One of my dependents, a cadet, has just received a "Civil Air Patrol Cadet Survey" (via email link to Surveymonkey) from the "noreply@capnhq.gov" address. The survey's front page states, quote:
"This survey is confidential. CAP National Headquarters will NOT [emphasis in original] let your squadron or wing leaders know how you've answered. You won't be punished in any way for the answers you give. You have total freedom to answer honestly and to the best of your ability. Thank you, CAP National Cadet Team, cadets@capnhq.gov".
Then, question #2 asks if the adolescent respondent is female, male, or "transgender". Later questions (#8) ask these minors to divulge their disability status, mentioning dyslexia and autism, and if the cadet receives "free or reduced-price lunches at school" (#10).
On a personal level, I frankly am disgusted that someone on our National CP team is trolling minor children in our care regarding their sexuality with question two, after emphasizing that no one will know their answers. I view this as a complete violation of our trust, and on a lesser level, I am equally disturbed that National HQ is asking minors to self report de facto information on their families income status and their own disability status. If that is that not considered voluntarily provided, protected information, how come CAP is requesting this sensitive information from minors who cannot legally consent to its provision?
How does NHQ/CP get off, pushing this leading question about sexuality to my kids while promising no one will tell?
As a parent, I am furious.
Ned - or anyone else - any info on this?
V/R,
Spam
+1
This kind of thing is among the reasons I keep my kids out of public schools.
Quote from: veritec on October 05, 2015, 09:36:05 PM
+1
This kind of thing is among the reasons I keep my kids out of public schools.
+1 My wife and I homeschool because of junk like this. I just got done defending CAP in another thread and then find this. I might end up changing my mind after all, considering my membership is up this month.
Kids, take it from me... don't drink and drive, er, post.
Disregard all after good morning.
Have you contacted National Headquarters about this? 1-877-277-9142 X401 or clafond@capnhq.gov.
And this is why people hate CAPTALK, >:(
How DARE you question us?
(Sorry, couldn't resist. ;D )
Please, absolutely question us. And then listen to our responses.
The survey is a follow-on the the CEAP money that the Air Force so kindly bestowed on us. I'm sure you remember the nearly a half million dollars that we spent on helping cadets get to encampment this summer (plus some additional corporate funds set aside for the upcoming winter encampments.)
Please recall that the money was prioritized by family need. Priority 1 cadets were financially needy cadets that self-certified that they received some form of government aid. We filled each and every request for assistance from Priority 1 cadets, including full encampment costs, per diem, and even uniform assistance. We also fulfilled the great majority of the Priority 2 cadets (no government assistance received, but still needy due to personal circumstances, multiple cadets in the same family attending encampment, etc.)
Both the Air Force and CAP really, really want the program to continue in the out years. Really, really. Because we believe it substantially boosted encampment attendance, and one of the stakeholders in this process is the Air Force who believes that encampment is a Good Thing for cadets. To the point where they invested over a half million dollars in our program.
Now we need to prove that we are being good guardians of the taxpayers's funds. The AF hired the Rand Corporation (yes, THAT Rand Corporation) to help establish some metrics to show that encampment attendance measurably improves cadet retention and performance, and that we directed the funds to needy cadets who might not otherwise have attended encampment.
So their scientists designed the survey. Which went out to every cadet. And a nearly-identical survey that was sent out to every parent that had a good email in eServices. Senior CAP leaders were pre-briefed on the survey and approved the distribution.
The survey needs to include demographic information in order to validate the objectives of outreach to needy CAP families. Which was one of the conditions that the AF imposed when they gave us the money. And in this case demographic information includes things like family income. The survey also includes questions about CAP participation, which is necessary to establish whether anything got better after the encampment experience. It was sent to all cadets and parents so that we could meaningfully compare CEAP participants against non-participants. Which is the whole point of the survey. To help prove that encampment is a Good Thing and measurable improves cadet retention and performance.
When the Rand folks heard that we have some self-identified transgender cadets, they included that question in the survey to help measure whether that particular group of cadets is underserved by CAP and/or CEAP.
Really not much more to it. Both the AF and CAP want the program to continue. But when you are spending hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars, you have to be able to justify it objectively.
Which is all the survey is trying to do.
I'm on the road for the next few days, but will try to check in and answer any additional concerns. I think I have a pretty good track record here for transparency.
Ned Lee
Col, CAP
National Cadet Program Manager
I don't see what the big deal is unless the survey is asking the person to also identify themselves by name or CAPID. When it comes to deciding who is getting government money, these types of demographics are used to make that decision.
I overall think the survey is a good idea.
But there is one thing I want to mention. I don't want to be that annoying person. I also don't know any transgender cadets who have answered this survey, so I don't know what they think. I'm just writing this because I know that words are important in the LGBTQ+ community. But knowing a few people who identify as being gender non binary, most of the time on surveys and stuff people put "other" as the choice for transgender people. That's because "other" can include people who are gender fluid, agender, ect. I don't remember the exact words the survey used, but if it's referring to gender then there could be a cadet who identifies as female, and that is her gender. While her sex may be male, her gender is female. So she is transgender and female at the same time.
For those who may think people are jumping the gun on this my family takes this very seriously. There is all sorts of data mining from many sources going on in regards to education and the common core initiatives which I find concerning. And while the purpose makes sense, the execution and wording is what I'm apprehensive about and would like clarification on. And since I don't have any children of cadet age yet to read the survey first person, I would like to ask:
Was the survey structured so all responders were anonymous? Much in the same way a Unit Climate Assessment survey is for the Air Force (if that is familiar to you)? Or is it merely we won't tell what you told us?
Was there pre-notification regarding the survey? Or will a notice be sent to the units trying to get a hold of parents in regards to what is being asked?
Is the future of the program contingent on this survey?
If they were trying to identify if the program worked why wasn't it sent to only program participants and applicants? What is the need for the data from those who didn't use the program?
Weren't demographics supplied through the applications and existing Cadet records and verifiable through attendance records? Special needs cadets are (or at least should be) identified prior to encampments and activities.
I think the most concerning part for me is the separate e-mail to both parent/guardian and minor/child. Why duplicate? Why not survey the family? The precedent exists, but sending out two different messages both seeking such highly personal information seems like an attempt to check answers against each other. That might seem a little conspiratorial for some but with some major overreaches from differing sources going on I believe in prudence and clarification.
Quote from: Airplane girl on October 06, 2015, 12:17:32 AM
I'm just writing this because I know that words are important in the LGBTQ+ community.
Words and actions are important to everyone. To me, family is everything. And I will raise my children to the best of my abilities. Not to get too personal, but my views come from my own experiences and observations in public school which was intrusive, demeaning, and all together unpleasant. Many of my teachers (from 5th grade until I turned to homeschool in 9th grade, and I then noticed the same trend in college) had given up educating and were pushing their world view onto highly impressionable youth. Especially before critical thinking skills had truly been cemented. So, when you remove a child from the home environment and place him or her into the care of another for a handful of hours or days at a time one can only react when the information comes along and request clarification. There are many issues right now in regards to how the changes to education are being implemented and the information being presented. Basically anything that attempts to circumvent parental rights and push views onto a child is a disquieting thought, even if at a later point the evidence proves that I did initially jump the gun.
I just spent 5 minutes to take the survey and thought it was reasonable. Perhaps younger cadets may want some form of supervision while taking it from their parents, but older cadets should be more than capable of doing it by themselves. It was non-specific in the way it asked the questions and I thought it was generally appropriate, even a little too general which was mitigated by the last comment box (allowing me to clear up my lack of participation in the last year).
Quote from: Paul_AK on October 06, 2015, 12:35:10 AM
Quote from: Airplane girl on October 06, 2015, 12:17:32 AM
I'm just writing this because I know that words are important in the LGBTQ+ community.
Words and actions are important to everyone. To me, family is everything. And I will raise my children to the best of my abilities. Not to get too personal, but my views come from my own experiences and observations in public school which was intrusive, demeaning, and all together unpleasant. Many of my teachers (from 5th grade until I turned to homeschool in 9th grade, and I then noticed the same trend in college) had given up educating and were pushing their world view onto highly impressionable youth. Especially before critical thinking skills had truly been cemented. So, when you remove a child from the home environment and place him or her into the care of another for a handful of hours or days at a time one can only react when the information comes along and request clarification. There are many issues right now in regards to how the changes to education are being implemented and the information being presented. Basically anything that attempts to circumvent parental rights and push views onto a child is a disquieting thought, even if at a later point the evidence proves that I did initially jump the gun.
A friend of mine told me last year that in his graduating class there was a student who could not read or write, our education system has radically changed when you get a diploma for showing up for 12 years instead of having to *gasp* learn something
I didn't receive anything from NHQ about this survey going out.
At a minimum, I would think that we in command positions should receive notification that our cadets are being surveyed - if for no other reason, to at least allow us to mention it to the cadets. I'd think every CC, Deputy CC for Cadets, or Deputy CC in cadet squadrons, should get notification. I don't see anything in e-mail.
I found out about it because cadets expressed concern about the personal nature of these questions. I sure don't like finding out that way, especially if we're going to get questions from parents about the personal nature of the questions. Did I miss a notification?
COL Lee, thanks for the reasoned reply and dash of humor (appreciated).
While I appreciate the underlying reasons, as a parent I am still furious, and have to tell you that I'd have expected more forethought here. Those of us who do NOT have parental emails linked to their cadets profiles in eServices have nonetheless had our minor children receive these surveys, without notice to us as their parents.
Thus, (A) National HQ CAP is in violation of our own Cadet Protection Policy in directly and anonymously contacting many of our minor cadets with questions specifically asking about their sexual orientation without informing anyone at Wing Commander level or below, NOR their own parents, and (B) National HQ CAP is in apparent violation of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act by asking minors (some of whom are under age 13) a number of detailed questions without the informed consent of we, their parents or guardians.
This issue is independent of any views on whether homosexuality is either deviant behavior or a rainbow spectrum of happiness. It is about a blatant departure from good practice, and violation of law in asking sexual orientation and medical and other sensitive questions of minors without consent or even information. You have no right to start emailing my kids asking them leading questions regarding sexual orientation (AT ALL), regarding medical disability, regarding income levels, or anything else without ensuring positive informed consent of me as a parent. This is my right under CAP policy and federal law, which CAP has broken here.
Mac, thanks yes, I had called NHQ and left a message (it was 1620 local time there, they were closed). My Wing Commander has stated that he wasn't given the courtesy of any advance copy (I wasn't either as a Squadron/CC), that he is also responding up the chain, and he's stated that he's not letting his daughter answer it either.
Who at NHQ primed Rand to ask these sort of questions ("when the Rand folks heard..."), and who told them to send max distro without informing ALL parents and subordinate Commanders? As a parent, I am furious, I am not alone, and I want to know who authorized this and that it won't happen ever again.
V/R,
Spam
PS - Airplane girl, yeah, I think the survey is a good idea too. Colonel Lee has made a good explanation of why. The way it is worded with sexually oriented language and the way it blind sides some moms and dads is wrong, though. NO discussion of sexuality or leading questions about it belong in our volunteer workplace, or from CAP to adolescents without telling their moms and dads, despite how someone at HQ would apparently like it to be.
PS - Nuke52, step off. If you're accusing me of drunkenness, you're off the mark with your ad hominem attack.
I just notified my CDC and CC who were unaware of this...
excellent points Spam you hit the nail on the head
Quote from: Spam on October 06, 2015, 02:39:34 AM
You have no right to start emailing my kids asking them leading questions regarding sexual orientation (AT ALL),
Actually, they are not asking about sexual orientation. They are asking gender identity. There is a difference.
Spam, I understand where you are coming from with disagreeing with the survey asking cadets if they are transgender.
However, there is a difference in asking someone's sexuality and their gender. I would be really annoyed if they asked me if I was gay or straight or asexual or any other sexual orientation. Gender is something entirely different. There are people who don't identify as either female or male, and they probably wouldn't like it if there wasn't an option for their gender (which is also why I think it should say other and not just transgender). If a cadet hasn't told anyone the gender they really identify as yet, they can put in their biological gender.
Although, I guess it would be a good thing for parents to know about the survey first. Even though it didn't really bother me (as a cadet) I understand why some parents might not like it.
Since I did not get the survey, does the survey ask for any of the following information:
-A first and last name;
-A home or other physical address including street name and name of a city or town;
-Online contact information as defined in this section;
-A screen or user name where it functions in the same manner as online contact information, as defined in this section;
-A telephone number;
-A Social Security number;
-A persistent identifier that can be used to recognize a user over time and across different Web sites or online services. Such persistent identifier includes, but is not limited to, a customer number held in a cookie, an Internet Protocol (IP) address, a processor or device serial number, or unique device identifier;
-A photograph, video, or audio file where such file contains a child's image or voice;
-Geolocation information sufficient to identify street name and name of a city or town; or
-Information concerning the child or the parents of that child that the operator collects online from the child and combines with an identifier described in this definition.
As a Unit CC, I received a notice from NHQ last week or so that the survey was coming.
They should have had just Male, Female, and Other to cover that can of worms....
Here we go with another tempest in tea pot so typical of CAP Talk. You took the money and the survey is the cost welcome to the world.
Quote from: thebeggerpie on October 06, 2015, 03:56:39 AM
They should have had just Male, Female, and Other to cover that can of worms....
How is "other" any different?
Quote from: Airplane girl on October 06, 2015, 03:02:16 AM
If a cadet hasn't told anyone the gender they really identify as yet,
... then a survey from Civil Air Patrol is NOT the place to be pushing that envelope with adolescents.
Quote from: LSThiker on October 06, 2015, 02:55:13 AM
Actually, they are not asking about sexual orientation. They are asking gender identity. There is a difference.
Sure, I get that, and yield the difference (and to your bio expertise, Sir). Still inappropriate. Gender is physiological and is an easy two value answer - M/F - and is appropriate.
Pushing the third option opens the "can of worms" debate about psychosexual development and gender identity which is inappropriate for a CAP survey or discussion with the developing adolescents in our care. I have had interesting debates about this with friends who are "in the life" - ADULT friends whom I love, from all points of the spectrum. I would never, though, as a CP officer, start, prompt or allow such discussions with a minor - someone else's child, who is still in a highly impressionable developmental stage - without their parent being involved, as that is as clear a violation of our policy.
CAP should stay OUT of leading questions to adolescents, period, and should not be asking questions of them at all without prior parental ok. This is divisive. Also, since you asked, LSThiker, yeah, persistent identifier info on our cadets' IP addresses and email addresses of respondents are stored in survey monkey results by default, and the creators can decide what they want to do with them, as they are already associated with names via the NHQ database (check their kb help center, its all there). One of the questions about disabilities mentions autism as an example, and as I have a son with an autistic spectrum disorder, I have come to be very sensitized about how information on him is collected and treated, counted, and used, because of misuse of data in the past. Many who are teenagers, childless, or haven't had to deal with this specific situation, may not appreciate the sensitivity there either.
