Re: co-ed cubbing
Mon, 7 Nov 1994 10:08:13 GMT
In message <email@example.com> SCOUTS-L%TCUBVM.BITNET@pucc.pr
> We completed our first co-ed camp on the weekend before Halloween.
> Although we have integrated the girls into the sixes ando notot
> segregate them, we did separate boys and girls into separate tents.
Congratulations, I hope that it went well.
> Our tents are small three person pup tents, with three children in each. I
> appreciate that these are latency aged children, but given the climate
> of sexual issues, all leaders and parents agreed that this was the
> best course of action.
I agree completely
> Curiously the daughter of one of the parents
> present --a female parent-- became upset over our decision to put the
> girls and boys in separate tents. She argued that she was being
> treated differently from the boy Cubs. I held to our decision despite
> her objections.
Ask yourself. What would she have done if her daughter had been "attacked" by
one of the other cubs. _YOU_ are responsible for the children in your care and
your decision should be final. By signing the Permission to Camp form the
parent has given you the autority to organise the camp according to laid down
> I am posting this to see if there is general
> agreement on the issue or if other Cub leaders have had similar
> experiences now that we are co-ed. By the way I have been very
> pleased in every way with the move to co-ed cubbing.
> I checked BP&P, section IV, and while it
> addressed Sleeping Quarters, stipulating, "Co-educational camps should
> ensure that every consideration is given to propriety".
> Oh, yes, not wanting to revive the issue of security checks, as a
> former child protection social worker I believe that the safety of
> children must be paramount. Their safety goes beyond fears of
> political correctness. I for one would willingly undergo a security
> check if required by policy. Indeed, I would like to see Scout's
> Canada move in this direction. Those who have not committed an
> offence, hence the innocent have absolutely nothing to fear. The
> focus is clearly to determine who has committed crimes which threaten
> the safety of children. I appreciate that my attitude may be an
> expression of a greater Canadian trust in the possibility of prudent
> and necessary state intervention into our lives --recognizing that the
> state is us. Oops, I said I didn't want to revive the issue, but I do
> think that there might be widely differing approaches based on
> national experience and perspectives??
I also do not have a problem with postive vetting. There is to much Civil
Liberties fuss. IHMO. If you are innocent there is nothing to be afraid of!
| Rod Keen. Akela of the Apache Pack. Std disclaimer applies |
| 3rd Harpenden. United Kingdom. to all comments made above |
| "Let no man be unworthy of the Angel |
| who stands over him" - Unknown. (from book by Stephen Donaldson) |
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City