Boy Scouts of America Kick Out Retarded Boy

What is wrong with these people...

from JoeUser Forums
So its 2AM and I'm just reading some random news stories before going to bed and I come across this and I have to vent somewhere.

The Boy Scouts of America have kicked a retarded boy out of his troop, citing that his behavior endangers him and others or some such bull like that.

The great thing is that, as a private organization, the Boy Scouts have the right to exclude whoever they want. And I'm not saying they shouldn't have that right. The right to be stupid is what makes this country great. What bothers me is that the Boy Scouts won't own up to it.

The KKK hates Blacks and Jews and gays and they come out and say it. When the Boy Scouts want someone out, they make up some phony excuse like the kids safety and move on with their supposed righteous and all inclusive agenda.

What if I decided to start a group and decided the Black kids were endangering the safety of the Hispanic kids? Or that the White kids were endangering the Black kids. It would be my right, but my organization would be torn to bits. It's time to do the same to the Boy Scouts.

They should own up their exclusivity. At least then I'd respect them for being honest.
3,743 views 23 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
It could mean that that boy always sets fire to something, threaten people with knifes, etc. If the boy has problems don't mean it's related to those problems. Where did you read this?
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
My apologies for once again forgetting my source. I was a little riled up at the time I wrote this.

http://www.riverfronttimes.com/issues/2004-10-20/news/news.html

From the article, it does not seem that the boy was doing anything to immediately endanger himself or the other scouts. It does sound, however, like they excluded him from the beginning, and made no effort to accommodate him.
Sins of a Solar Empire II
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
Thank ~you so very much to bringing this article to my attention. I was so incredibly horrified I had to write the editor of this newspaper in response to such prejudicial ignorance being spread to our youth by these parents that our mentoring our children our future in such a way. These children are enrolled in such groups as my nieces and nephews are by parents that wish to involve their children and keep them striving towards strong core values they instill at home and are able to reinforce in such organizations. However it is essential that we as parents and a community as a whole ensure that the people representing these organizations are not poisening our children by such actions.

In reading this article another parent from this particular troop was interviewed and stated she had not witnessed anything out of the norm other then this child was slower in completing some of the activities or projects. So if this is what they are refering to in their letter of keeping everyone "safe" does this mean safety requires one not to tolerate another child that is slower? If I were one of the parents in this troop my child would be have to be enrolled in another group with a very long talk on why they were being moved to another troop.

Have a good evening~!~

~Peace,Love,Health & Happiness ~Extended to you

Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
I too considered writing the editor, although opted against it in favor of writing the Boy Scouts of America directly, although I'm having trouble figuring out who to direct my comments to.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
So if one boy is disrupting the activities of 30, the one boy should be allowed to keep doing so in the name of "compassion"?
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top

From the article, it does not seem that the boy was doing anything to immediately endanger himself or the other scouts. It does sound, however, like they excluded him from the beginning, and made no effort to accommodate him.


That article doesn't even sound as if it's trying to be objective.


Even the mentally disabled can be problematic. Wealthy white boys with high IQs aren't the only trouble-makers.

Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
So if one boy is disrupting the activities of 30, the one boy should be allowed to keep doing so in the name of "compassion"?


No, he shouldn't

However, I have a sore spot for the BSA, I was a member from Cub scouts up. When I was 17 a couple of my friends and I were asked to leave because my hair and vehicles were not becomming of the "Christian Organization". At the time 2 of us were a community project away from our Eagle scout. We were not trouble makers, we just weren't the perfect little scouts that they wanted.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top

I just have to wonder whether Philomedy has any children.

I have two sons. The 7 year old plays little league. The 4 year old is in various "play groups". As a parent, I would consider it quite unfair to the other children if one child were essentially disruptng the rest.

I have sympathy for people who are mentally retarded. My uncle is mentally retarded and I have a cousin who has down syndrome.  And my child hood friend who has brain cancer is now effectively "retarded" because of the damage it haas done.

And unless soeone has spent serious time with someone who is retarded I think they should shut the hell up when it comes to being judgmental. I'm just telling it how it is. For my child hood friend, whose cancer has has left her mentally impaired, deaf and mosty blind I keep in touch with her family regularly despite having moved away years ago. I also flew down there when I was i college to take her to her high school prom.  My point being that this isn't an issue of sympathy or compassion. This is an issue of weighing the needs of the rest of the scout troops versus the needs of the impaired child.

A single retarded child can make things a lot less fun for everyone. Every activity ends up taking much more time. Every event has to be more carefully planned. Special care has to be taken to make sure no one gets hurt.

And the practical reality is that most parents are just trying their best with their limited time and resources to give THEIR children a shot at having some good experiences in life. And if one child in that group is degrading that severely, then I'm sorry but that's not remotely fair to the other children.

The question isn't whether the Boy Scouts are the bad guys. The question is whether the parents of this special child are the bad guys. Because it's pretty damn selfish for one parent, who knows what's involved in supervising and working with a retarded child, to not consider the rights and experiences of the other children in that troop.

Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
The writer of the article quoted the mom as admitting, "After about four meetings, people stopped showing up with their kids," How many people have to be alienated before the organization can remove a child? It was obviously not working out for the other parents and children. The writer is biased towards the child's situation, there is no mention of what the exact circumstances were, but I would bet he wouldn't mention past problematic incidences.....

While I don't believe that disabled children should be hidden away, I have to say that if MY son was in a pack that was not accomplishing the set goals because of one child, I would request something be done about it. One person cannot care for an entire packs needs if they are focused on one child. The mom was a pack leader and although the article doesn't say, I would be surprised if other parents felt that their child was being held back and THAT is unfair.

.
In reading this article another parent from this particular troop was interviewed and stated she had not witnessed anything out of the norm other then this child was slower in completing some of the activities or projects


How long is appropriate to delay 30 children for the needs of one? 10 min? 1 hour? 2 weeks? A private organization should have the right to set standards for their participants. I would be upset if my child was not learning at his grade level at school because the class was held back for one child's personnal developmental needs.....at some point a decision must be made....the needs of one shouldn't outweigh the needs of the rest.....
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
First of all, Philomedy does not have children and, God willing, will not have children for at least another ten years.

Of course the disabled can be problematic. The world can also be accommodating, as it is to the rich white kids with high IQs.

I'm sure a single retarded child can make things a lot less fun. I'm also sure a single retarded child can make things a lot more fulfilling. And of course it takes more planning and more time and more care. Do the work! Did they accept the kid in the first place thinking that it was going to be easy? Why did they let him in at all?

Also, to ask whether this child's parents are to blame is absurd. They did not impose any sort of will on the Boy Scouts of America. They approached the group and were allowed to join. How can we question the selflessness of any parent that wants their child to have the opportunities that any other child has? Was it selfish for the southern Black parents to want integration of schools because of the horrible psychological effects it would have on the White kids? Base it on whatever you want, segregation is segregation.

Again, I would like to reiterate that I entirely support the Boy Scouts' right, as a private organization, to exclude whoever they want. However, I do not like it when groups paint a picture of themselves as "all-American" and righteous and moral and whatever, just to turn around and say that retarded people or gay people or people with long hair or excessive tattooing or the wrong kind of car are not good enough and could they kindly stay the hell away but tell your friends because the Boy Scouts are here to make America better.

While I am not a parent, if I was, and had a child in a troop or class or team with a retarded individual on it, I would look for ways within the organization to help accommodate and integrate, instead of immediately pulling my child out of said troop or class or team.

Again, I'm not trying to say that doing this is not within the Boy Scouts' rights. I'm just saying that its wrong, and that I don't like getting false sugarcoated messages about it. You don't want someone involved, own up to it. Do not put the burden on the child for being retarded or on his parents for wanting him involved. Put the burden on yourself because you're the all exclusive country club.

You do not agree to let someone join your organization and then turn around and throw them out because you decided that, in retrospect, its hard. I know its naive to think that a hypocrite will admit its hypocrisy. The least I can do is try to point it out.
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top

Your focusing entirely on the boy's mental disability and not the boy's actions in the Boy Scouts. Being different does not give one a license to be a disruption to the other children.

Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
I have been an advocate for the mentally disabled for years working with a variety of challenging disabilities. So I agree some behavior issues are not appropriate and can cause safety concerns but from this particular report that has not been the case unless they are not sharing the whole story. But with interviewing another parent from the troop and her observations it sounds to me as if it was just because the child was slower. I am sorry but if we are unable to teach our children to have some compassion for these citizens it a shame.

I think they need to define the disruption with a specific example and have some issues with why these people refused to comment it just sounds a bit fishy to me.

No one is saying hold the whole class or troop behind for one child but teach these children that see no matter what your particular challenge you too can participate and do what everyone else is doing and it may take a little longer but is possible.

So I do think it is a terrible shame some of these parents stopped showing up for the troop meeting possibly feeling uncomfortable with the child and maybe just not wanting to take the extra time to explain some of these tough issues.

Have a good evening~!~

~Peace,LoVe,Health & Happiness~ Extended to all

Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
I agree that being different does not give one a license to disrupt. Once having been allowed to join a certain organization, however, it is not right to kick him out because things got a little difficult, and nothing will convince me that it is. Perhaps if "a little difficult" meant that the boy was going after other kids with a swiss army then maybe, but nothing in the article suggests anything of the sort.

And if it seems that I focus entirely on the boy being excluded, it is because I can relate with the feeling. On the other hand, I cannot imagine myself leaving a group because a retarded individual joined and it took a little longer or a little more work to get things done.

I was on a soccer team once that played another team that had a retarded boy on it. When he had the ball, we eased up, not because anyone asked us to, but because it was clear that his level was not as high as ours. No one got upset that the game slowed down, we just waited until he passed the ball and the game continued. No one got hurt, us or him.

