I've felt that BSA is willingly excluding populations that would like to participate in scouting but do not fit it its narrowed membership requirements. I agree that if a church is chartering a unit, and their beliefs state homosexuals are immoral, then they should limit their leadership to those they deem fit. However, organizations that are welcoming to gay and straight alike should be able to allow their chartered units to have leadership drawn from that population.

Many in scouting may feel this debate is over, but there are pockets of people who feel scouting should be for all boys regardless of race, color, creed, or belief. BSA is a better organization when we recognize, and respect, each other's differences and unique contributions, and we should not feel threatened just because we may have different opinions.

[Dan S.]

I fail to see how parent involvement could shrink any more than it already has!

Training isn't going to drive people away. If anything, offering a coherent, understandable training program is going to attract more volunteers, because they see they're going to get training and proper support.

[hempcamp]

"My stance in the troops I work with is, that if a parent so strongly believes in their own beliefs and they totally conflict with the BSA program I strongly suggest that they find a different program for their children."

The problem with beliefs like this is that pretty soon, you will have nobody left in Scouting, or nobody talking to one another.

I lost my mother as a young child and experienced many difficulties growing up, and I credit Scouting with steering me through those difficult years and turning me into the successful adult that I am today.

Over that time, Scouting certainly never taught me that gay men and lesbians were immoral and incapable of leading youth. It was my Christian church that gave me my moral compass, and there I was taught that there is nothing inherently wrong with homosexuality.

Over the 23 years that passed since I became a Tiger Cub, it's become harder and harder to reconcile what my church taught me with what the Boy Scouts of America say are "core values," despite the fact that both my church and the Boy Scouts played an important role in my life. It's been painful and confusing. Many times I've nearly thrown in the towel.

But then I remember... why should I leave Scouting? Why not the others? What gives one person's values the monopoly over an organization that never teaches sexuality one way or another (nor should it)?

Others may disagree with what the United Church of Christ teaches about sexuality, but we have no less a right to be in Scouts and have our "values" represented than any other group.

I'm sorry you think people like me should take our families elsewhere, but sorry, I'm not going anywhere. This is MY Boy Scouts, too.

[Scouter in Denver]

Well said, sir! Well said.

[Clarke Green]

I have seen the difficulty you have had reconciling what the BSA says with what Scouting actually does in the lives of many Scouts your age and younger. I think it is safe to say that anyone who has been active in Scouting within the past ten or twelve years has seen this too.

I must argue, however, with the statement 'we have no less a right to be in Scouts and have our "values" represented than any other group.'

I don't think that it is a matter of anyone having a right or privilege to Scouting but the responsibility Scouting has to society as a whole and individuals in particular.

The genius and relevance of Scouting is not dividing the world over the dissemination and maintenance of a narrowly defined dogma but bringing the world together around a credo of common good.

The Scout oath and law can be used to exclude or include, to unite or divide. Which of these is at the heart of its founding and true intent?

[MPLS Scouter]

This thread has truly been a thought provoking conversation.

Scouting has been my life up until recent. I have earned my Eagle back in 2005, and at some points I was actively serving in two troops as a youth member. Scouting gave me a common ground to associate with others my age and it was a safe place to come and have fun, because at the time my parents went through a rather nasty divorce which resulted in me going into a deep, deep state of isolation. It was not until one of my best friends asked me to attend a camp with him that I started to turn around. I do not regret my decision on joining the BSA because if I hadn't I might have committed suicide. The BSA saved my life.

In the recent months I have become fully aware of the BSA's policy on membership and I have become rather appauled and disgusted. Like I have stated, I have done a lot with the BSA, I am an Eagle Scout, Woodbadger and a Scouter. The main thing I beleive the national council forgets is this, we are here for the boys and only the boys. There is a lot of ideological arguing going out in the open. The first thing we all need to do is reafirm ourselves to the delivery of the program to the boys. promotion of a religious group can come in second.
I fully beleive that all children, irregardless of politics, creed, race, gender, who their parents are, or any other consideration, should be allowed to take advantage of this wonderful program.

The notion of having troops customized to fit the needs and beliefs of the church is a good one, however there leaves a gap. one where people like myself can't fit in to the norms of society, I am agnostic, here comes in non-religous affiliated groups. I am an police explorer and I do not have to deal with differing personal Ideologies at all, there is only one matter at hand, the teaching. let's place this into the scouting realm to include all and more.

This is purly my PERSONAL beleif on the BSA in general, It is a good progam, in theory, however it is not without its flaws. anything made by man kind is flawed in some way or another. It goes without saying the BSA has its own problems. Membership is one of those. It should be opened up to gays, agnostics, and atheists. There is one reason why we are afraid, statistics, it is typical of humans to place things into numbers to better understand things, however we forget that those numbers are actual people with feelings and lives. Who is to say that a gay scout is going to hit on a straight member, who is to say that a devout christian is going to try to sway an atheist to join a troop and become christian himself. sure it can happen, but it might not. in short we are excluded those who can use our leadership and guidance because of a fear we might get a little uncomfortable affection, and different spiritual beliefs. If we want to best prepare our youth for the society we should be open to society in general. I live in the Twin Cities area and I choose where to work, where to eat, and where to live. But I do not choose who to work with, who to interact with on a retail basis, I especially DO NOT choose who to ride the bus with. We should not shelter our youth in order to prepare them for an unsheltered life.
I am preparing for a life of servitude as a law enforcement professional, when I am on the job I do not care who is covering me, I do not judge the person next to me. As long as they are with the program that is fine, because they are there. I ask the same of all scouts that I associate with, "I am glad you are here", I take pride in knowing that the life of one kid was positively affected by my role as a mentor, a scoutmaster, a person. If scouts leave, so what, I am sad to see them leave, But I remember how I might have affected them and vice versa. And if there is one thing I ask, please keep on the bright side and remain cheery. I have seen bad leaders, I have seen leaders fight. for some scouts like myself when I was younger, this is there escape, they do not need to see grown men and women acting like idiots, they need responsible and mature men and women to guide them and be a positive role model.

[brandon sargent]

I have been visiting this blog off and on for a while, never commenting, however, the topic of this post is crucial to the success of the organization that, in many ways, raised me. The first point is essential. I am in my mid-twenties, I am an Eagle Scout(among many other achievements), I am openly gay, and I am many times more capable and qualified to be a Scouter than most- and I know I am not the only one. I hid, very deeply, any indication of my sexual identity in fear of losing everything that I had worked so hard to achieve. It is unconscionable that an organization can be so unappreciative of its members' time and dedication as not to accept them back as leaders. Granted, many adults become involved as a result of their child's participation and do not have any prior experience in the organization, however, this policy discriminates on the basis of a stereotype of a group of people, rather than the evaluation of the character of an individual.
An additional issue that I will add here is the breakdown of council-level professional leadership. (disclaimer: this is commentary on the council i was a member of, not necessarily a general issue.) I noticed over time- 10 years or so- that as the older scouters who had been involved their entire life retired, they were replaced by younger (30s, 40s) professionals who operated the council like a business- where the focus became money instead of the boys. I feel this goes hand in hand with increasing oversight and control from Texas- traditions are being lost, experiences are becoming increasingly sanitized and buffered from any type of risk. Then again, this only mirrors the attitude or direction of the country in general.