Thanks for those of you with sincere, thoughtful replies, teammates.
Spam
Quote from: Spam on October 06, 2015, 04:24:18 AM
Sure, I get that, and yield the difference (and to your bio expertise, Sir). Still inappropriate. Gender is physiological and is an easy two value answer - M/F - and is appropriate.
No. Sex is the biological male or female status as assigned by our genetics (and really external genitalia). Gender identity, however, refers to the internal sense of being male, female, or some other category. Gender is based on social constructs, activities, behaviors, and other attributes as assigned by the society. Sexual orientation, just for clarification, is what that person is attracted to or have sexual desires for. These categories are all unrelated as they describe very specific details.
Whether the question is appropriate or not depends on what the question that needs to be answered. Without that knowledge, it may or may not, be an appropriate question.
Thanks for the reply. I was following the prompt of the actual question language, which was phrased: "What is your gender" (vice "sex", which would have been correct), with "Transgender" the third option). So, they may be mixing terms.
We're getting too deep into semantics here, though. The issue is simple, and not complex - they have no business asking. CAP is not the place to prompt children to ask, answer, or discuss these questions of gender identity. The fact that someone thinks they can and should ask a question about it at all, and put Rand Corp. up to asking it, indicates that we have a problem that needs fixing.
Thanks,
Spam
(In a hotel room on my phone -I apologize for format, spelling, and brevity.)
In response to a few concerns, the survey is completely anonymous. We do not at ask for, nor track, personal identifiying information. We did not ask for name, CAPSN, or similar data. Just charter number and some necessary demographic information like age, gender, and ethnicity. We absolutely do not plant cookies or use any other technology to help track the data.
We don't ask for any sort of family income estimate. We simply asked if they receive free or reduced price school lunches; which was one of the ways we allowed folks to self-identify as Priority 1 CEAP participants. (and one of the available responses is "not sure.")
The entire survey is 37 questions and takes less than 10 minutes to complete. The great majority of questions are devoted to assessing cadet-specific items, like how active they are with their squadron, college / tech school plans, amount of exercise, quality of diet, etc. things that might be affected by the encampment experience.
It appears that most of the sensitivity here has been raised by the first question: "What is your gender?" And the provision of three possible responses. It is worth remembering that the survey was prepared by the scientists at the Rand Corporation. The world-class research and analysis think tank providing services to the armed forces. And in this case, under a contract with the Air Force to examine our encampment program.
I may be missing something, but it does not seem unusual to ask a survey participant to self-identify their gender, especially when gender appears to be a factor in evaluating the encampment experience. And like it or not, CAP has a small number of cadets that are transgendered. They deserve our respect, and if they choose to anonymously self identify on our survey, the Rand folks believe it will improve their ability to provide the requested metrics. Which should assist us in maintains this important funding resource for our cadets going forward.
Are there any other questions I can answer one letter at a time on my phone?
Ned Lee
has life really become this complicated?
Quote from: Flying Pig on October 06, 2015, 10:36:41 AM
has life really become this complicated?
No but I see where Spam is coming from not only as fellow CAP officer but also as a parent as well and I agree that this is something that should not have been sent to cadets.
Lt Col Lee. Was this survey sent to you and the rest of the DCP folks to look over before being sent out? Because honestly if this org or any other org sent a survey to my children I'd be having some words for them.
If the AF and NHQ absolutely had to have the information this survey should have been sent to the parents to complete and a heads up should have been given to the subordinate commanders.
Yes we must be stewards of the AF's money and yes they invested a good chunk into the CEAP which was awesome of them to do but I think that they can do a better job of sending their data collection attempts out.
I am sure you have enough data from those who applied for the funds this past year to have a target demographic for whom to send the survey and I think a note to take from it and to send to RAND corp is to send this to parents and not the cadets.
And is our emails and especially minor emails something that we are suppose to protect as part of PII?
Quote from: Ned on October 06, 2015, 09:32:37 AM
(In a hotel room on my phone -I apologize for format, spelling, and brevity.)
In response to a few concerns, the survey is completely anonymous. We do not at ask for, nor track, personal identifiying information. We did not ask for name, CAPSN, or similar data. Just charter number and some necessary demographic information like age, gender, and ethnicity. We absolutely do not plant cookies or use any other technology to help track the data.
We don't ask for any sort of family income estimate. We simply asked if they receive free or reduced price school lunches; which was one of the ways we allowed folks to self-identify as Priority 1 CEAP participants. (and one of the available responses is "not sure.")
The entire survey is 37 questions and takes less than 10 minutes to complete. The great majority of questions are devoted to assessing cadet-specific items, like how active they are with their squadron, college / tech school plans, amount of exercise, quality of diet, etc. things that might be affected by the encampment experience.
It appears that most of the sensitivity here has been raised by the first question: "What is your gender?" And the provision of three possible responses. It is worth remembering that the survey was prepared by the scientists at the Rand Corporation. The world-class research and analysis think tank providing services to the armed forces. And in this case, under a contract with the Air Force to examine our encampment program.
I may be missing something, but it does not seem unusual to ask a survey participant to self-identify their gender, especially when gender appears to be a factor in evaluating the encampment experience. And like it or not, CAP has a small number of cadets that are transgendered. They deserve our respect, and if they choose to anonymously self identify on our survey, the Rand folks believe it will improve their ability to provide the requested metrics. Which should assist us in maintains this important funding resource for our cadets going forward.
Are there any other questions I can answer one letter at a time on my phone?
Ned Lee
I have not seen this survey, but on every survey I have ever taken questions on race, gender, and disability have an option that says "I choose not to answer this question"
I am grateful the Air Force has made the commitment to help cadets go to encampment. I also understand the purpose of a survey to gauge future needs. All surveys ask "personal" questions to understand sample size and determine credibility. The Rand Corp. designed the survey, and the AF approved its distribution. There is no way specific individual can be identified, nor does the Air Force care, however I do wonder why the survey wasn't directed to parents. This is a survey which will determine financial support; not "other" reasons. Maybe there is a reason why the Air Force wanted to survey cadets directly. They (USAF) are the benefactors, and they will determine the extent of their future contributions.
In any event, the distribution of the survey was allowed by those above Mr. LaFond's pay grade. Col Lee has given a good explanation of things. Expect more of the same, as the Air Force is probably determining how far we will go as "Airmen". This should be a good thing, as we are now part of the "Total Force"...
I saw the advance copy a week or so ago, the distribution list was pretty extensive...
One thing to remember here is CAP's commitment to equal opportunity and non-discrimination. Perhaps one of the reasons behind the gender identity questions is to confirm that we do not (did not) discriminate against trans-gendered cadets in the distribution of the taxpayer provided encampment funds. I.E. "We can't send Jane to encampment, even though she's financially disadvantaged, because she was born as John. We aren't quite sure how to deal with that and don't want to be bothered with figuring it out."
JMHO...
I've honestly got to say that nothing mentioned as actually being on the survey sounds in any way inappropriate to me. It's all pretty much standard demographic information.
Quote from: jeders on October 06, 2015, 01:15:09 PM
I've honestly got to say that nothing mentioned as actually being on the survey sounds in any way inappropriate to me. It's all pretty much standard demographic information.
And you missed the OP point. It was sent directly to cadets, no notice to the parents, and no notice to their commands. Bad form when dealing with children.
In the trash this time and there will not be a next.
"View this email in your browser
You are receiving this email because of your relationship with Civil Air Patrol. Please reconfirm your interest in receiving emails from us. If you do not wish to receive any more emails, you can unsubscribe here.
This message was sent to XXXXXXXXX by noreply@capnhq.gov
105 S Hansell St Bldg 714, Maxwell AFB, AL, 36112"
Quote from: Paul_AK on October 06, 2015, 12:24:18 AM
For those who may think people are jumping the gun on this my family takes this very seriously. There is all sorts of data mining from many sources going on in regards to education and the common core initiatives which I find concerning.
Per Survey Monkey Help Center "You can track how many people opened the invitation or clicked through to the survey, as well as who responded to your survey. Collectors by default store the IP addresses of respondents in survey results, which you may find useful for tracking respondents."
Results will not be shared, however RAND will know who and how someone responded and who did not.
Quote from: Spam on October 06, 2015, 06:45:21 AM
Thanks for the reply. I was following the prompt of the actual question language, which was phrased: "What is your gender" (vice "sex", which would have been correct), with "Transgender" the third option). So, they may be mixing terms.
We're getting too deep into semantics here, though. The issue is simple, and not complex - they have no business asking. CAP is not the place to prompt children to ask, answer, or discuss these questions of gender identity. The fact that someone thinks they can and should ask a question about it at all, and put Rand Corp. up to asking it, indicates that we have a problem that needs fixing.
This is not a semantics discussion. Rather you keep using the wrong words, which have been given rather specific definitions. Their question, as you state, "What is your gender" is not using the term gender incorrectly as evidenced by the responses. It is specifically asking about gender and gender identity: Male, Female, Transgender (although I would have expanded that last).
The question, which Ned has clarified as to the purpose, is appropriate. The RAND Corp and the USAF (and probably NHQ), want to know specifically about transgender cadets. Therefore, the only way to ascertain this information is to ask if they identify as male, female, or transgender.
It is clear that you do not have a problem with the question "What is your gender?", but rather the fact they included the third response "transgender". Had they only listed Male and Female, we would not be having this conversation. However, the fact remains there are both seniors and cadets, as well as the general population, that identify as transgender, regardless of whether you agree with it or not. This question is no more "invasive" than simply asking "What is your sex?".
Gender dysphoria is something this country is currently in the process of recognizing and understanding. It has been officially listed as a medical condition (ICD-9-CM: 302.85 or ICD-10: 64.8 and 64.9). The US Military, the Prison System/Justice System, State Vital Records, etc are all now having to figure out how to sort the gender question out. Frankly, I am not surprised CAP has had to step into this as it seems it has come up in the past before. Nevertheless, CAP must remain an organization that promotes equality and non-discrimination.
Quote from: Flying Pig on October 06, 2015, 10:36:41 AM
has life really become this complicated?
No, life has been complicated since about 3.8 BYA. Humans have been dealing with life's complexity since about 200,000 years ago. The problem is, we are just now understanding this tiny aspect of life, which makes it seem complicated. Just for clarification, I am not saying that gender dysphoria is a tiny issue for a person, rather in the relative complexity of life, gender as a whole is a rather tiny portion of it.
Quote from: THRAWN on October 06, 2015, 01:18:07 PM
and no notice to their commands.
Well, that seems to be a mixed bag as some commanders have reported not seeing it, while others have.
Quote from: CAPs1 on October 06, 2015, 01:29:19 PM
Quote from: Paul_AK on October 06, 2015, 12:24:18 AM
For those who may think people are jumping the gun on this my family takes this very seriously. There is all sorts of data mining from many sources going on in regards to education and the common core initiatives which I find concerning.
Per Survey Monkey Help Center "You can track how many people opened the invitation or clicked through to the survey, as well as who responded to your survey. Collectors by default store the IP addresses of respondents in survey results, which you may find useful for tracking respondents."
Results will not be shared, however RAND will know who and how someone responded and who did not.
Not quite that RAND will know how someone responded. It depends on how RAND has setup the survey, which the corporation is fully aware of Child Online Protection Laws, SurveyMonkey's Terms and Conditions, and many other legalities of survey collections. As per SurveyMonkey Website:
QuoteAnonymity
It's up to each survey creator to decide to collect responses anonymously or to capture respondents' personal information. Respondents' personal information can be captured by the survey creator in two ways: by expressly asking you for your personal details (name, address, etc.) and by configuring the survey to automatically capture your IP address and/or email address.
SurveyMonkey provides several survey distribution methods called collectors. Every collector type has different settings that affect the survey-taking experience.
•All of collectors allow the survey creator to collect responses anonymously.
•All collection methods permit the tracking of respondent IP addresses.
•Anyone using the Email Invitation Collector could potentially track an email address on the response.
Survey creators may have their own privacy policies which apply to surveys that they create using our services and that detail how they handle your personally identifiable information.
•We encourage you to read any such policy, or to contact the survey creator directly to ask them any questions about their privacy practices.
•If the survey creator has not disclosed the collection method in the introduction of the survey, please contact them to verify if the response is anonymous.
Note that although survey creators may choose to collect responses anonymously, creators may still from include specific demographic survey questions that ask you for personally identifiable information. Review our Privacy Policy and how we handle respondents' personal information.
Quote from: Ned on October 06, 2015, 09:32:37 AM
(In a hotel room on my phone -I apologize for format, spelling, and brevity.)
In response to a few concerns, the survey is completely anonymous. We do not at ask for, nor track, personal identifiying information. We did not ask for name, CAPSN, or similar data. Just charter number and some necessary demographic information like age, gender, and ethnicity. We absolutely do not plant cookies or use any other technology to help track the data.
With the information asked for, one can easily determine which cadet in a unit you are getting information about. Or at least narrow it to a couple.
I also did not receive any notice about this survey as a unit/cc.
Spam,
I appreciate the same concerns you have as outlined in your original post on the matter.
Not being a paladin for the LGBTQ+ cause, I found other issues (income, diet, family structure) and other questions do not reconcile with data needed to justify AF dollars.
Ned, let someone know that admitting to a faux pas, doesn't carry consequences. Just like the surveys I am told.
Quote from: THRAWN on October 06, 2015, 01:18:07 PM
Quote from: jeders on October 06, 2015, 01:15:09 PM
I've honestly got to say that nothing mentioned as actually being on the survey sounds in any way inappropriate to me. It's all pretty much standard demographic information.
And you missed the OP point. It was sent directly to cadets, no notice to the parents, and no notice to their commands. Bad form when dealing with children.
Actually I went back and read the OPs first post, nowhere in it does he mention being upset that parents weren't told about the survey. His entire argument was that the question was asked; which is ridiculous. Also, as a commander, I did get a notice from NHQ about this survey going out.
The fact of the matter is that, as LSThiker has pointed out, we as a society are just starting to figure out and understand this whole gender identity/gender dysphoria issue. As a result, things that we used to take for granted are going to evolve into something less familiar (such as the gender question). As for the family income question, I don't ever remember a serious survey that didn't ask that.
Take it like the CAPF 161, on which my copy contains multiple fields with "NOYDB" (None of your darned business).
Quote from: jeders on October 06, 2015, 02:07:48 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on October 06, 2015, 01:18:07 PM
Quote from: jeders on October 06, 2015, 01:15:09 PM
I've honestly got to say that nothing mentioned as actually being on the survey sounds in any way inappropriate to me. It's all pretty much standard demographic information.
And you missed the OP point. It was sent directly to cadets, no notice to the parents, and no notice to their commands. Bad form when dealing with children.
Actually I went back and read the OPs first post, nowhere in it does he mention being upset that parents weren't told about the survey. His entire argument was that the question was asked; which is ridiculous. Also, as a commander, I did get a notice from NHQ about this survey going out.
