Kid and Dad are a handful

[Mike Barney]

You're right Roger, except for example # 2 above, I can't think of a specific incident where the kid was a root problem.

Actually, the kid you reference was one of the best behaved kids I've ever met, and he needed the program more than most kids, in part (IMHO) because of his mom.

I've been with this troop for 10 years and seen 100+ kids go through. 95% of the kids were great, and watching them grow up is clearly worth the time investment. 90% of the parents same thing. Unfortunately, some parents want it their way but are not willing to help. About 2% are willing to be a 'hole' about it. As Roger notes, it's not the kids.

After being threatened with ADA, "going to Council" legal action et al, we've taken a 'don't let the door hit you in the a$$' for past and future 2%'ers, including providing those parents with a list of other troops in the area.

It's a great program, and am very proud to have been associated with it. The kids make it memorable and totally worthwhile. The 2% make me thankful for the 90%, but unfortunately, the kids of the 2% are the ones that lose out.

[Roger Tate]

As Scouter and a father of a boy with Aspergers I see more than one side to this problem. It can be hard to tell the difference between a spoiled brat and a kid with a real developmental disorder. Not every parent will disclose that their kid has a problem. That doesn't obligate a scout leader to diagnose a kid or to put up with bad behavior, but I hope we will think before assuming things about a kid.

I would suggest a couple of things as possible solutions.

If you hope to salvage the situation, you could require the Dad to come along on a shakedown hike. You'll get to see if the kid behaves better when Dad is around and if there is any point to trying to take Dad to Philmont. The Dad will also get a first-hand taste of what you are preparing for and why the Crew has to be cohesive.

If your gut is telling you to pull the plug, don't make the decision all by yourself. If it is the right decision, make the decision as a group with the SM, ASMs, and Troop Committee in agreement. Then present the decision as a group to the Dad.

Now, going into the future, take a fresh look at your Troop's Code of Conduct. Your committee may want to add language regarding high adventure/long range outings where the threat of sending a kid home isn't viable. It's OK to set a higher bar for these events for safety management reasons. If the boys don't get along on a routine outing, the added physical and mental stress of a high adventure outing will make it worse not better, and they must depend on each other to be safe.

[Floyd Wrich]

If you have trouble with the boy on regular weekend camp outs and the other adult members of your Philmont crew would rather stay home then go with him you would be CRAZY and irresponsible towards all the rest of your crew to take him. You missed the point with both the "Father and his son, Implied with the threat to sue you is the attitude of screw you, were the ones who are the most important here. Don't you realize at this point the boy knows his Dad has threaten you! If you give in what will you do when (as I'm sure will happen)during the trek he tells you what he wants and that you better do it or his Dad will sue! The situation might be different if the Father acknowledged the problems you faced with his son and asked what he could do to help,and with the understanding that if the situation/behavior doesn't improve his son can't go. But that doesn't sound like what happened. The Philmont handbook states (paraphrase) if the boyscout has "behavior" problems prior to philmont those behaviors tend to become worse over the trek not better. Please don't get me wrong as a ASM I along with all the other adult leaders in our troop are willing to work with any boy who shows even the smallest desire to be a scout and participate with the troop. What we won't do is bend over and kiss you know what to appease any parent and/or boy. Once you have been threaten you have only two choices, give in or call his bluff, either way its time to show them the door. If you give in every scout will know and the troop will then become all about that one "scout" and his Dad. You and the other adults will have given up your authority. Which in the end is my guess of what they really want.
Please don't leave us hanging, let us know what the outcome is. Good Luck

'

[JASON CUZZETTO]

This is a pretty simple one. First, contact your Profesional Scouter assigned to your unit. Say you want a meeting with him and one of the Execs. Have them meet with you and the other leaders/parents for the trip.
If things aren't looking good have these things ready:

1. A list of other troops to try in the area.
2. A refund for Philmont.
3. A refund for his yearly dues. It's easier.
—Seperate checks with notes as to what they are for.

Philmont is a treat. He would be lucky to go. Why on Earth would you even concider taking this kid if you can't get him to chill out and listen. Volunteering is fun, challenging and one of the best things you can do for yourself and the kids. You can't let them get away with anything that doesn't follow the Scout Oath and Law, The older Scouts should be enforcing this and you should only have to worry about guiding the older Scouts in their leadership roles and decision making. If this isn't happening then this boy is to much to deal with. He has to respect his peers. They are his leadership.

Personally as soon as the dad said something about sueing I think the Council should know immediately and they can talk to him about his issues and concerns. They need to back you up. That is what the insurance is for. That is why they are your organization. If you do it right and follow the basic guidelines this shouldn't be such an issue.

Heck with this dad.

[Luymes Ted]

Sam,

I'm an attorney. I deal with difficult people all the time. If your leadership is not comfortable handling this scout at Philmont, you must sit down with the dad right away and tell him so. Politely explain why, refund their money, and leave. If dad threatens to sue, tell him to go ahead.

He won't sue because you've done nothing actionable. With any luck, they'll leave the troop and be a burden on someone else.

Ted

[J R]

In our Troop, if a Scout does not live and show others his "Scout Spirit" he does not advance or go on outings. We are VERY up front about this.

[Thomas Hood]

Its a hard situation to be in for sure. i was an eagle and went to philmont in 2000. My troop kicked a kid out while i was in scouts because he caused nothing but trouble. They actually had the troop committee and chartering org write a letter that banned him from all activities except meetings and he kinda got the message and left.

