Re: Another Eagle Scout Problem...
Richard Russell (lderlore@XMISSION.COM)
Tue, 4 Oct 1994 08:59:29 -0600
Since the leadership requirement for a palm is so vague, it is pretty
much left up to the discrection of the SM. However, this case is not one
of inappropriate expections with regard to the requirements, rather it is
one of failed communication at conveying those expectations. The Scout
acted in good faith as he read the requirements. If the SM had not told
him what his expectations are, then this ruling should have gone in favor
of the boy.
The SM Conference is the place to communicate these expectations for the
next rank, in this case, a palm. While I do not agree with this
particular SM's requirement, since it adds more than is implied by the
written requirement, his error was not in having the expectation but in not
communicating it to the Scout and having some sort of agreement (a
contract) with him about it. If he expects something like a mini-Eagle
project then he ought to proceed with the same sort of approvals and
checks along the way to insure the Scout has met the expectations.
To spring it on him was unfair, the Scout, justifiably, felt it was
unfair and says, "I don't need any more of this kind of treatment. I will
go where I can achieve in other ways."
What we as adults often forget is that teenagers (even though they may
not act like it) are people, too. They need to be accorded all the
considerations we would give to any other adult in our circle. And when
they respond negatively, it's not always that they are just being
adolescents, but sometimes, they have legitimate complaints about our
failure to treat them as people with rights.
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City