The fact of the matter is that, as LSThiker has pointed out, we as a society are just starting to figure out and understand this whole gender identity/gender dysphoria issue. As a result, things that we used to take for granted are going to evolve into something less familiar (such as the gender question). As for the family income question, I don't ever remember a serious survey that didn't ask that.
Go back and read it slowly. Move your lips if you have to. He is TO'd about the question and the sneaky "it's our little secret" manner in which it was asked. As far as you being a commander and receiving notice, you seem to be in the minority.
He also included this "How does NHQ/CP get off, pushing this leading question about sexuality to my kids while promising no one will tell? As a parent, I am furious." That's a gem. CPP be [darn]ed, the Umbrella Corporation NEEDS this information!. Did it ever occur to anyone that sending this type of survey out to kids will lead to discussions within families that they may not be willing or prepared to have? I realize that being trans-whatever is the shiny ball of tinfoil that we should all be focused on right now, but this should have been routed through the commanders to the parents, not the kids.
I get enough of this stuff on my other social media sites. My opinion is that we live in an era where we are slowly moving away from traditional labels to a more homogeneous system. For instance, I was surprised to learn that I am called cisgender. Basically, that means I was pulled out of my mom, the doctor took a look at my plumbing and declared I am a male. This is according to some social anthropologist or something. It has zero to do with who I am, how I choose to identify, or how I live my life.
If CAP, Inc. wants to know what cadets are male, female, trans, whatever, they can do so, BUT don't blindside and cut out the parents. It's not their place to put the onus on the kid to say "hey, mom n dad, CAP sent me this survey, imma fill it out." Also, keep in mind some jag, like me when I was a teen, would probably jack around with the answers just for fun, thus skewing the results.
Spam, as my CC, has time and again put the cadets first against the bureaucracy. I, as his deputy, also did not get any kind of notification about this survey, and had I, I would have counseled caution to my cadets, asking them to notify their parents about it and go over the questions. That, too, may have skewed results, but I opt for full transparency when it comes to CAP's relationship with cadets.
Quote from: Garibaldi on October 06, 2015, 02:20:12 PM
... but I opt for full transparency when it comes to CAP's relationship with cadets.
CAP's relationship with cadet will go through parents until they are 18.
CAP has other issues to address, vital to its survival rather than embracing movements, efforts outside of it boundaries.
Must have come with being part of the Total Force package.
Quote from: THRAWN on October 06, 2015, 02:18:51 PM
Go back and read it slowly. Move your lips if you have to.
Really livin' that core value of respect there, aren't ya?
QuoteHe is TO'd about the question
I believe that's what I said, but feel free to not realize that.
Quoteand the sneaky "it's our little secret" manner in which it was asked.
Actually, it was more of a, "we're not going to go around telling your private information to everyone. If you identify a problem/personal issue here that you haven't identified with your chain of command, we aren't going to tell them." Again, feel free not to understand that.
QuoteAs far as you being a commander and receiving notice, you seem to be in the minority.
I really don't, but whatever. If other commanders have email notifications from national turned off, then this kind of thing happens. Maybe they should turn notifications back on. If the email went to a spam folder or to a dead account (seen it happen), then there's nothing I can say to fix that one.
QuoteHe also included this "How does NHQ/CP get off, pushing this leading question about sexuality to my kids while promising no one will tell? As a parent, I am furious."
Which simply shows that he has a clear misunderstanding about the question. No one was leading anyone to talk about their sexuality or sexual orientation, they were asking about gender. I know they use a lot of the same big words like male and female, but they aren't the same topic. This is another case of someone who doesn't understand issues overreacting.
QuoteCPP be [darn]ed
Where was CPP even close to being breached? Last time I checked, asking which gender you are does not violate any rules or best practices.
QuoteDid it ever occur to anyone that sending this type of survey out to kids will lead to discussions within families that they may not be willing or prepared to have?
Seriously? I'd rather generate discussions within a family where the parents can guide their children based on their own values rather than have others guide them. If this question sparks an uncomfortable conversation (which I very highly doubt that it will), then that's an unintended bonus. Also, bare in mind that unless you keep your children cloistered at home, they likely already know about transgender and don't really care.
QuoteI realize that being trans-whatever is the shiny ball of tinfoil that we should all be focused on right now, but this should have been routed through the commanders to the parents, not the kids.
So that it could be blocked by commanders who feel it is their righteous duty to "protect" children from uncomfortable conversations; no. National did what they should have done, formulate a survey with input from key stake holders (the air force) using experts (RAND Corp.) and then send it in the most direct way possible to the intended sample population (cadets) while also notifying commanders.
I keep hearing people say that they haven't seen the survey so they can't comment. Here is the link for y'all.
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/JJD3BZ5 (https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/JJD3BZ5)
Quote from: jeders on October 06, 2015, 03:31:17 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on October 06, 2015, 02:18:51 PM
Go back and read it slowly. Move your lips if you have to.
Really livin' that core value of respect there, aren't ya?
QuoteHe is TO'd about the question
I believe that's what I said, but feel free to not realize that.
Quoteand the sneaky "it's our little secret" manner in which it was asked.
Actually, it was more of a, "we're not going to go around telling your private information to everyone. If you identify a problem/personal issue here that you haven't identified with your chain of command, we aren't going to tell them." Again, feel free not to understand that.
QuoteAs far as you being a commander and receiving notice, you seem to be in the minority.
I really don't, but whatever. If other commanders have email notifications from national turned off, then this kind of thing happens. Maybe they should turn notifications back on. If the email went to a spam folder or to a dead account (seen it happen), then there's nothing I can say to fix that one.
QuoteHe also included this "How does NHQ/CP get off, pushing this leading question about sexuality to my kids while promising no one will tell? As a parent, I am furious."
Which simply shows that he has a clear misunderstanding about the question. No one was leading anyone to talk about their sexuality or sexual orientation, they were asking about gender. I know they use a lot of the same big words like male and female, but they aren't the same topic. This is another case of someone who doesn't understand issues overreacting.
QuoteCPP be [darn]ed
Where was CPP even close to being breached? Last time I checked, asking which gender you are does not violate any rules or best practices.
QuoteDid it ever occur to anyone that sending this type of survey out to kids will lead to discussions within families that they may not be willing or prepared to have?
Seriously? I'd rather generate discussions within a family where the parents can guide their children based on their own values rather than have others guide them. If this question sparks an uncomfortable conversation (which I very highly doubt that it will), then that's an unintended bonus. Also, bare in mind that unless you keep your children cloistered at home, they likely already know about transgender and don't really care.
QuoteI realize that being trans-whatever is the shiny ball of tinfoil that we should all be focused on right now, but this should have been routed through the commanders to the parents, not the kids.
So that it could be blocked by commanders who feel it is their righteous duty to "protect" children from uncomfortable conversations; no. National did what they should have done, formulate a survey with input from key stake holders (the air force) using experts (RAND Corp.) and then send it in the most direct way possible to the intended sample population (cadets) while also notifying commanders.
You play well. You will go far.
In CAP.
If, as claimed, the singular purpose of this was to help gauge the success regarding the grant program, and supposedly done by a professional and experienced company, then why is the opening line so broadly worded?
"We need your help determining what effect the Civil Air Patrol Cadet Program is having upon young people."
In a society requiring legal and scholarly exactness, why is this so broad? This would seem to imply a little more than just trying to figure out how to better help kids through a single initiative or grant. If transparency is your aim, then a better stated goal or research question is imperative. That, and if the goal was to measure the success of the AF's money in this regard, why send it out to all Cadets?
"This survey is confidential. CAP National Headquarters will NOT let your squadron or wing leaders know how you've answered."
This survey asks for HIPAA related information, I did not see a HIPAA notice prior to the survey. Was it included in another portion? And if notification was sent to parents or guardians, considering their legal responsibilities, were they notified of their HIPAA protections? This information is defined by 45 CFR 160.103 as follows:
Health information means any information, including genetic information, whether oral or recorded in any form or medium, that:
(1) Is created or received by a health care provider, health plan, public health authority, employer, life insurer, school or university, or health care clearinghouse; and
(2) Relates to the past, present, or future physical or mental health or condition of an individual; the provision of health care to an individual; or the past, present, or future payment for the provision of health care to an individual.
This might also fall under the Privacy Act, 5 USC 552a, but since they are not keeping records of the originating location, the wording may render that notification unnecessary "(B) but does not include—(i) matches performed to produce aggregate statistical data without any personal identifiers" under the definition of Computer Matching Program. It could be argued that anything electronic somehow retrievable by outside parties especially the originating location, and by cross referencing Personally Identifiable Information from other sources. Until the legal definition is changed they appear to be abiding by the law there, although the preceding sections certainly discuss the PII CAP sought to solicit from minors. Even if not legally required, it still might have been a good idea, though, "CYA" and all. It would've taken the designers an extra ten minutes to copy, paste, and post the wording onto the survey.
I did the honest thing and clicked "I'm not a Cadet" for the first question and was rendered ineligible, so I have to go by what I'm being informed is the content.
Quote from: Paul_AK on October 06, 2015, 04:35:48 PM
If, as claimed, the singular purpose of this was to help gauge the success regarding the grant program, and supposedly done by a professional and experienced company, then why is the opening line so broadly worded?
"We need your help determining what effect the Civil Air Patrol Cadet Program is having upon young people."
In a society requiring legal and scholarly exactness, why is this so broad? This would seem to imply a little more than just trying to figure out how to better help kids through a single initiative or grant.
When you need to write survey's, they are written in the most basic form to ensure those persons with low education can read and understand the language.
Quote
This survey asks for HIPAA related information, I did not see a HIPAA notice prior to the survey. Was it included in another portion? And if notification was sent to parents or guardians, considering their legal responsibilities, were they notified of their HIPAA protections? This information is defined by 45 CFR 160.103 as follows:
Health information means any information, including genetic information, whether oral or recorded in any form or medium, that:
(1) Is created or received by a health care provider, health plan, public health authority, employer, life insurer, school or university, or health care clearinghouse; and
Because CAP is neither of these listed, therefore HIPAA does not apply.
Quote from: jeders on October 06, 2015, 03:31:17 PM
QuoteI realize that being trans-whatever is the shiny ball of tinfoil that we should all be focused on right now, but this should have been routed through the commanders to the parents, not the kids.
So that it could be blocked by commanders who feel it is their righteous duty to "protect" children from uncomfortable conversations; no. National did what they should have done, formulate a survey with input from key stake holders (the air force) using experts (RAND Corp.) and then send it in the most direct way possible to the intended sample population (cadets) while also notifying commanders.
From what Col Lee stated, it was not CAP who formulated the survey, however your conclusion is valid. That some of the demographic questions seem "uncomfortable" to some is not surprising. It is not, IMHO, a breach of ethics, core values, or law to distribute the survey as done, or is it "inappropriate". The Air Force and CAP decided on this. The organization understands this may have some negative consequences, and is willing to deal with it. I'm sure our leadership is thrilled the USAF is willing to spend significant dollars used to develop our cadet programs, and give our cadets more and better opportunities. Positive change is not easy; we all need to deal with it.
Quote from: jeders on October 06, 2015, 03:31:17 PM
So that it could be blocked by commanders who feel it is their righteous duty to "protect" children from uncomfortable conversations; no. National did what they should have done, formulate a survey with input from key stake holders (the air force) using experts (RAND Corp.) and then send it in the most direct way possible to the intended sample population (cadets) while also notifying commanders.
It is
NOT CAP's duty, obligation, responsibility, or privilege, to force societal views onto kids or the membership in general by circumventing parental rights. I do not care which agency or who the authority is, I thought everyone was entitled to Constitutional protections? We have standards of conduct and values which must be adhered to but not defining moral code so as to allow for membership from all walks of life. The Protection Policy and every bit of Character Development reiterates not to force views, to be tolerant.
Tolerance is not blind acceptance. If you were speaking of a steel girder, it would have a tolerance to load bearing, temperature, and motion. If any of those are surpassed, the structure and girder itself will fail. When I attended NESA in 2003 their stated definition of tolerance was "endurance without complaint" in regards to "I will not lie, cheat, steal, nor tolerate anyone who does". In this case we cannot discuss the contents here without discussing the political viewpoints and faiths of the individual member. And since we would all like a society, where everyone can enjoy the freedoms guaranteed by our founding documents and subsequent amendments, we can tolerate (see above description) alternative or opposing viewpoints with the hope that they will still see a person at the end. But what you advocated by a governmental organization stepping in with the help of social workers and statisticians and even considering someone like a Unit CC (who is not a licensed therapist, psychiatrist, psychologist, or minister) and tossing aside the family structure many of us firmly believe in, you have shown a truly intolerant bias.
No matter how you look at it, the questions request suspect information, and are presented in a suspicious manner disregarding (whether intentional or not) a minor's legal guardian. And you lost absolutely all credibility to me when you implied you were in favor of that. All of these argument is predicated on two opposing worldviews and legal definitions. If there was any question as to the process or how it would be received it should have been halted until it could be ironed out. And a process should have been in place so there were no surprises.
Quote from: LSThiker on October 06, 2015, 04:45:28 PM
Quote from: Paul_AK on October 06, 2015, 04:35:48 PM
If, as claimed, the singular purpose of this was to help gauge the success regarding the grant program, and supposedly done by a professional and experienced company, then why is the opening line so broadly worded?
"We need your help determining what effect the Civil Air Patrol Cadet Program is having upon young people."
In a society requiring legal and scholarly exactness, why is this so broad? This would seem to imply a little more than just trying to figure out how to better help kids through a single initiative or grant.
When you need to write survey's, they are written in the most basic form to ensure those persons with low education can read and understand the language.
Quote
This survey asks for HIPAA related information, I did not see a HIPAA notice prior to the survey. Was it included in another portion? And if notification was sent to parents or guardians, considering their legal responsibilities, were they notified of their HIPAA protections? This information is defined by 45 CFR 160.103 as follows:
Health information means any information, including genetic information, whether oral or recorded in any form or medium, that:
(1) Is created or received by a health care provider, health plan, public health authority, employer, life insurer, school or university, or health care clearinghouse; and
Because CAP is neither of these listed, therefore HIPAA does not apply.
In a situation where legality comes into play, and where questions are raised, even specificities can be worded at a fifth grade level to concretely define our purpose. And protected information is covered, that is the point. I can't go up to anyone and legally without any need to know and especially not as a covered entity, ask their background, what kind of medication they take, or if they have mental or physical disabilities for any purpose and expect to be protected just because I'm not specifically listed. Protected Health Information is still Protected Health Information.
Quote from: Paul_AK on October 06, 2015, 04:35:48 PM
This survey asks for HIPAA related information, I did not see a HIPAA notice prior to the survey. Was it included in another portion? And if notification was sent to parents or guardians, considering their legal responsibilities, were they notified of their HIPAA protections? This information is defined by 45 CFR 160.103 as follows:
Quote
I did the honest thing and clicked "I'm not a Cadet" for the first question and was rendered ineligible, so I have to go by what I'm being informed is the content.
