Youth Protection Policy

[Mayhemxpc]

I have read ssmdive's comments several times and I do not see the condescension that dougbush sees. Ron W. Seems to have summarized the issue that ssmdive is trying to get at. I see no purpose in attacking someone's argument because somehow a reader has taken some personal affront to something where no affront was intended.

Although...I will also point out that many in this forum have had MUCH more extensive background checks than ssmdive appears to think make him stand out among us. We are pilots, that already makes us outside the norm. It would be reasonable to expect that we have non-flying backgrounds outside the norm, too.

Now, back on track. EAA HQ felt it needed to do something to protect the corporation from potential allegations. It implemented a program without apparently doing a thorough problem definition, analysis of alternatives, and effective member outreach. The result has been a significant push back from YE pilots and their chapters. Some have accepted the change, some have even embraced it. Others have left the program or continue under protest. Some chapters may be operating without any effective acknowledgement of the program at all. It is quite likely that YE flights are dropping. It is also possible that the program as implemented is not adding any additional protection and, in the EXTREMELY UNLIKELY EVENT that something undesirable does happen, EAA HQ may find that the current program does not protect them at all. So...what do we do about that?

[rwanttaja]

(Good stuff deleted)

Although...I will also point out that many in this forum have had MUCH more extensive background checks than ssmdive appears to think make him stand out among us.

Does anyone else's organization use the euphemism, "Dentist's Chair"? :-)

... in the EXTREMELY UNLIKELY EVENT that something undesirable does happen, EAA HQ may find that the current program does not protect them at all. So...what do we do about that?

I think the current program protects EAA to the greatest extent possible. If sued, EAA has to show that it implements protection to at least the standard set by other major organizations like the Boy Scouts. Any plaintiff will attempt to show that EAA's program lags the currently-accepted norm, or that the implementation was botched in a way that should have been noticed and corrected.

Beyond that, there's little EAA can to to prepare. It's ludicrous to assume that any YE pilot will "try something" during a flight...with the kid's parents and dozens of people standing right there when the plane returns. The danger is that the person will try to parlay meeting the youth into continued contact OUTSIDE the bounds of Young Eagles... prohibited by the YPP, but there's no way for EAA to detect if it's happening.

That's where EAA will get bit, legally, and the existence of the YPP will be a damned thin shield. I don't think there's any way to provide further protection.

Ron Wanttaja

[ssmdive]

Although...I will also point out that many in this forum have had MUCH more extensive background checks than ssmdive appears to think make him stand out among us. We are pilots, that already makes us outside the norm. It would be reasonable to expect that we have non-flying backgrounds outside the norm, too.

Points of order:
1. I do not think my BGC's make me "stand out". I just think that I go through more BGC's than an average person. I don't see that claim as controversial. I could be wrong, but no one brought data to counter my belief - only grief. How many BGCs does the average person go through in a year?

2. If you think go through a bigger, better, more difficult BGC... OK, great. If you made the claim that your BGC was better than the ones I go through... OK, I don't see that as controversial or you thinking you are 'better' than me. It could very well be a statement of fact. I could debate the details if I cared, but to make the claim I think you are being big headed for making that claim is just silly.

3. I specifically mentioned the "average". If you work for the NSA, then you would not be "average". If you happen to be the POTUS, then again, not "average". You made the claim that pilots are not "average".... OK fair claim. But the average pilot goes through approximately how many BGC's per year?

The LEO thing. I found dark humor in the fact that we tell kids if they are in trouble, to go find and tell an LEO. Yet the EAA seems to think that is not enough and some online BGC will save the day.

But some people will take ANY opportunity to get their ego hurt and slam someone... Especially certain groups. I am used to it, but honestly always surprised. With that I am done wasting my time. The EAA does not care and all I am doing here is opening myself up to abuse from someone who got upset and has an axe to grind (not you).

[Mayhemxpc]

Geez. There I was, trying to say that you were NOT trying to come off as coming from a "better than you are" mentality, only pointing out that some or many of us also go through rigorous screenings, and you decide to post this. I was not trying to slam you. I was NOT claiming that my screening is more extensive than yours (nor am I saying that yours is more extensive than mine.) My own clearance and background checks are none of your concern. Some on this forum probably have more thorough (intrusive) checks than you. Some do not. None of us, however, are, "the average joe." Your words. Now, can we stop this and focus on defining problems and trying to turn a sow's ear into suede (understanding we will never make it into silk.)