Scouts is an organization that teaches kids life skills and how to be responsible adults. However it is not a behavior boot camp or an organization for kids that really should be with professional help.

My scoutmaster would not have probably been able to exist with today's pansy parents. You got out of line and he had no problem ripping your butt. There was a fight or something along those lines and he would get in the middle and drag both of you away by your shirt collars,,, how times have changed.

My recommendation would be to try to work the situation out, but by no means would I take him if he was that much trouble. You are adults giving your time to further the enjoyment of the scouts and to provide positive role models of what young men should grow up to be. Not babysitters.

[Rich Bowman]

As an advisor, you primary function is to ensure the health and safety of everyone in your crew. Other than that, the boys run the show. If the behavior / attitude of this one boy will create a threat to the health and safety of your crew, you must act.

IMHO the best way to determine if he will present a threat is to observe him during pre-trek hikes and shakedown trips. (You should have several of these.) If he can handle these outings, fine. If not, then sit down with him and his dad and explain what happened, that his actions are not acceptable, and give them a refund.

The sooner you have this discussion, the better. I've seen boys change their attitude and improve their behavior as a result of one of these discussions – and be able to go on a trek as a result. On the other hand, I've had boys realize that they were not mentally or physically ready for Philmont after a challenging shakedown trip and bow out gracefully.

Remember, even "good" boys can be a handlful when they are tired/hungry/sore – in other words about day 4-5.

Good Luck,

–Rich
'01 617H2, '05 702J '08 628O

[rhonda rouyer]

As a former Scouter who took two crews to Philmont, I just want to add to all the good advice ,that going to Philmont is a PRIVILEGE not a right! If this child is one who can ruin the experience for the crew then you need to "man up" and tell dad that the son can't attend until behavior changes. Or…he only comes if Dad attends and takes full responsibilty for the child, get it in writing.

[Robert Blean]

He's already paid his money in full, his dad is an attorney and a major league A$$HOLE, and is telling us we have to take him and he will be responsible for him.

I'd be interested in two things:

1) Precisely why does the dad think you have to take his son?

2) Precisely how does the dad propose to be responsible for his son? It does not seem to me that he can effectively do so remotely. He certainly hasn't in the past.

If the dad does threaten you, I'd be tempted to refuse the kid based on that alone — otherwise it looks as if you are giving in to his threat. (Emotional reaction and potentially unfair to the kid, I know, but that's the way I feel about it.)

Be careful what you ask for …. Do you want the dad to come on the trip? Is he qualified to do so? You state that he is "a major league A$$HOLE". Do you really want to insist that someone like that come on your trip? How will your trip go if he agrees?

–MV

[Bob Shaver]

We had a kid, the scoutmasters son, who was known for being a handful, or knucklehead as I have sometimes heard it called. Our troop went to the BSA hiking hostel in Konderstag Austria. I was not on the trip, or in the troop at that time, but I heard he and some other boys were egging each other on to more and more unruly behavior, and at some point streaked through a cave on a public hiking trail, or something like that. They took movies of each other doing it, so the evidence was there.

One kid of the bad boys was sent home – from Europe, at his Dad's expense. I don't know the mechanics of how that was accomplished, but I bet the Dad was very angry.

Several people have mentioned their troops requirements for high adventure trip participation, like 3 shakedown trips. I would really like to see those policies, as I am supposed to formulate our troops policies. If you have them, send to [email protected]. Thanks!

[EndoftheTrail]

"Dad was very angry."

Hopefully angry at his kid and not the scouts — that is, for the kid's own sake.

[Walter Underwood]

I removed a Scout from our 50 MIler crew after a shakedown. His mom was pretty angry, but he didn't go on the trek.

We consider emotional maturity and teamwork a safety issue. Adults have final say on safety issues, and it is a single-veto system, no voting.

In this case, the Scout didn't bring a sleeping pad, didn't prepare for his crew responsibility, resisted doing crew chores, continually pushed back on the crew leader's decisions (like the hike leader rotation), ignored safety signs, and intentionally left food behind because he didn't want to carry it.

Sounds like small stuff until the Scout does that with bear or lightning protocol. We decided he was a safety risk for the crew. Maybe he would be ready next year.

The Philmont Advisor Guide has a very good section on this, well worth your $10: http://www.bacphilmont.org/pag.html

[Mike Barney]

Walter,
it takes some fortitude to 'do the right thing' for the overall crew, particularly when parents get into the fray.

Hope the 50 went better than expected.

Mike

[Roger Caffin]

> In this case, the Scout didn't bring a sleeping pad, didn't prepare for his
> crew responsibility, resisted doing crew chores, continually pushed back
> on the crew leader's decisions (like the hike leader rotation), ignored
> safety signs, and intentionally left food behind because he didn't want to carry it.
> Sounds like small stuff

Definitely NOT 'small stuff' at all. Right decision.

It may be he was subconsciously looking for adult discipline (leadership) which he was not getting at home. It might be interesting to see how he behaves on a local trip in the future?

Cheers

[Walter Underwood]

Our 50 Miler was great, even though it was more challenging than expected, including three people heading home the second day with altitude sickness.

For me, the high point was a crew discussion (no adults) about five days in, about the goals for the trip. They decided that a fun trip was more important than a patch and we had a 45 Miler.

This crew was the core of our Philmont crew last month, which made it a breeze.

[Author]

Posts