This right here invalidates your entire line of arguments. You did NOT read any part of the survey past the initial eligibility question and therefore do not know what was and was not asked or presented. Please stop claiming facts not in evidence.
Quote from: jeders on October 06, 2015, 05:51:52 PM
Quote from: Paul_AK on October 06, 2015, 04:35:48 PM
This survey asks for HIPAA related information, I did not see a HIPAA notice prior to the survey. Was it included in another portion? And if notification was sent to parents or guardians, considering their legal responsibilities, were they notified of their HIPAA protections? This information is defined by 45 CFR 160.103 as follows:
Quote
I did the honest thing and clicked "I'm not a Cadet" for the first question and was rendered ineligible, so I have to go by what I'm being informed is the content.
This right here invalidates your entire line of arguments. You did NOT read any part of the survey past the initial eligibility question and therefore do not know what was and was not asked or presented. Please stop claiming facts not in evidence.
So did it, then? I have been asking questions with no answers as of yet. The information I have been finding is worrisome and these concerns are not to be discounted. My argument is not invalidated simply because I have been referencing other users and then checking legality. How was anything invalidated? If access is restricted to content then someone should make the content in it's entirety public in text form so we can all see. Are you saying those who raised the alarm are someone lying in this thread? Please elaborate. IF evidence proves otherwise, then great and I will be the first to relent. Until then please refrain from the implied insults.
EDIT: I went back through the thread to see if I had missed something and I did find the post explaining the structure. I still am concerned with minors being asked to self report, what was being asked, and how it went around the parents.
Unless your kid lives under a rock, or completely off-grid, they have heard about transgender. Given our numbers in CAP, we can very safely assume that we have transgender members, in transition or not. We can safely assume that we have members of the LGBT community. Exactly how does that impact me or my family, IT DOES NOT. There is another word for a transgender cadet, PERSON. There is a word for a gay SM or Cadet, PEOPLE. If you want to keep your family and your children ignorant of humanity, then you better get under that rock right along with them, or I hear there are plenty of cults on the Utah Arizona border that don't allow TV, radio, or learning about dinosaurs.
We do not protect our children by making them ignorant of the people around them.
Sorry about the rant.
Quote from: CAPDCCMOM on October 06, 2015, 06:00:05 PM
Unless your kid lives under a rock, or completely off-grid, they have heard about transgender. Given our numbers in CAP, we can very safely assume that we have transgender members, in transition or not. We can safely assume that we have members of the LGBT community. Exactly how does that impact me or my family, IT DOES NOT. There is another word for a transgender cadet, PERSON. There is a word for a gay SM or Cadet, PEOPLE. If you want to keep your family and your children ignorant of humanity, then you better get under that rick right along with them, or I hear there are plenty of cults on the Utah Arizona border that don't allow TV, radio, or learning about dinosaurs.
We do not protect our children by making them ignorant of the people around them.
Sorry about the rant.
This has nothing to do with denying information and everything to do with circumventing legal rights in regards to minors and the questionable nature of what is being asked. We are not making children ignorant by demanding an organization, if there is indeed wrongdoing, respect parental concerns and NOT go direct to minors and ask them to self report highly sensitive regarding health and status.
EDIT: I went back through the thread to see if I had missed something and I did find the post explaining the structure. I still am concerned with minors being asked to self report, what was being asked, and how it went around the parents.
I'm sorry, Paul. I don't see how CAP is "circumventing legal rights" by asking questions in a survey. I've read it, and only the first few questions have to do with "demographics". I understand what your argument is, however I'm not buying into it. CAP is not forcing cadets to answer the questions, identify themselves, or to keep the survey confidential from parents.
BTW; asking cadets to disclose health information in an anonymous fashion (like in this survey) is not a violation of law or regulation. It's what's done with the information which can be problematic...
The cadet and/or parent can also click on the little red X in the upper right hand corner of the screen at any time and not answer the survey at all.
Quote from: CAPDCCMOM on October 06, 2015, 06:00:05 PM
Unless your kid lives under a rock, or completely off-grid, they have heard about transgender. Given our numbers in CAP, we can very safely assume that we have transgender members, in transition or not. We can safely assume that we have members of the LGBT community. Exactly how does that impact me or my family, IT DOES NOT. There is another word for a transgender cadet, PERSON. There is a word for a gay SM or Cadet, PEOPLE. If you want to keep your family and your children ignorant of humanity, then you better get under that rock right along with them, or I hear there are plenty of cults on the Utah Arizona border that don't allow TV, radio, or learning about dinosaurs.
We do not protect our children by making them ignorant of the people around them.
Sorry about the rant.
Correct.
They are better protected from ignorant rants.
Quote from: Al Sayre on October 06, 2015, 06:33:06 PM
The cadet and/or parent can also click on the little red X in the upper right hand corner of the screen at any time and not answer the survey at all.
Sure, if the parent knows about their child is being asked to complete a survey to begin with.
Quote from: FW on October 06, 2015, 06:28:47 PM
I'm sorry, Paul. I don't see how CAP is "circumventing legal rights" by asking questions in a survey. I've read it, and only the first few questions have to do with "demographics". I understand what your argument is, however I'm not buying into it. CAP is not forcing cadets to answer the questions, identify themselves, or to keep the survey confidential from parents.
BTW; asking cadets to disclose health information in an anonymous fashion (like in this survey) is not a violation of law or regulation. It's what's done with the information which can be problematic...
It has nothing to do with if someone declines to answer or not, information is being gathered from minors without consent, or at least an attempt that everyone received and could acknowledge. It is implied that parents have no need to worry, and I am certain there isn't some malevolent entity sitting on the other end reading everyone's answers laughing at the information gathered while opening credit cards. A minor is a minor, though, anonymous or not. There are questions here raised by several parties in regards to HIPAA, CPPT, and the method of execution. I have no doubt that if it was explained prior successfully the push back would have been less. I completely understand the request for information in this regard and the purpose it would be used for is a good one, but I feel the concerns raised are legitimate. We are trying to be transparent and include families in this program. The attempt that was elaborated on a while ago to reach CCs and parents apparently failed. Perceived or actual, CAP has requested confidential information accessible by other means without parental knowledge or consent from minors.
Quote from: FW on October 06, 2015, 04:49:24 PM
Quote from: jeders on October 06, 2015, 03:31:17 PM
QuoteI realize that being trans-whatever is the shiny ball of tinfoil that we should all be focused on right now, but this should have been routed through the commanders to the parents, not the kids.
So that it could be blocked by commanders who feel it is their righteous duty to "protect" children from uncomfortable conversations; no. National did what they should have done, formulate a survey with input from key stake holders (the air force) using experts (RAND Corp.) and then send it in the most direct way possible to the intended sample population (cadets) while also notifying commanders.
From what Col Lee stated, it was not CAP who formulated the survey, however your conclusion is valid. That some of the demographic questions seem "uncomfortable" to some is not surprising. It is not, IMHO, a breach of ethics, core values, or law to distribute the survey as done, or is it "inappropriate". The Air Force and CAP decided on this. The organization understands this may have some negative consequences, and is willing to deal with it. I'm sure our leadership is thrilled the USAF is willing to spend significant dollars used to develop our cadet programs, and give our cadets more and better opportunities. Positive change is not easy; we all need to deal with it.
I have no problem with the content of the survey per se, but the fact that the communication was directly with the cadets, and not the parents. Which would seem to be in defiance of our guidance in communications with cadets
And it just keeps getting sillier!
I repeat. This is why people hate CAPTALK.
Quote from: lordmonar on October 06, 2015, 06:55:25 PM
And it just keeps getting sillier!
I repeat. This is why people hate CAPTALK.
We could change it to a uniform thread, if that's more to your liking.
Quote from: Alaric on October 06, 2015, 06:52:04 PM
Quote from: FW on October 06, 2015, 04:49:24 PM
Quote from: jeders on October 06, 2015, 03:31:17 PM
QuoteI realize that being trans-whatever is the shiny ball of tinfoil that we should all be focused on right now, but this should have been routed through the commanders to the parents, not the kids.
So that it could be blocked by commanders who feel it is their righteous duty to "protect" children from uncomfortable conversations; no. National did what they should have done, formulate a survey with input from key stake holders (the air force) using experts (RAND Corp.) and then send it in the most direct way possible to the intended sample population (cadets) while also notifying commanders.
From what Col Lee stated, it was not CAP who formulated the survey, however your conclusion is valid. That some of the demographic questions seem "uncomfortable" to some is not surprising. It is not, IMHO, a breach of ethics, core values, or law to distribute the survey as done, or is it "inappropriate". The Air Force and CAP decided on this. The organization understands this may have some negative consequences, and is willing to deal with it. I'm sure our leadership is thrilled the USAF is willing to spend significant dollars used to develop our cadet programs, and give our cadets more and better opportunities. Positive change is not easy; we all need to deal with it.
I have no problem with the content of the survey per se, but the fact that the communication was directly with the cadets, and not the parents. Which would seem to be in defiance of our guidance in communications with cadets
I can only speculate the survey was for "members", however I see no reason why parents/guardians could have been the recipients of the survey.
Maybe they should have added a BDU question... :o >:D
Quote from: Paul_AK on October 06, 2015, 07:06:37 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on October 06, 2015, 06:55:25 PM
And it just keeps getting sillier!
I repeat. This is why people hate CAPTALK.
We could change it to a uniform thread, if that's more to your liking.
No. I would just like people to at least give NHQ a little bit of common sense and not immediately jump to conspiracy theory, liberal agendas and government over reach.
Geeze....the USAF needs/wants this information and they asked some questions. That is all.
Quote from: lordmonar on October 06, 2015, 07:23:33 PM
Quote from: Paul_AK on October 06, 2015, 07:06:37 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on October 06, 2015, 06:55:25 PM
And it just keeps getting sillier!
I repeat. This is why people hate CAPTALK.
We could change it to a uniform thread, if that's more to your liking.
No. I would just like people to at least give NHQ a little bit of common sense and not immediately jump to conspiracy theory, liberal agendas and government over reach.
Geeze....the USAF needs/wants this information and they asked some questions. That is all.
And once again, no problem with them wanting information, but if you want information from a child, you should go through the parents, not around them. Wasn't that the entire point of that section of the CPP? So that adults are not contacting cadets without the parents knowledge?
Quote from: Paul_AK on October 06, 2015, 04:59:06 PM
And protected information is covered, that is the point. I can't go up to anyone and legally without any need to know and especially not as a covered entity, ask their background, what kind of medication they take, or if they have mental or physical disabilities for any purpose and expect to be protected just because I'm not specifically listed. Protected Health Information is still Protected Health Information.
Again, CAP is neither of those options above. Therefore, HIPAA does not apply to CAP at any time.
That does not mean we are not required to protect PII. We are of course. Just that HIPAA does not apply to CAP. Therefore, no HIPAA warning is required. The information is not defined by 45 CFR. So your assertion that CAP violated HIPAA is flat out wrong.
Even CAPR 160-1 covers this:
Quote2-4. HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996). HIPAA is a federal government statute, which sets standards for the use and disclosure of health information by "covered entities" as defined in the statute and implementing regulations. HIPAA does not apply to the operations of CAP outside of the administration of any health care benefit plan maintained by CAP National Headquarters for employees.
However, asking whether someone identifies themselves as male, female, or transgender is not asking health information or PHI.
Also, as a person that has written surveys for IRB approvals, writing surveys is difficult. You must write the survey at a level which a reasonable person of the target audience/age can understand without being too technical or confusing. The approval for IRB consent can be as technical or legal as one wants, though. However, the actual survey must be clear. You write it in such a way that is both board and specific. Unfortunately, that nebulous area differs for each person reviewing the survey for IRB approval.
Quote from: LSThiker on October 06, 2015, 07:49:26 PM
Quote from: Paul_AK on October 06, 2015, 04:59:06 PM
And protected information is covered, that is the point. I can't go up to anyone and legally without any need to know and especially not as a covered entity, ask their background, what kind of medication they take, or if they have mental or physical disabilities for any purpose and expect to be protected just because I'm not specifically listed. Protected Health Information is still Protected Health Information.
Again, CAP is neither of those options above. Therefore, HIPAA does not apply to CAP at any time.
That does not mean we are not required to protect PII. We are of course. Just that HIPAA does not apply to CAP. Therefore, no HIPAA warning is required. The information is not defined by 45 CFR. So your assertion that CAP violated HIPAA is flat out wrong.
Even CAPR 160-1 covers this:
Quote2-4. HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996). HIPAA is a federal government statute, which sets standards for the use and disclosure of health information by "covered entities" as defined in the statute and implementing regulations. HIPAA does not apply to the operations of CAP outside of the administration of any health care benefit plan maintained by CAP National Headquarters for employees.
However, asking whether someone identifies themselves as male, female, or transgender is not asking health information or PHI.
Also, as a person that has written surveys for IRB approvals, writing surveys is difficult. You must write the survey at a level which a reasonable person of the target audience/age can understand without being too technical or confusing. The approval for IRB consent can be as technical or legal as one wants, though. However, the actual survey must be clear. You write it in such a way that is both board and specific. Unfortunately, that nebulous area differs for each person reviewing the survey for IRB approval.
But information regarding disabilities, autism, and dyslexia (question #8 according to the OP) IS protected information as defined within numerous acts and laws including HIPAA and FERPA. As has been harped on, going direct with minors is not only bad form but a violation of our own policies. If it isn't HIPAA itself, it is still protected information and CAP bears a responsibility to protect, we don't get free reign to do as we please, even if it is under the attempted protection of anonymity. So a HIPAA warning wasn't warranted, neat. We still went direct with minors and asked sensitive healthcare information.
And I completely understand the need for clear speech. But with such a wide ranging membership dealing with so many minors and considering some if not many parents have no consistent interaction with their squadron, much less an understanding of our policies, I'd think greater care would've been given to reach out prior to undertaking something like this.
My bag of popcorn is empty, so I must leave for now. I appreciate the concerns noted above, and also would have liked the survey to go thru the parents, however I trust in the Air Force leadership who sponsored the survey, and I trust our leadership; more especially our very competent COO and CLC who directed the survey's publication and dissemination. Life is short, and I doubt this survey has caused any harm to a cadet.
Quote from: FW on October 06, 2015, 08:44:44 PM
My bag of popcorn is empty
Poor planning. Lessons were learned.
Quote from: Paul_AK on October 06, 2015, 08:11:04 PM
But information regarding disabilities, autism, and dyslexia (question #8 according to the OP) IS protected information as defined within numerous acts and laws including HIPAA and FERPA. As has been harped on, going direct with minors is not only bad form but a violation of our own policies. If it isn't HIPAA itself, it is still protected information and CAP bears a responsibility to protect, we don't get free reign to do as we please, even if it is under the attempted protection of anonymity. So a HIPAA warning wasn't warranted, neat. We still went direct with minors and asked sensitive healthcare information.
