[slv77]

As a scoutmaster you have probably noticed the problems go much deeper:

1) The BSA national organization sized itself in the 1970s based on the idea that membership would continue to increase forever. The national organization is grossly oversized relative to the needs of the troops. The result is that the national organizations needs are at odds with the troops needs. The national organization is primarily focused on funding itself, including its debt, which creates a net burden for troops. 2) This net burden manifests itself in multiple ways at the troop level including using troops for fund raising efforts for the national organization where little if any of the funds make it back to the troop, increasingly irrelevant mandatory merit badge requirements to appease national donors who want to make their mark (reducing scout choices) and increasingly expensive costs for camps and equipment. 3) Lack of a solid development program for Scoutmasters. Few men in corporate America truly know how to manage or lead anymore. This rot started in the 1970s when computer programs replaced middle management and operations was largely outsourced. Outdoor skills have eroded as the population became more urbanized. Scoutmasters can’t teach what they don’t know and the national organization hasn’t filled that gap. For example compare BSA with NOLS for quality of their skills training. 4) Without a strong selection and development program for scoutmasters there is no prestige. Corporate America’s doesn’t see it as a place to develop leadership from but a distraction. That means that the people the scouting organization can draw from are the very, very good and the very, very bad. 5) Sexual abuse is a significant problem for any youth development organization and that fact was ignored by the BSA for way too long. The majority of perpetrators are men. As an organization with a declining pool of volunteers to draw adult leadership from the ratio of abusers who volunteer is going to be uncomfortably high. Courts and the court of public opinion have shown that there is no limit to the liability for this type of behavior. This is a strong signal that American’s simply do not want youth programs where this kind of thing can happen. 6) Being an adult leader of a youth organization comes with breathtakingly high amount of personal liability. Simply moving a car full of youth from one place to another risks financial devastation. The BSA does little to nothing to mitigate that risk and the only other way to mitigate that is through 1:1 youth to parent involvement where children are under direct, parental supervision at all times. This is antithetical to a youth lead program like the BSA.

[bluGill]

And I really get the impression that you're very out of touch with what's scouts is like today when you make comments like that. I mean, yes, there are problems, but they are not what you say. There are plenty of great leaders, at least from what I can see. There's lots of parents that are very good at this.

As for sexual abuse, the scouts have very good programs to stop it. The past is not the reality today. Comments like yours probably are the reality of public opinion. However, they are not the reality of scouting today.

[slv77]

There are many of parents who are good at running activity programs for youth but there aren’t many parents who are good at running a youth leadership training program. The article rightly points out that the Eagle Scout project, which is supposed to be a leadership capstone project has devolved into learning how to navigate bureaucracy.

The BSA settlement over sexual abuse allocations was $2.46B for claims going back to the 1970s. No matter how good the program to prevent abuse today, this generation of controls will be judged against the standards of 2070s. This makes any asset heavy youth program financially untenable.

Personally I think scouting, done right, is a beautiful thing but I don’t see how the program survives or how any similar volunteer program would she able to survive long term.