“Failure to Protect”

[Lance]

Hoping this article has more than an ephemeral effect on corps' hiring procedures and decisions. 

Forgive me for being dubious.

[Jeff Ream]

1 hour ago, cixelsyd said:

Just re-reading one of your posts (emphasis mine).

as beat to death in the last mega thread. Dan was made aware of Morgan Larson. 

[Jeff Ream]

1 hour ago, MikeD said:

Bands where I taught going back to the 80's required staff to go through the substitute teacher process, which included background checks even then (as much as was possible in those times). 

However, the overall environment was far different. Teachers who messed with students were rarely prosecuted, as the victims almost never pressed charges. The "norm" for decades was for the offending teacher to resign. When that person applied for a new position, and the new district contacted the old district, all the old district could say is that the teacher resigned in good standing. Stating anything else, even if done in private, would have opened the first district up to a lawsuit by the teacher if that person found out what happened. 

I know of many music teachers in NJ, going back to the 70's, who got subsequent jobs after being caught and resigning...sometimes multiple times in multiple districts.

I know of a few in PA too. 

[JimF-LowBari]

14 minutes ago, cixelsyd said:

Yes.  And like I said yesterday, I favor improved processes that have zero tolerance, zero excuses.

My point is if the enablers are still running things then the corps world has NOT been cleaned up. So more power to any reporter who keeps digging.

[Jeff Ream]

54 minutes ago, garfield said:

You said what I couldn't.

Thanks.

fair point. However, one would think in DCI's current climate, transparency would be of the utmost importance, and apparently it's not. 

[Jeff Ream]

32 minutes ago, cixelsyd said:

That is not my belief.  But that article spends nearly all its time describing people who are no longer in the drum corps activity.  And for that matter, her lead story (and many of the others) centered on abuses that occurred in the marching band activity.  And further, the main reason these stories exist is not because of some drum corps specific problem, but a nationwide/society-wide phenomenon regarding how the accused/convicted have records expunged, suppressed or plea bargained away.

yet DCI lets them in. hence the issue discussed here.

[Jeff Ream]

21 minutes ago, Fran Haring said:

Since this particular reporter is working on series of articles, this one is just another one in the series... which has been about sexual predators in drum corps.

There is no rule anywhere that requires her to provide new information, or to clarify anything about the current state of drum corps... but in fact, she does, when she reports on the changes DCI has made in reaction to this entire mess, changes aimed at ending the "haven." I think that provides some perspective here.

You can read into this line... "Elite youth drum corps have become a haven for instructors with sexual misconduct in their past".... any way you choose.  But to me, it's a factual statement, based on the evidence presented so far about various people... GH, this OC guy, Larson, etc. 

For those of you cautioning us to not place blame where it doesn't belong... in this case, on the DCI front office which was just following the BOD's rules... perhaps you can also refrain from placing blame or throwing shade on this reporter, who certainly did not cause any of the problems she is now writing about.

 

yup. Dan was given his code red by the board, and he followed it. the board followed their boards wishes. the list of the negligent is huge. 

[Jeff Ream]

22 minutes ago, cixelsyd said:

Yes.  And like I said yesterday, I favor improved processes that have zero tolerance, zero excuses.

but do you not agree that there has to be some accountability for past transgressions/negligence to act?

[cixelsyd]

6 minutes ago, Fran Haring said:

Since this particular reporter is working on series of articles, this one is just another one in the series... which has been about sexual predators in drum corps.

Actually, the series of articles are about participant safety, not limited to sexual predation.  The Pioneer situation involved numerous issues which were not of a sexual nature.

Quote

There is no rule anywhere that requires her to provide new information, or to clarify anything about the current state of drum corps... but in fact, she does, when she reports on the changes DCI has made in reaction to this entire mess, changes aimed at ending the "haven." I think that provides some perspective here.

Not so much, when the lead is "drum corps = haven".  Take away that inflammatory, overreaching headline/lead, and you would have an appropriately balanced article.

Quote

For those of you cautioning us to not place blame where it doesn't belong... in this case, on the DCI front office which was just following the BOD's rules... perhaps you can also refrain from placing blame on this reporter, who certainly did not cause any of the problems she is now writing about.

I am not casting blame, just reacting to an article.  With the Hopkins article, this same reporter provided the essential reporting that brought an ongoing abusive situation with no oversight (a true "haven") to an end.  This article, with no such current drum corps staff examples, fails to do that.  

[JimF-LowBari]

32 minutes ago, HockeyDad said:

I didn't think it was possible to excuse the inexcusable concerning this topic.  After reading the  posts, I guess I was wrong.  

You should have been in Central PA when Sandusky came to light. When the reporter starts getting threats we’ll know how low it has sunk. And the excuses are deja vu all over again as per Yogi Berra