Again, for the third time, it is not protected by HIPAA. HIPAA only applies to covered entities. Also, PHI only applies to covered entities, which again CAP is not one.
Please refer to the NIH about the use of PHI in research
https://privacyruleandresearch.nih.gov/pr_07.asp
I would like to point out a few sentences in particular but I would suggest you read the entire website before spouting more false arguments.
QuoteThe Privacy Rule defines PHI as individually identifiable health information, held or maintained by a covered entity or its business associates acting for the covered entity,
QuoteA critical point of the Privacy Rule is that it applies only to individually identifiable health information held or maintained by a covered entity or its business associate acting for the covered entity. Individually identifiable health information that is held by anyone other than a covered entity, including an independent researcher who is not a covered entity, is not protected by the Privacy Rule and may be used or disclosed without regard to the Privacy Rule. There may, however, be other Federal and State protections covering the information held by these entities that limit its use or disclosure
So to recap, it is not HIPAA nor is it PHI. Does it need to be protected, well that depends on if it has been de-identified. If the data has none of the 18 criteria, then it is not considered protected. If it does, then it is considered protected and may apply to other cederal laws. But again, HIPAA and PHI are not applicable to this survey.
Quote from: LSThiker on October 06, 2015, 11:05:20 PM
Quote from: Paul_AK on October 06, 2015, 08:11:04 PM
But information regarding disabilities, autism, and dyslexia (question #8 according to the OP) IS protected information as defined within numerous acts and laws including HIPAA and FERPA. As has been harped on, going direct with minors is not only bad form but a violation of our own policies. If it isn't HIPAA itself, it is still protected information and CAP bears a responsibility to protect, we don't get free reign to do as we please, even if it is under the attempted protection of anonymity. So a HIPAA warning wasn't warranted, neat. We still went direct with minors and asked sensitive healthcare information.
Again, for the third time, it is not protected by HIPAA. HIPAA only applies to covered entities. Also, PHI only applies to covered entities, which again CAP is not one.
Please refer to the NIH about the use of PHI in research
https://privacyruleandresearch.nih.gov/pr_07.asp
I would like to point out a few sentences in particular but I would suggest you read the entire website before spouting more false arguments.
QuoteThe Privacy Rule defines PHI as individually identifiable health information, held or maintained by a covered entity or its business associates acting for the covered entity,
QuoteA critical point of the Privacy Rule is that it applies only to individually identifiable health information held or maintained by a covered entity or its business associate acting for the covered entity. Individually identifiable health information that is held by anyone other than a covered entity, including an independent researcher who is not a covered entity, is not protected by the Privacy Rule and may be used or disclosed without regard to the Privacy Rule. There may, however, be other Federal and State protections covering the information held by these entities that limit its use or disclosure
So to recap, it is not HIPAA nor is it PHI. Does it need to be protected, well that depends on if it has been de-identified. If the data has none of the 18 criteria, then it is not considered protected. If it does, then it is considered protected and may apply to other federal laws. But again, HIPAA and PHI are not applicable to this survey.
And if you would re-read my previous post I ceded the point that it is not HIPAA. I would ask you to slow your roll assuming I am throwing around false arguments, though. I have been a first responder of some sort most of my career. I have fought structure fires, wild fires, placed a teenager on a backboard while the mom was screaming behind me at a vehicle roll over, and deployed to Iraq to work outside the wire while maintaining clearances to work around priority assets for the Air Force. For all of those positions I have received some form of training on OPSEC, Privacy Act, and HIPAA on many occasions. Do NOT think to insult me or think I am attempting to lie or am not paying attention to details, or am simply being some conspiratorial nut job, sir. The information being asked is defined within the acts I have mentioned, even if it is not covered by those acts in this singular situation. Health information is a private matter, and asking
minors to self report it in any fashion without ensuring their
legal guardians/parents and
chain of command were 100% aware may not be malicious, it is still negligent even if some semblance of anonymity is maintained. People are uncomfortable with this. Not just me.
EDIT: I do not mention all that in an attempt to engage in some measure of manliness or in an attempt to show you or anyone else up. It is my aim to establish some sort credibility where you quite apparently believe I have none. Which is compounded by the vagaries of the internet.
QuoteAnd if you would re-read my previous post I ceded the point that it is not HIPAA.
Your first line is where you again assert that question #8 is protected by HIPAA:
QuoteBut information regarding disabilities, autism, and dyslexia (question #8 according to the OP) IS protected information as defined within numerous acts and laws including HIPAA and FERPA
Which again, it is not protected by HIPAA in our context. So this would be a false argument because it is not protected by HIPAA as we are not a covered entity. Also, FERPA is a federal law that protects the privacy of student education records. Again, this does not apply to CAP or this survey as we do not hold any student education records, nor are we accredited by the US Dept of Ed. This would be another false argument as it does not apply to our situation. Therefore, question #8 is not protected information in the context of the survey. Sure, they are protected under specific circumstances, which are irrelevant to the discussion. If CAP becomes a healthcare provider or accredited school, then yes those acts would apply. Until then, question #8 is not protected by those acts.
QuoteThe information being asked is defined within the acts I have mentioned, even if it is not covered by those acts in this singular situation.
If it is not covered by those acts then in the context of the survey, they are not protected by those acts. Those acts only apply to the covered entities and schools that receive US Department of Education, respectively. They have no bearing to the survey, this discussion, or CAP.
QuoteEDIT: I do not mention all that in an attempt to engage in some measure of manliness or in an attempt to show you or anyone else up. It is my aim to establish some sort credibility where you quite apparently believe I have none.
Claims stand or fall by their own merit, not by the person making the claim. Therefore, it does not matter whether I think you have credibility or not as it does not have a bearing on the conversation.
In the name of all that's holy please make this craziness stop. All of you barracks room lawyers need to give it a rest. Now, where is my aspirin?
Quote from: PA Guy on October 07, 2015, 03:13:44 AM
In the name of all that's holy please make this craziness stop. All of you barracks room lawyers need to give it a rest. Now, where is my aspirin?
You are correct. I am done with this craziness. My apologies. Have a good night.
Quote from: CAPs1 on October 06, 2015, 02:31:11 PM
CAP has other issues to address, vital to its survival rather than embracing movements, efforts outside of it boundaries.
Must have come with being part of the Total Force package.
Air Force: "Hey, CAP, we want to get more of your cadets to 'summer camp'. Will half a mill help?"
CAP: "Oh, heck yeah it will!"
Air Force: "Great. BTW, cuz this is a lot more than, you know, some books or an orientation ride or two, our data people are gonna want to know more about how the money was spent, on whom, etc, you know, to be sure we're getting the most bang for the buck."
CAP: "Oh, uh, yeah, sure. I mean, we get that: you're giving us like 500Gs, you probably want to know that we're not blowing it on laptops and stuff, right?"
Air Force: "exactly. We just want to make sure that when we spend the money, it is effective, fairly distributed, etc. We might want some demographics data, that kind of thing, so we can say to Congress things like 'Yo, look at all the disadvantaged cadets we helped out' and 'We assisted over x number of cadets who are already on public assistance..' or whatever."
CAP: "Yeah! When do we get that big check that we can take a picture of?"
I'm sure it didn't go quite like that, but when the US Government gives you $$$, there are *always* strings attached.
I have a customer that does STEM events for the US Navy & Army. Middle & High School students (some college). They have similar surveys they use that generate their necessary demographics to be able to say "We're not just helping out the rich kids, here, you know.."
Quote from: NIN on October 07, 2015, 03:55:04 AM
Quote from: CAPs1 on October 06, 2015, 02:31:11 PM
CAP has other issues to address, vital to its survival rather than embracing movements, efforts outside of it boundaries.
Must have come with being part of the Total Force package.
Air Force: "Hey, CAP, we want to get more of your cadets to 'summer camp'. Will half a mill help?"
CAP: "Oh, heck yeah it will!"
Air Force: "Great. BTW, cuz this is a lot more than, you know, some books or an orientation ride or two, our data people are gonna want to know more about how the money was spent, on whom, etc, you know, to be sure we're getting the most bang for the buck."
CAP: "Oh, uh, yeah, sure. I mean, we get that: you're giving us like 500Gs, you probably want to know that we're not blowing it on laptops and stuff, right?"
Air Force: "exactly. We just want to make sure that when we spend the money, it is effective, fairly distributed, etc. We might want some demographics data, that kind of thing, so we can say to Congress things like 'Yo, look at all the disadvantaged cadets we helped out' and 'We assisted over x number of cadets who are already on public assistance..' or whatever."
CAP: "Yeah! When do we get that big check that we can take a picture of?"
I'm sure it didn't go quite like that, but when the US Government gives you $$$, there are *always* strings attached.
I have a customer that does STEM events for the US Navy & Army. Middle & High School students (some college). They have similar surveys they use that generate their necessary demographics to be able to say "We're not just helping out the rich kids, here, you know.."
Doesn't at all justify or address the issue of circumventing the parents of minor children. Parents may provide as much or as little demographic information as we want.
You're correct. I didn't address that (and meant to).
I guess my point there is probably someone at the AF level, talking to the nice folks at RAND, were probably not thinking entirely about "hey, these are *minors*."
But they're also looking at the "integrity" of the survey. Are we surveying the participants or their parents? Those are, really, entirely different population sets. So a parent responding is a different set of responses, from a statistical & demographic rigor standpoint, than those provided by the cadet. I took two stats classes in college and my two takeaways from that were "What you assume to be true about stats probably isn't," and "When you need stats, hire someone who knows what they're doing." :)
So yeah, there is a problem there with the methods used. I get it. My son is 14, and were he a cadet, I would not have an issue with that survey for the stated purpose, but that's me. Others might, and thats their prerogative.
But it seems we (the collective "we," encompassing CAP, RAND and the AF, not the "we" of CAP-Talk) could have probably done a little better job on the front-end letting people know this is coming and the reasons why, mostly to cut down on this tempest in a teapot that we're seeing now.
Quote from: NIN on October 07, 2015, 03:50:41 PM
You're correct. I didn't address that (and meant to).
I guess my point there is probably someone at the AF level, talking to the nice folks at RAND, were probably not thinking entirely about "hey, these are *minors*."
But they're also looking at the "integrity" of the survey. Are we surveying the participants or their parents? Those are, really, entirely different population sets. So a parent responding is a different set of responses, from a statistical & demographic rigor standpoint, than those provided by the cadet. I took two stats classes in college and my two takeaways from that were "What you assume to be true about stats probably isn't," and "When you need stats, hire someone who knows what they're doing." :)
So yeah, there is a problem there with the methods used. I get it. My son is 14, and were he a cadet, I would not have an issue with that survey for the stated purpose, but that's me. Others might, and thats their prerogative.
But it seems we (the collective "we," encompassing CAP, RAND and the AF, not the "we" of CAP-Talk) could have probably done a little better job on the front-end letting people know this is coming and the reasons why, mostly to cut down on this tempest in a teapot that we're seeing now.
According to this:
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/RAND_survey_B4AB10DF8908D.pdf (http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/RAND_survey_B4AB10DF8908D.pdf)
the survey was supposed to be conducted to include cadets AND parents. Were parents included? If not, why?
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 04:01:56 PM
Quote from: NIN on October 07, 2015, 03:50:41 PM
You're correct. I didn't address that (and meant to).
I guess my point there is probably someone at the AF level, talking to the nice folks at RAND, were probably not thinking entirely about "hey, these are *minors*."
But they're also looking at the "integrity" of the survey. Are we surveying the participants or their parents? Those are, really, entirely different population sets. So a parent responding is a different set of responses, from a statistical & demographic rigor standpoint, than those provided by the cadet. I took two stats classes in college and my two takeaways from that were "What you assume to be true about stats probably isn't," and "When you need stats, hire someone who knows what they're doing." :)
So yeah, there is a problem there with the methods used. I get it. My son is 14, and were he a cadet, I would not have an issue with that survey for the stated purpose, but that's me. Others might, and thats their prerogative.
But it seems we (the collective "we," encompassing CAP, RAND and the AF, not the "we" of CAP-Talk) could have probably done a little better job on the front-end letting people know this is coming and the reasons why, mostly to cut down on this tempest in a teapot that we're seeing now.
According to this:
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/RAND_survey_B4AB10DF8908D.pdf (http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/RAND_survey_B4AB10DF8908D.pdf)
the survey was supposed to be conducted to include cadets AND parents. Were parents included? If not, why?
Hmmm. Yeah. My point from above is that really these are two different population sets who might have two similar but essentially different sets of answers.
As a sq bubba, I don't *always* have a parent's email unless they give it to me. I'm not even completely certain I can easily track it in eServices (unless its the "Secondary Email" in a cadet's contact record, and then it is not clear whether thats the cadet's email or mom/dad's email) to any degree of accuracy. I'm not sure where they might have gotten a parental email unless it was somehow collected at the time the CEAP vouchers were handled.
It was sent to parents. In the case of my son, we were also sent the survey. If when parents signed their cadet up they failed to include a parent e-mail as was requested, it did not go to the parent :o. Parents need to go to e-service with their cadet and update the contact information.
Quote from: NIN on October 07, 2015, 04:20:51 PM
As a sq bubba, I don't *always* have a parent's email unless they give it to me. I'm not even completely certain I can easily track it in eServices (unless its the "Secondary Email" in a cadet's contact record, and then it is not clear whether thats the cadet's email or mom/dad's email) to any degree of accuracy. I'm not sure where they might have gotten a parental email unless it was somehow collected at the time the CEAP vouchers were handled.
The CADET PARENT EMAIL line under contacts appears when it's in the system for the individual.
In my very personal opinion, questions about gender identity, which go beyond the physical/biological differences between male and female, are inappropriate in CAP. There are currently no CAP regulations recognizing or granting special accommodations to a separate gender group from male and female. So why are we asking this question? Are encampments providing separate dormitories and restroom facilities for genders other than biological male or female? Do we have special uniform provisions? The answer is no. While we need to embrace our core value of respect for everyone, gender identity is not CAP's business.
Holy BATMAN!
Fodder like this is why I have slowly drifted away from CAPTalk.
Are some of you people SERIOUS?
Take personal bias, world view, misinformation, lack of knowledge, and what do you get? This type of topic.
Seems to me, the main issue is the fact that some people are opposed to the word "transgender", others have no idea what an anonymous survey means, what HIPPA is, or what CAP regulations are and how they read and work. Some are SO disconnected from their cadet activities as parents to not even HAVE an email in eservices along with their cadets, and then blame CAP for this?
Who are you people?
Want to blame someone in CAP? Blame the DCPs and Unit Commanders who didn't mention this. Or perhaps they did mention it, and no one was interested in listening. Happens all the time.
Don't like this? Vote with your feet. CAP will be better for it.
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 04:57:00 PM
Holy BATMAN!
Fodder like this is why I have slowly drifted away from CAPTalk.
Are some of you people SERIOUS?
Take personal bias, world view, misinformation, lack of knowledge, and what do you get? This type of topic.