On an unrelated topic, I would just like to thank the administrators of this site for providing a forum where I can express my views, thoughts, opinions, and what have you for no charge. Free is good. I'm just mentioning this now because I realize I did not have an official "debut" article, and wanted to express my gratitude as I have been looking for a place like this for a long time.
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
See I don't really agree with your soccer team "easing" up because this is not teaching anything and totally opposite of what I was trying to explain. It depends on the activity the entire group is not going to lose making crafts and one taking longer to complete theirs but in sports you have to work harder and if the opposing team wins in soccer because of that "easing" up it wasn't a true win. I really do not think even the child that is retarded can bask in the victory with the knowledge it wasn't due to their own dedication and perserverance in working on their skills and it was only due to the other team "feeling" sorry for them.

Have a good day~!~

~Peace,Love,Health & Happiness~ Extended to you
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
Perhaps if "a little difficult" meant that the boy was going after other kids with a swiss army then maybe, but nothing in the article suggests anything of the sort.


THis is definately NOT a maybe here consequences ARE required if this was the case one shouldn't wait until the swiss army is plunged into another child before removing the child from the group. This would definately need action taken to proactively prevent a serious injury or death.
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
The comment about the swiss army knife was an example of unacceptable behavior, and I certainly didn't mean to imply that one should wait for someone to be attacked before taking action.

As for the easing off, we certainly didn't if the kid was anywhere near our goal or in any situation that put our team in danger of losing the game. We just didn't feel that there was any need to rush at him with the intensity we would another player, as it was obvious that he did not posess the skill to avoid intense coverage of that sort, if he was in his defensive zone or by midfield where he was not an imminent scoring threat.

You can bet every other person on that team was covered to the point that you would not have been able to tell them apart from the defender, since we did not want a pass from him to lead to a goal.
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
I think the issue is that people are judging this based off of a lack of information. Obviously violent or dangerours behavior would require the removal of any child until the matter could be resolved. However we don't KNOW exactly what happened. The article was biased and lacked specific information, but it did give some....

The mother of the handicapped child was the pack leader. I would wonder if she was turning the entire pack program into a social setting for her one child. Could she deal withthe needs of the other children as well as her own son? Maybe she was not able to accomplish this and the other children were suffering. I work in a scout troop....I have jsut started, but I realize already that some children need a different pace. We have lots of "geographically single parent" homes (One parent is in Iraq) This is affecting the boys attitudes and behaviors. We do not plan on removing any of the kids....including some who are challenged emotionally and socially. We also have several boys who are working on Eagle scout projects at 14.....They are all ate different levels and we have to work with all of them to achieve thier goals. Parents are a big part of the childs accomplishments, but so is the group setting. To accomplish certain skills, we may have a limited time to complete a project/hands on activity/learning a skill. Children (at the parents/leaders discresion) may not participate in some activities that they cannot complete in the time alloted or the parents are responsible for catching them up durring the week. We do not always have the option of stopping everything to work with ONE child and that's a harsh truth. if we could no longer work woth a child for whatever reason, we would seek as meany other options as possible before removing them from a location/pack/troop. I have to hope that the leaders in this case were willing to do that as well.
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
This article is irritating to me because of the biased information put forth. The article mentions none of the causes, and when it comes to the child's disruptive behavior, all they have is the child's mother's opinion...

However, I'm suprised that our poster and the supporters have skimmed over this part of the article....

The actions of Cub Scout Pack 765 leaders Huston and Hummert appear to contradict the philosophy of the Boy Scouts of America. Boy Scout literature goes to great lengths in highlighting the organization's commitment to include children with disabilities, maintaining that there are more than 100,000 registered scouts with disabilities.


The BSA (Boy Scouts of America) takes pride in being able to provide leadership and a healthy environment for its participants. The BSA is an organization that helps young men become leaders in their community, and helps them learn skills that they will use the rest of their lives.

As an Eagle Scout, I know what the scouting program is about, and I know how it works. If the scout was excluded, there had to be a good reason, unless the people running the troop are unethical, and if that is the case they shouldn't be scout leaders anyway.

Just my .02 dollars.

Peace,

Beebes
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
At this point let me just say that I do not believe that every troop, pack leader or scout practices the exclusive practices which this article brought to my attention for the second time in the last couple of years. It is just my opinion that in this particular case, and in some others, the administrative bodies of the BSA have acted in ways that contradict their mission statement.

As for the part of the article that sites the BSA's attempts at accommodation, certainly that is a good thing. In this case, however, I believe it provides further evidence for my argument that this particular situation was not handled in the most correct manner.
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top
Because the organization consistently paints itself as beacon of all that is good and shiny and bright, while constantly excluding individuals whose views they disagree with. Don't think that this is an only instance. It is not just about the mentally ill, it is about homosexuals, it is about people with tattoos, people with long hair, people who listen to the wrong kind of music...The BSA kicks out individuals for no reason all the time...this is just the article i happened to catch. Given their track record, I wouldn't be surprised if this child was excluded for no reason other than his being mentally ill.
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top

Isn't the Boy Scouts of America a private institution who has the right to discriminate against anybody they choose


EXACTLY!!!!