Re: Y.P. and Camping
Bruce E. Cobern (bec@NYC.PIPELINE.COM)
Tue, 25 Jun 1996 19:47:18 GMT
On Jun 25, 1996 12:39:30, 'Bob McGwier <n4hy@CCR-P.IDA.ORG>' wrote:
>>composing the "two-deep leadership" could not be related or husband/wife.
>>Married couples would be OK on a camping trip, as long as they weren't
>>the ONLY adults on the trip.
>This is incorrect and I will provide a counterexample. Philmont follows
>the two deep leadership as closely as anyone and on co-ed crews they
>recommend that the two deep leadership CONSIST of a husband/wife team.
>My wife and I are THE adults on 703-M-1.
Using Bob's excellent post merely as a posting vehicle, I believe that it
is time, once again, to remind people that there are two DIFFERENT sets of
rules. One is the two deep leadership rule and the other is the YP rule.
The two deep leadership rule concerns how many adults must be present on an
activity in order for it to happen. This requires two, one of which must
be at least 21 and the other at least 18. Independently, at least one must
be a registered leader and if the other is not a registered leader it must
be a parent.
As I understand the rationale for this rule it is so that, should an
emergency arise which would require one adult to take an injured Scout for
treatment, then there would still be an adult to remain with the rest of
the group. As I understand the rules, it is understood that, under these
emergency conditions, each group would now have only ONE adult, but that
would be viewed as an acceptable condition under these extenuating
I can see no reason why a husband and wife cannot fulfill this requirement.
The second set of rules, the YP rules, as I understand them, DO NOT require
two adults. They merely state that one YOUTH should never be alone with
one ADULT. Thus, in a youth/adult mix there need to be at least THREE
people, but it could be 2/1 either way. The purpose of this rule, as I
understand it, is to protect both the youth and the adult. It always
provides a third set of eyes which makes it much less likely for an adult
to abuse a child OR for a child to falsely accuse an adult.
While it can be argued that a husband/wife really does not provide that
kind of witness and that it is better if the second adult not be related to
the first, I have never seen that in writing as policy, nor have I heard it
stated as policy in any of the YP sessions I have attended (unless I slept
through that part, each time.)
I know, for example, the merit badge card instructs the Scout to bring a
buddy, so as to guarantee a third individual present, but I have never felt
that this was REQUIRED as long as the setting for the meeting is one where
there would be third parties present, such as in a library, at a troop
meeting, etc. Again, I view the goal and requirement as being a third
individual, not necessarily any particular category of individual.
If I am incorrect, I would appreciate information so that I can learn.
Bruce E. Cobern
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City