Seems to me, the main issue is the fact that some people are opposed to the word "transgender", others have no idea what an anonymous survey means, what HIPPA is, or what CAP regulations are and how they read and work. Some are SO disconnected from their cadet activities as parents to not even HAVE an email in eservices along with their cadets, and then blame CAP for this?
Who are you people?
Want to blame someone in CAP? Blame the DCPs and Unit Commanders who didn't mention this. Or perhaps they did mention it, and no one was interested in listening. Happens all the time.
Don't like this? Vote with your feet. CAP will be better for it.
I was actually going to blame the parents. Sure it's the command that is responsible for informing their members about stuff like this, but ultimately, it is the parent's fault for not providing every possible contact that they should have.
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 05:05:36 PM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 04:57:00 PM
Holy BATMAN!
Fodder like this is why I have slowly drifted away from CAPTalk.
Are some of you people SERIOUS?
Take personal bias, world view, misinformation, lack of knowledge, and what do you get? This type of topic.
Seems to me, the main issue is the fact that some people are opposed to the word "transgender", others have no idea what an anonymous survey means, what HIPPA is, or what CAP regulations are and how they read and work. Some are SO disconnected from their cadet activities as parents to not even HAVE an email in eservices along with their cadets, and then blame CAP for this?
Who are you people?
Want to blame someone in CAP? Blame the DCPs and Unit Commanders who didn't mention this. Or perhaps they did mention it, and no one was interested in listening. Happens all the time.
Don't like this? Vote with your feet. CAP will be better for it.
I was actually going to blame the parents. Sure it's the command that is responsible for informing their members about stuff like this, but ultimately, it is the parent's fault for not providing every possible contact that they should have.
Certainly indignant parents may have some blame, but again, nothing about this survey is either out of line, or illegal.
Quote from: CAPDCCMOM on October 07, 2015, 04:23:09 PM
It was sent to parents. In the case of my son, we were also sent the survey. If when parents signed their cadet up they failed to include a parent e-mail as was requested, it did not go to the parent :o. Parents need to go to e-service with their cadet and update the contact information.
SOME parents. In the case of my sons, whose profile does not have a parental email, the survey was sent to them without notifying me. I've verified that I'm not alone on that.
Mom, I'm glad that you're happy with your own outcome, but what is inappropriate to one parent may differ from what is to another. Neither you, nor CAP, has the right to break our policy to directly contact my kids without informing me, especially with a survey tool which opens up with "we won't tell" language which (to MY family and MY wife if not to YOU) smacks of the grooming and isolating language we are told in the CPP to be aware of.
We could care less what you define as normative, or that you think my own kids should live in your world as you implied in your prior post, or that you might think I'm a bad parent. I am the parent of my kids - you and CAP are not - and I don't contact your kids nor expect to do so behind your back. CAP violated our own CPP policy here, and our national Cadet Programs leadership doesn't see an issue that they've broken our trust. I am strongly disappointed, and you can't twist the issue to make it somehow MY FAULT that NHQ did this in the blind because my wife and I didn't add our emails to our sons records.
Chaser, completely agree with your newest post here. I've people of all walks and beliefs in my family and in the unit I command, and will go to the mat to protect their rights of all our legally protected groups. I can separate my own beliefs from enforcing policy: you should have seen the letters I wrote this summer to run interference for one of my cadets to wear her muslim head scarf at encampment, or years ago to preserve the rights of an officer with spina bifida, or six years ago to challenge an IC who refused to let female pilots fly on missions. I expect CAP to equally respect my rights as a parent and to follow our own policy to not blindside parents, and to stay OUT of topics like this.
V/R
Spam
Quote from: Spam on October 07, 2015, 05:16:41 PM
Quote from: CAPDCCMOM on October 07, 2015, 04:23:09 PM
It was sent to parents. In the case of my son, we were also sent the survey. If when parents signed their cadet up they failed to include a parent e-mail as was requested, it did not go to the parent :o. Parents need to go to e-service with their cadet and update the contact information.
SOME parents. In the case of my sons, whose profile does not have a parental email, the survey was sent to them without notifying me. I've verified that I'm not alone on that.
Mom, I'm glad that you're happy with your own outcome, but what is inappropriate to one parent may differ from what is to another. Neither you, nor CAP, has the right to break our policy to directly contact my kids without informing me, especially with a survey tool which opens up with "we won't tell" language which (to MY family and MY wife if not to YOU) smacks of the grooming and isolating language we are told in the CPP to be aware of.
We could care less what you define as normative, or that you think my own kids should live in your world as you implied in your prior post, or that you might think I'm a bad parent. I am the parent of my kids - you and CAP are not - and I don't contact your kids nor expect to do so behind your back. CAP violated our own CPP policy here, and our national Cadet Programs leadership doesn't see an issue that they've broken our trust. I am strongly disappointed, and you can't twist the issue to make it somehow MY FAULT that NHQ did this in the blind because my wife and I didn't add our emails to our sons records.
Chaser, completely agree with your newest post here. I've people of all walks and beliefs in my family and in the unit I command, and will go to the mat to protect their rights of all our legally protected groups. I can separate my own beliefs from enforcing policy: you should have seen the letters I wrote this summer to run interference for one of my cadets to wear her muslim head scarf at encampment, or years ago to preserve the rights of an officer with spina bifida, or six years ago to challenge an IC who refused to let female pilots fly on missions. I expect CAP to equally respect my rights as a parent and to follow our own policy to not blindside parents, and to stay OUT of topics like this.
V/R
Spam
I'm with you to a point, but I have to address the 600 pound gorilla: why isn't your contact info in your kid's profile? Between my ever so patient bride and I, we have no less than 10 forms of contact that we provide for what ever activity Blip is going to engage in. I get your point about the outfit not including you in the notification chain, but they can't contact you if there is no contact info.
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 05:24:14 PM
but I have to address the 600 pound gorilla: why isn't your contact info in your kid's profile?
Reminds me of this experiment from 1999. Try it, it is a good test that is applicable to a number of things in CAP
https://youtu.be/vJG698U2Mvo
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 04:57:00 PM
Holy BATMAN!
Fodder like this is why I have slowly drifted away from CAPTalk.
Are some of you people SERIOUS?
Take personal bias, world view, misinformation, lack of knowledge, and what do you get? This type of topic.
Seems to me, the main issue is the fact that some people are opposed to the word "transgender", others have no idea what an anonymous survey means, what HIPPA is, or what CAP regulations are and how they read and work. Some are SO disconnected from their cadet activities as parents to not even HAVE an email in eservices along with their cadets, and then blame CAP for this?
Who are you people?
Want to blame someone in CAP? Blame the DCPs and Unit Commanders who didn't mention this. Or perhaps they did mention it, and no one was interested in listening. Happens all the time.
Don't like this? Vote with your feet. CAP will be better for it.
Who am I? I'm a father, a Christian, a former cadet, and an over 3 decade member and officer of CAP who can separate his own legitimate beliefs and biases from enforcing CAP's policies and programs of record, as apparently you can't. I'm a dad whose cadet sons ride with me every WED to the unit I grew up in. I check their homework, have guys nights with them, and monitor their relationships and internet usage, and I've erred many times, such as in not updating my email on their eservices profiles. I am very serious, and I'm not alone.
It really, really irks you, doesn't it, that someone might disagree with your world view? You really, really seem to have a problem with respecting my beliefs as a father that these questions are offensive. Your lack of respect, and that of some of your fellows on CT, is on display, as you suggest that I simply quit CAP. I also am a guy who believes that we can and should encourage people to stay in CAP by RESPECTING their positions, beliefs, and backgrounds ESPECIALLY when we disagree with them. I've done so (this year) for a cadet whose religion I differ with strongly, but whom I am sworn to respect and support. Can't you do the same for me?
My wife and I are in charge of raising our kids - not you, not a "village" to raise our child, not the Air Force, and not CAP, and yes, as both an officer of CAP and as a dad I have a problem with forcing outside agendas related to non-protected category sex related and intrusive disability related questions on our minor cadets without telling the parents or commanders (no, an advance copy of the survey was NOT made available to parents, commanders and DCPs, and yes, I would have objected to these questions as inappropriate, had it been).
Why are you people all protecting your agendas and parsing and twisting definitions, and not standing by our policies and the rights of our parents?
V/R,
Spam
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 04:57:00 PM
Holy BATMAN!
Fodder like this is why I have slowly drifted away from CAPTalk.
Are some of you people SERIOUS?
Take personal bias, world view, misinformation, lack of knowledge, and what do you get? This type of topic.
Seems to me, the main issue is the fact that some people are opposed to the word "transgender", others have no idea what an anonymous survey means, what HIPPA is, or what CAP regulations are and how they read and work. Some are SO disconnected from their cadet activities as parents to not even HAVE an email in eservices along with their cadets, and then blame CAP for this?
Who are you people?
Want to blame someone in CAP? Blame the DCPs and Unit Commanders who didn't mention this. Or perhaps they did mention it, and no one was interested in listening. Happens all the time.
Don't like this? Vote with your feet. CAP will be better for it.
Are you a parent?
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 05:24:14 PM
I'm with you to a point, but I have to address the 600 pound gorilla: why isn't your contact info in your kid's profile? Between my ever so patient bride and I, we have no less than 10 forms of contact that we provide for what ever activity Blip is going to engage in. I get your point about the outfit not including you in the notification chain, but they can't contact you if there is no contact info.
Fair enough question, Thrawn.
Our phones are, our emails are not updated. Screwup on my part. Does that excuse other peoples actions in going direct to them anyways? "Your Honor, the kids mom wasn't watching, so I grabbed her, but its NOT MY FAUUUUULLLT, it hers for insufficient vigilance"?
Odd how I can get smacked here for NOT watching closely enough to stop CAP from breaking the policy, but then I get smacked for being TOO protective of my kids with my belief system. I refuse to let this be twisted around to be my fault that CAP broke the policy.
V/R,
Spam
Quote from: Spam on October 07, 2015, 05:16:41 PM
Neither you, nor CAP, has the right to break our policy to directly contact my kids without informing me, especially with a survey tool which opens up with "we won't tell" language which (to MY family and MY wife if not to YOU) smacks of the grooming and isolating language we are told in the CPP to be aware of.
What policy are you referencing here? I've looked through CAPR 52-10 several times since this started and I cannot find anything requiring advance or concurrent notification of parents when sending email to cadets. I personally think this is a good idea and try to copy parents on everything I send to my cadets, but it is not required in 52-10.
As far as the "we won't tell" language goes, I think you have bad info. Here's the statement from the survey (thanks to C/Cool for sharing the link):
QuoteThis survey is confidential. CAP National Headquarters will NOT let your squadron or wing leaders know how you've answered. You won't be punished in any way for the answers you give. You have total freedom to answer honestly and to the best of your ability.
All that statement does is allay fears that a cadet might get in trouble with their leadership if they happen to tell an inconvenient truth. I think that you'd have to try VERY hard to find any nefarious intent there.
Quote from: NC Hokie on October 07, 2015, 06:17:41 PM
Quote from: Spam on October 07, 2015, 05:16:41 PM
Neither you, nor CAP, has the right to break our policy to directly contact my kids without informing me, especially with a survey tool which opens up with "we won't tell" language which (to MY family and MY wife if not to YOU) smacks of the grooming and isolating language we are told in the CPP to be aware of.
What policy are you referencing here? I've looked through CAPR 52-10 several times since this started and I cannot find anything requiring advance or concurrent notification of parents when sending email to cadets. I personally think this is a good idea and try to copy parents on everything I send to my cadets, but it is not required in 52-10.
As far as the "we won't tell" language goes, I think you have bad info. Here's the statement from the survey (thanks to C/Cool for sharing the link):
QuoteThis survey is confidential. CAP National Headquarters will NOT let your squadron or wing leaders know how you've answered. You won't be punished in any way for the answers you give. You have total freedom to answer honestly and to the best of your ability.
All that statement does is allay fears that a cadet might get in trouble with their leadership if they happen to tell an inconvenient truth. I think that you'd have to try VERY hard to find any nefarious intent there.
From 52-10, 2-3 (b) "Whenever reasonably possible, cadet activities will be scheduled at least 2 weeks in advance and announced on a web-based unit calendar that enables cadets' parents to verify that a purported event is indeed an official activity. In the rare instance that a short-notice activity arises, the unit commander or project officer will notify parents of the event at the earliest opportunity."
While this survey is not a "cadet activity", using this guidance could have mitigated some of the concerns expressed here.
Spam,
I never meant to imply that you are a bad parent. If that is how you took my post, then please allow me to publicly apologize. I understand what you mean. I don't want the "village, or the Village Idiot" to raise my child either. I am just another CAP Mom doing the best I can for my sons and my cadets. I would never try to take the place of their parents or interfere with their parents.
I was merely trying to point out that information that we don't like as parents is out there. I was also trying to point out the reason some parents did not get the survey. I am not a part of Wing or of National. I am just another involved parent much as yourself doing the best I can.
I applaud how you helped your cadet wear her Hijab. I actually meant to send kudos your way for that one.
With Respect
CAP Mom
(Not a helicopter parent..A BLACKHAWK!!)
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 06:30:34 PM
While this survey is not a "cadet activity", using this guidance could have mitigated some of the concerns expressed here.
Agreed, but if the parents don't have updated info? Is someone at NHQ supposed to make phone contact with every parent who doesn't do the bare minimum? If the concern is that the big bad world will get your kid...teach them to share info. Got an email with a survey? Check with your parents if it's ok to fill it out, if that's what you want your kids to do.
There is absolutely NO requirement for CAP to contact/copy parents on any or all communication with cadets.
Quote2-7. Interactions Outside CAP Activities.
a. Email and Open Social Media. When adult leaders need to communicate with cadets in the
interval between official activities, if reasonably possible they will do so via email or social media that is
visible to other members. With email, adult leaders will include their supervisor or director of cadet
programs in the distribution, except for very brief messages, or email traffic distributed to two or more
members.
b. Closed Media. Texting, private messaging, and similar forms of electronic communication that
third parties cannot easily monitor are permitted only for very brief messages of an official nature. Contact
with cadets via telephone or video conference is permitted during non-school hours.
Quote from: Spam on October 07, 2015, 05:45:04 PM
Who am I? I'm a father, a Christian, a former cadet, and an over 3 decade member and officer of CAP who can separate his own legitimate beliefs and biases from enforcing CAP's policies and programs of record, as apparently you can't.
That's REAL nice. You're going to go and talk about how I owe you some magical respect, while doing ad hominem? Ok, I'll play ball. What policies were violated by this survey?
QuoteIt really, really irks you, doesn't it, that someone might disagree with your world view?
It really irks me when someone tries to apply their worldview to make a snowball into an avalanche, yes.
Quote
You really, really seem to have a problem with respecting my beliefs as a father that these questions are offensive.
Exactly which questions do you find offensive?
Quote
Your lack of respect, and that of some of your fellows on CT, is on display, as you suggest that I simply quit CAP.
Your response started with lack of respect, so what are we talking about here?
Quote
I also am a guy who believes that we can and should encourage people to stay in CAP by RESPECTING their positions, beliefs, and backgrounds ESPECIALLY when we disagree with them. I've done so (this year) for a cadet whose religion I differ with strongly, but whom I am sworn to respect and support. Can't you do the same for me?
You mean you were able to separate your own issues with a faith from the individual? Welcome to modern society I guess.
Quote
My wife and I are in charge of raising our kids - not you, not a "village" to raise our child, not the Air Force, and not CAP,
Great, because I have no interest in raising your kids for you. Still confused how this relates to the survey.
Quote
and yes, as both an officer of CAP and as a dad I have a problem with forcing outside agendas related to non-protected category sex related and intrusive disability related questions on our minor cadets
What specific agendas were forced? Did I misread the survey somehow? I'm so confused right now. Intrusive disability questions? Must have missed those as well!
Quote
without telling the parents or commanders (no, an advance copy of the survey was NOT made available to parents, commanders and DCPs, and yes, I would have objected to these questions as inappropriate, had it been).
Nor was there a requirement to do so, and yes, notification of the VOLUNTARY nature were in fact distributed.
Quote
Why are you people all protecting your agendas and parsing and twisting definitions, and not standing by our policies and the rights of our parents?
V/R,
Spam
My only agenda when it comes to CAP is to provide the program as outlined by our regulations. I see nothing wrong with this Survey within that scope.
Adjusted your signature to reflect the actual way you presented your message.
Quote from: abdsp51 on October 07, 2015, 05:51:11 PM
Are you a parent?
That's by far one of the most insulting things in this thread.
Does one need to be a parent to have common sense? How about working with cadets?
Quote from: Spam on October 07, 2015, 05:53:02 PM
Odd how I can get smacked here for NOT watching closely enough to stop CAP from breaking the policy, but then I get smacked for being TOO protective of my kids with my belief system. I refuse to let this be twisted around to be my fault that CAP broke the policy.
No, your indignation broghts about the "smacking", but no actual policies were broken.
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 06:47:31 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 06:30:34 PM
While this survey is not a "cadet activity", using this guidance could have mitigated some of the concerns expressed here.
Agreed, but if the parents don't have updated info? Is someone at NHQ supposed to make phone contact with every parent who doesn't do the bare minimum? If the concern is that the big bad world will get your kid...teach them to share info. Got an email with a survey? Check with your parents if it's ok to fill it out, if that's what you want your kids to do.
There is absolutely NO requirement for CAP to contact/copy parents on any or all communication with cadets.
Quote2-7. Interactions Outside CAP Activities.
a. Email and Open Social Media. When adult leaders need to communicate with cadets in the
interval between official activities, if reasonably possible they will do so via email or social media that is
visible to other members. With email, adult leaders will include their supervisor or director of cadet
programs in the distribution, except for very brief messages, or email traffic distributed to two or more
members.
b. Closed Media. Texting, private messaging, and similar forms of electronic communication that
third parties cannot easily monitor are permitted only for very brief messages of an official nature. Contact
with cadets via telephone or video conference is permitted during non-school hours.
And that is just plain wrong.
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 06:59:02 PM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 06:47:31 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 06:30:34 PM
While this survey is not a "cadet activity", using this guidance could have mitigated some of the concerns expressed here.
Agreed, but if the parents don't have updated info? Is someone at NHQ supposed to make phone contact with every parent who doesn't do the bare minimum? If the concern is that the big bad world will get your kid...teach them to share info. Got an email with a survey? Check with your parents if it's ok to fill it out, if that's what you want your kids to do.
There is absolutely NO requirement for CAP to contact/copy parents on any or all communication with cadets.
Quote2-7. Interactions Outside CAP Activities.
a. Email and Open Social Media. When adult leaders need to communicate with cadets in the
interval between official activities, if reasonably possible they will do so via email or social media that is
visible to other members. With email, adult leaders will include their supervisor or director of cadet
programs in the distribution, except for very brief messages, or email traffic distributed to two or more
members.
b. Closed Media. Texting, private messaging, and similar forms of electronic communication that
third parties cannot easily monitor are permitted only for very brief messages of an official nature. Contact
with cadets via telephone or video conference is permitted during non-school hours.
And that is just plain wrong.
Cite please.
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 07:02:14 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 06:59:02 PM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 06:47:31 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 06:30:34 PM
While this survey is not a "cadet activity", using this guidance could have mitigated some of the concerns expressed here.
Agreed, but if the parents don't have updated info? Is someone at NHQ supposed to make phone contact with every parent who doesn't do the bare minimum? If the concern is that the big bad world will get your kid...teach them to share info. Got an email with a survey? Check with your parents if it's ok to fill it out, if that's what you want your kids to do.
There is absolutely NO requirement for CAP to contact/copy parents on any or all communication with cadets.
Quote2-7. Interactions Outside CAP Activities.
a. Email and Open Social Media. When adult leaders need to communicate with cadets in the
interval between official activities, if reasonably possible they will do so via email or social media that is
visible to other members. With email, adult leaders will include their supervisor or director of cadet
programs in the distribution, except for very brief messages, or email traffic distributed to two or more
members.
b. Closed Media. Texting, private messaging, and similar forms of electronic communication that
third parties cannot easily monitor are permitted only for very brief messages of an official nature. Contact
with cadets via telephone or video conference is permitted during non-school hours.
And that is just plain wrong.
Cite please.
There is no "cite". It's wrong for any organization to communicate directly with minors and not include the guardians. There are many ways that this could have been handled. And it wasn't...
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 07:05:01 PM
There is no "cite". It's wrong for any organization to communicate directly with minors and not include the guardians. There are many ways that this could have been handled. And it wasn't...
Can't really have a discussion if facts get in the way.
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 07:09:36 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 07:05:01 PM
There is no "cite". It's wrong for any organization to communicate directly with minors and not include the guardians. There are many ways that this could have been handled. And it wasn't...
Can't really have a discussion if facts get in the way.
This from the non-parent.
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 06:59:02 PM
And that is just plain wrong.
As an opinion of how the policy should be written, yes. However, as an assertion that CAP broke policy, then no. CAP broke no policy as no policy that parents must be contact exists. Should they? Possibly. Nevertheless, they can go direct to the cadets as of today.
Spam has admitted that he has not updated his email address in his child's eServices, yet is mad that NHQ did not contact him. I am confused how that is NHQ's fault?
As pointed out by NC Hokie, the confidential language does not "smacks of the grooming and isolating language we are told in the CPP" as asserted by Spam.
NHQ is not pushing an agenda and is respecting the beliefs of those parents and children that identify as transgender. The survey did not say the cadet needed to select transgender. It did not say that the cadet or parent needs to agree with the transgender identity. It simply provides an option for those cadets that identify as transgender. There is no agenda being pushed.
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 07:11:55 PM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 07:09:36 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 07:05:01 PM
There is no "cite". It's wrong for any organization to communicate directly with minors and not include the guardians. There are many ways that this could have been handled. And it wasn't...
Can't really have a discussion if facts get in the way.
This from the non-parent.
And there goes another.
Should I also resign from my position as CDC? Does having a child miraculously give people wisdom? A special club card?
I'll stand by my assertion, with a caveat:
Can't have a discussion when the other person isn't willing to reason.
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 07:15:31 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 07:11:55 PM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 07:09:36 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 07:05:01 PM
There is no "cite". It's wrong for any organization to communicate directly with minors and not include the guardians. There are many ways that this could have been handled. And it wasn't...
Can't really have a discussion if facts get in the way.
This from the non-parent.
And there goes another.
Should I also resign from my position as CDC? Does having a child miraculously give people wisdom? A special club card?
I'll stand by my assertion, with a caveat:
Can't have a discussion when the other person isn't willing to reason.
Nor can you if the other person lacks the ability to view the issue from any other position other than their narrow and inexperienced view point. No, being a parent does not give you instant wisdom, but it does teach you, very rapidly, to be less tolerant of "innocent" actions where your child is involved.
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 07:23:09 PM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 07:15:31 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 07:11:55 PM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 07:09:36 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 07:05:01 PM
There is no "cite". It's wrong for any organization to communicate directly with minors and not include the guardians. There are many ways that this could have been handled. And it wasn't...
Can't really have a discussion if facts get in the way.
This from the non-parent.
And there goes another.
Should I also resign from my position as CDC? Does having a child miraculously give people wisdom? A special club card?
I'll stand by my assertion, with a caveat:
Can't have a discussion when the other person isn't willing to reason.
Nor can you if the other person lacks the ability to view the issue from any other position other than their narrow and inexperienced view point. No, being a parent does not give you instant wisdom, but it does teach you, very rapidly, to be less tolerant of "innocent" actions where your child is involved.
I've yet to hear what is so inappropriate about the survey content.
It's a slow news week. 8)
Quote from: lordmonar on October 07, 2015, 07:27:25 PM
It's a slow news week. 8)
It is. Although I guess we could talk about NASA's release of the Apollo Moon conspiracy photos :)
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 07:25:10 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 07:23:09 PM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 07:15:31 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 07:11:55 PM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 07:09:36 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 07:05:01 PM
There is no "cite". It's wrong for any organization to communicate directly with minors and not include the guardians. There are many ways that this could have been handled. And it wasn't...
Can't really have a discussion if facts get in the way.
This from the non-parent.
And there goes another.
Should I also resign from my position as CDC? Does having a child miraculously give people wisdom? A special club card?
I'll stand by my assertion, with a caveat:
Can't have a discussion when the other person isn't willing to reason.
Nor can you if the other person lacks the ability to view the issue from any other position other than their narrow and inexperienced view point. No, being a parent does not give you instant wisdom, but it does teach you, very rapidly, to be less tolerant of "innocent" actions where your child is involved.
I've yet to hear what is so inappropriate about the survey content.
Never said there was. You might want to actually read what you're commenting on. My position is and will be that it is in appropriate to contact children directly without notifying their parents that it is being done.
Okay......that is your position. CAP's position is different. Move along.
Quote from: lordmonar on October 07, 2015, 07:37:29 PM
Okay......that is your position. CAP's position is different. Move along.
Your blind devotion and obedience is admirable.
And there's our core vales at work 8)
I ask again, regardless of personal views and values, how is the gender identity of our cadets CAP's business? There's no CAP regulation that addresses gender identity or sexual orientation. You know why? Because it shouldn't matter. That information is not relevant to CAP or the Cadet Programs.
Well it does matter. We don't have rules about trans gender cadets or SM for that matter. Maybe we (CAP and USAF) are trying to make some. And gathering data is an important first step in identifying the situation before formulating new rules and policies. I had a transgender person try to join my squadron just this last year. So I know that it does exist out in the real world.
In that case, CAP should be contacting the parents to gather the information they need, not the cadets.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 07, 2015, 07:53:40 PM
In that case, CAP should be contacting the parents to gather the information they need, not the cadets.
Talk with a transgender teen with parents that do not accept it. The responses of the parent and the teen will be different. It is sometimes better to get the information from the primary source.
Also, a teen may not always tell the parent until he/she is ready for the hormone therapies or needs the letter from a physician (depends on state).
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 07, 2015, 07:53:40 PM
In that case, CAP should be contacting the parents to gather the information they need, not the cadets.
And we've arrived back at the beginning...
Here's a quick sketch of how the word could have been spread:
NHQ puts out a notice of this survey coming out to all unit commanders. Unit commanders email the members of their units and the parents to tell them about the survey. If the parents didn't provide an email contact, pick up the doggone phone and call them (I know, how 20th century...) to inform them of the survey. Brief it at opening and closing. Send something home with the cadets to the parents.....
Shrugging your shoulders and saying "I don't have an email for Cadet Tenthumbs' parents...guess I can't contact them!" is a failure as a commander. Face it, most units are complaining that they don't have a huge roster, so making time to literally call every single home should take less than a Saturday. It's be a great opportunity to test out the emergency contact roster.
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 07:36:36 PM
Never said there was. You might want to actually read what you're commenting on. My position is and will be that it is in appropriate to contact children directly without notifying their parents that it is being done.
Now, now.
Quote from: THRAWN on October 06, 2015, 02:18:51 PMThat's a gem. CPP be [darn]ed, the Umbrella Corporation NEEDS this information!. Did it ever occur to anyone that sending this type of survey out to kids will lead to discussions within families that they may not be willing or prepared to have? I realize that being trans-whatever is the shiny ball of tinfoil that we should all be focused on right now, but this should have been routed through the commanders to the parents, not the kids.
Along with the other posts right above, THIS attitude is why it matters.
Not willing or unprepared to have the discussion with your kid? That's your choice. Guarantee it, if your 13+ year old didn't already know about this, they clicked male or female and moved on. Perhaps they googled it. But chances are, with your views on this, whether your kid is or isn't transgender, they won't be coming to you to ask about it. Sleep well tonight!But as to your condescending description of this perceived "issue", would you say that to a persons face?
Quote from: THRAWN on October 07, 2015, 08:05:58 PM
Here's a quick sketch of how the word could have been spread:
NHQ puts out a notice of this survey coming out to all unit commanders. Unit commanders email the members of their units and the parents to tell them about the survey. If the parents didn't provide an email contact, pick up the doggone phone and call them (I know, how 20th century...) to inform them of the survey. Brief it at opening and closing. Send something home with the cadets to the parents.....
Shrugging your shoulders and saying "I don't have an email for Cadet Tenthumbs' parents...guess I can't contact them!" is a failure as a commander. Face it, most units are complaining that they don't have a huge roster, so making time to literally call every single home should take less than a Saturday. It's be a great opportunity to test out the emergency contact roster.
Less than a Saturday? How about you be responsible for yours, and I'll spend my day off with mine? Teach your kid to share information? Ask about what was talked about/announced at the meeting on the drive home?
I'm guessing you're one of the people here who are against the "village", so take the responsibility to be on top of your own kid and teach them to communicate with you. Don't pass it on to the volunteers who provide a service to you and yours.
It's amazing how this thread devolved. All I'm hearing now is Blah, Blah, Blah...
FACT: CAP sent out a survey to it's Cadet members.
FACT: no one had to answer the survey
FACT: some parents are upset.
FACT: CAP knew of the possible consequences.
FACT: members and parents will do what they will do; CAP wishes all well, and will continue to perform in it's best interest.
FACT: I'm enjoying my popcorn.... 8)
Quote from: FW on October 07, 2015, 08:22:34 PM
It's amazing how this thread devolved. All I'm hearing now is Blah, Blah, Blah...
FACT: CAP sent out a survey to it's Cadet members.
FACT: no one had to answer the survey
FACT: some parents are upset.
FACT: CAP knew of the possible consequences.
FACT: members and parents will do what they will do; CAP wishes all well, and will continue to perform in it's best interest.
FACT: I'm enjoying my popcorn.... 8)
Perhaps we should do an automated phone survey to see how many parents are upset.
Quote from: LSThiker on October 07, 2015, 07:59:54 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 07, 2015, 07:53:40 PM
In that case, CAP should be contacting the parents to gather the information they need, not the cadets.
Talk with a transgender teen with parents that do not accept it. The responses of the parent and the teen will be different. It is sometimes better to get the information from the primary source.
Also, a teen may not always tell the parent until he/she is ready for the hormone therapies or needs the letter from a physician (depends on state).
Let's think about this for a second. The only reason CAP would need this information is to develop some kind of policy and accommodation for these cadets. What would those be? Exceptions to the uniform policy? Overnight accommodations? Any of these would require parental consent. So, why not involve the parents to begin with? If this is a sensitive (and controversial) issue that cannot be resolved at home, then there's not much that CAP can or should do. It's not our place.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 07, 2015, 08:31:33 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on October 07, 2015, 07:59:54 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 07, 2015, 07:53:40 PM
In that case, CAP should be contacting the parents to gather the information they need, not the cadets.
Talk with a transgender teen with parents that do not accept it. The responses of the parent and the teen will be different. It is sometimes better to get the information from the primary source.
Also, a teen may not always tell the parent until he/she is ready for the hormone therapies or needs the letter from a physician (depends on state).
Let's think about this for a second. The only reason CAP would need this information is to develop some kind of policy and accommodation for these cadets. What would those be? Exceptions to the uniform policy? Overnight accommodations? Any of these would require parental consent. So, why not involve the parents to begin with? If this is a sensitive (and controversial) issue that cannot be resolved at home, then there's not much that CAP can or should do. It's not our place.
It is our place to deal with it when the parents who do have the bandwidth to address/resolve said "issue" at home, have no problem with their kid in CAP.
Warning: Lengthy post.
All questions on the survey are below (I think). I'm a cadet, by the way, and the parents' survey is identical except for wording (like 'your cadet' instead of 'you').
1. This survey is designed for Civil Air Patrol cadets. (I am a CAP cadet, age 13 or older.), (I am a CAP cadet, age 12 or younger.), (I am not a CAP cadet.)
2. What is your gender? (Female), (Male), (Transgender)
3. How old are you?
4. What race do you identify with? Please check all that apply. (White), (Black/ African American), (American Indian/ Alaskan Native), (Asian), (Native Hawaiian/ Other Pacific Islander), (Other race - _____)
5. Do you identify as Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish? (No, not of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin), (Yes, Mexican, Mexican-American, or Chicano), (Yes, Puerto Rican), (Yes, Cuban), (Yes, another Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin)
6. What is your GPA in school, approximately? (Less than 2.0 (C's and below)), (2.0 to 3.0 (B's and C's)), (3.0 to 4.0 (A's and B's)), (Higher than 4.0 (Straight A's)), (Not applicable: I am not attending school right now.)
7. Do you have any conditions that limit your ability to walk, run, or otherwise participate in physical activities? (Yes), (No), (Not sure)
8. Do you have any disability or disorder that might affect your school work or employment? For example, ADHD, dyslexia, and autism are common types of disabilities or disorders. (Yes), (No), (Not sure)
9. Are your parents CAP members? (My father is a CAP member.), (My mother is a CAP member.),(Both of my parents are CAP members.),(Neither of my parents are CAP members.)
10. Do you receive free or reduced-price lunches at school? (Yes), (No), (Not sure), (Not applicable)
11. Do you come from a single parent household? (Yes), (No)
12. Thinking about the last year or so, how often have you typically participated in Cadet activities during the school year?
Off and on, irregularly due to other interests or commitments
A few times per month
Nearly every week, but rarely on weekends
Nearly every week, plus some weekends
13. What is your grade in the CAP Cadet Program?
14. What is your squadron's charter number? (i.e. CA-123)
15. What city is your squadron located in?
16. Suppose that you could do just what you'd like and nothing stood in your way. Please look at the choices below, and mark the thing that you would most want to do.
Attend technical or vocational school.
Serve in the armed forces.
Graduate from a 2-year college program.
Graduate from a 4-year college program.
Attend graduate or professional school after college.
None of the above.
17. The following questions ask you about your awareness of different career paths. (Too many answers to include)
18. The following questions ask you about your interest in different career paths. How interested are you in the following career paths? (Not including answers here, too long)
19. The following questions ask you about your feelings towards the CAP Cadet Program. (Generic, not including answers)
20. If you had your choice and nothing else could get in the way, how often would you like to attend Cadet activities during this school year? (Generic answers)
21. The following questions ask about your teamwork skills. (Generic)
22. The following questions ask about your skills related to military customs and culture. (Generic)
23. The following questions ask about how you relate to CAP Senior Members. (Generic)
24. The following questions ask about how you think about yourself. Options are Strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree
I feel that I'm a person of worth, at least on an equal plane with others.
I feel that I have a number of good qualities.
All in all, I am inclined to feel that I am a failure.
25. During the past 7 days, on how many days were you physically active for a total of at least 60 minutes per day? Add up all of the time that you spend in any kind of physical activity that increased your heart rate and made you breathe hard at least some of the time.
26. How many days a week do you eat breakfast?
27. In general, how healthy is your diet?
28. The following questions are about your relationships to CAP peers. (Generic)
29. The following questions are about your attitudes on drugs, alcohol, and tobacco. (Generic illegal drugs survey)
30. The following questions are about your attitudes on community service. (Generic community service questions)
31. Did you attend an encampment in the Summer of 2015
32. Was this the first time you attended Encampment?
33. At Encampment, did you participate as an in-ranks student or Cadet Cadre (staff) member?
Student Cadet
Cadet Cadre
34. What state was your Encampment located in this year?
35. About how many friends from your hometown squadron attended Encampment with you this year?
Zero
1-2
3 to 5
5 or more
36. Did you receive a full or partial scholarship to attend Encampment this year?
Yes
No
37. Did you attend all of Encampment this year?
Yes, I attended the full Encampment and graduated.
No, I was not able to complete the Encampment this year.
38. If you were not able to complete Encampment this year, what was the reason?
39. Would you like to tell us anything more that would clarify any of your answers in this survey?
ETA: The survey still permits one to continue in the survey if some or all of the questions aren't answered.
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 08:35:35 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 07, 2015, 08:31:33 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on October 07, 2015, 07:59:54 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 07, 2015, 07:53:40 PM
In that case, CAP should be contacting the parents to gather the information they need, not the cadets.
Talk with a transgender teen with parents that do not accept it. The responses of the parent and the teen will be different. It is sometimes better to get the information from the primary source.
Also, a teen may not always tell the parent until he/she is ready for the hormone therapies or needs the letter from a physician (depends on state).
Let's think about this for a second. The only reason CAP would need this information is to develop some kind of policy and accommodation for these cadets. What would those be? Exceptions to the uniform policy? Overnight accommodations? Any of these would require parental consent. So, why not involve the parents to begin with? If this is a sensitive (and controversial) issue that cannot be resolved at home, then there's not much that CAP can or should do. It's not our place.
It is our place to deal with it when the parents who do have the bandwidth to address/resolve said "issue" at home, have no problem with their kid in CAP.
And that's why we should involve the parents in these types of discussions.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 07, 2015, 08:57:04 PM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 08:35:35 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 07, 2015, 08:31:33 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on October 07, 2015, 07:59:54 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 07, 2015, 07:53:40 PM
In that case, CAP should be contacting the parents to gather the information they need, not the cadets.
Talk with a transgender teen with parents that do not accept it. The responses of the parent and the teen will be different. It is sometimes better to get the information from the primary source.
Also, a teen may not always tell the parent until he/she is ready for the hormone therapies or needs the letter from a physician (depends on state).
Let's think about this for a second. The only reason CAP would need this information is to develop some kind of policy and accommodation for these cadets. What would those be? Exceptions to the uniform policy? Overnight accommodations? Any of these would require parental consent. So, why not involve the parents to begin with? If this is a sensitive (and controversial) issue that cannot be resolved at home, then there's not much that CAP can or should do. It's not our place.
It is our place to deal with it when the parents who do have the bandwidth to address/resolve said "issue" at home, have no problem with their kid in CAP.
And that's why we should involve the parents in these types of discussions.
And we will if it comes to it.
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 09:14:00 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 07, 2015, 08:57:04 PM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 08:35:35 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 07, 2015, 08:31:33 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on October 07, 2015, 07:59:54 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 07, 2015, 07:53:40 PM
In that case, CAP should be contacting the parents to gather the information they need, not the cadets.
Talk with a transgender teen with parents that do not accept it. The responses of the parent and the teen will be different. It is sometimes better to get the information from the primary source.
Also, a teen may not always tell the parent until he/she is ready for the hormone therapies or needs the letter from a physician (depends on state).
Let's think about this for a second. The only reason CAP would need this information is to develop some kind of policy and accommodation for these cadets. What would those be? Exceptions to the uniform policy? Overnight accommodations? Any of these would require parental consent. So, why not involve the parents to begin with? If this is a sensitive (and controversial) issue that cannot be resolved at home, then there's not much that CAP can or should do. It's not our place.
It is our place to deal with it when the parents who do have the bandwidth to address/resolve said "issue" at home, have no problem with their kid in CAP.
And that's why we should involve the parents in these types of discussions.
And we will if it comes to it.
If? It already came to that. CAP asked questions in a survey that some parents found objectionable. And, whether you agree with them or not, that's their parental right.
From the Advanced Course Content:
P. 12, [graphic]: "Come in, We're Open" sign.
"Parents & Open Access to CAP Activities
CAP is proud of its cadet programs and has absolutely nothing to hide from parents who want to know more about what their child is doing, or have a special concern about a particular aspect of a cadet activity... [paragraphs on parental observation of classes, meeting supervisory adults, asking questions, etc.]... The bottom line is that open access and a spirit of transparency helps CAP earn parents' trust, which is a prerequisite in keeping their children safe".
I'd like to follow the guidance of the module to "assume the best" intent, that sending this to cadets without parental contacts listed was simply an oversight, but the feedback I've got so far to my original post (and the sentiments of others) indicate that CAP officially hasn't any problem with discounting my concerns.
Spam
Captain H:
Fair enough on correction of my signature. I apologize for the inconsistency of my message.
Here's where I think you and I both went wrong:
On the boundary concern issue, (p. 9 of the CPPT basic course content) I raised honest concerns regarding electronic communication with cadets contrary to the CAP standards of practice, and based on the tone and content of your inputs here I felt that you were lacking in respect "Failing to respond to another person's boundary concern", p.10. What I want to do is make sure that neither of us (none of us) go further in breaking the manners and professionalism boundary, number 4, defined as "Disparaging other CAP adult leaders in front of cadets".
People get emotional regarding their offspring when others start pitching in such comments, and I apologize for my part in reacting emotionally to your comments.
Thanks for your service to CAP,
Spam
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 06:58:15 PM
Quote from: abdsp51 on October 07, 2015, 05:51:11 PM
Are you a parent?
That's by far one of the most insulting things in this thread.
Does one need to be a parent to have common sense? How about working with cadets?
It's not about common sense it's about respect and decency of communicating with parents about things. Since you are not a parent you're not going to get it. Let's try this say hypothetically you have a child accused of a crime do you want LE talking to your child asking incriminating questions without YOU as the parent in the know? Or how about a teacher having a discussion or lesson in their class on a topic that you do not want your child expose too.
I get where Spam is coming from on this and honestly, if Ma Blue wanted they data fine, but honestly this survey is better off going to the cadets parents who are going to be more in the know about the type of information being requested than lil Jack and Jill.
Having taken surveys by the Rand Corp for Ma Blue it is very easy to skew the data and therefor skew the results. And honestly if my child has a disability depending on the nature of it it's no one's business but mine, his/her's and the Dr who renders treatment. It is not CAP's, some third party org hired by Ma Blue or Ma Blue's.
When you have children some day then you will understand where people are coming from.
Quote from: Spam on October 07, 2015, 09:53:17 PM
Captain H:
Fair enough on correction of my signature. I apologize for the inconsistency of my message.
Here's where I think you and I both went wrong:
On the boundary concern issue, (p. 9 of the CPPT basic course content) I raised honest concerns regarding electronic communication with cadets contrary to the CAP standards of practice, and based on the tone and content of your inputs here I felt that you were lacking in respect "Failing to respond to another person's boundary concern", p.10. What I want to do is make sure that neither of us (none of us) go further in breaking the manners and professionalism boundary, number 4, defined as "Disparaging other CAP adult leaders in front of cadets".
People get emotional regarding their offspring when others start pitching in such comments, and I apologize for my part in reacting emotionally to your comments.
Thanks for your service to CAP,
Spam
This thread has been... intense, but this reply is an example of what makes me proud to be a part of
OUR organization. We'll go to the mat, bring all of our passion to the conversation, but in the end, we stand together, respecting each other and taking personal responsibility for
OUR organization moving forward, together.
I have never been prouder to be a member of CAP, and even CAPTalk, than I am at this moment. :)
Thank you.
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 07, 2015, 07:15:31 PM
Does having a child miraculously give people wisdom? A special club card?
Not exactly, but becoming a parent is much different from herding cadets as a CAP SM. You can think of the cadets as "your kids" all you want, but until you have your own, you can't really know what parenting is truly all about. Being a sibling counts a little, but not enough. In either of these situations, there's always someone else really "in charge". That's the parent.
I was a cadet for 6 years, and a single SM for 9 more. My world turned upside-down when my first daughter was born. Now I was the one "in charge". When you have your first child, you'll see. We mostly all do.
That said, I'm otherwise not taking sides here. It's just a view from the parents' balcony.
Quote from: Spam on October 07, 2015, 09:53:17 PM
Captain H:
Fair enough on correction of my signature. I apologize for the inconsistency of my message.
Here's where I think you and I both went wrong:
On the boundary concern issue, (p. 9 of the CPPT basic course content) I raised honest concerns regarding electronic communication with cadets contrary to the CAP standards of practice, and based on the tone and content of your inputs here I felt that you were lacking in respect "Failing to respond to another person's boundary concern", p.10. What I want to do is make sure that neither of us (none of us) go further in breaking the manners and professionalism boundary, number 4, defined as "Disparaging other CAP adult leaders in front of cadets".
People get emotional regarding their offspring when others start pitching in such comments, and I apologize for my part in reacting emotionally to your comments.
Thanks for your service to CAP,
Spam
You, sir, win at the Internets today.
Nice job. Lot of heated commentary in here, but man (and I know this from experience) it is not easy to back off and say "OK, cool, we're good.."
Some sites list up to 58 different genders. On Tumblr, one can easily get up to the hundreds in the varying genders(Whether all 100+ are actually legitimate and not just made up for fun is another question.).
Wouldn't it just be easier to have everybody just type in their gender? Auto-Capitalization with Spell-check, no drag down boxes or things to click. Saves any sort of hassle regarding parents(WHICH I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE WITH, don't get me wrong.) and lets those that identify differently to put whatever they want in.
Just a thought for CAP HQ and the Rand Corp.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 07, 2015, 09:30:59 PM
If? It already came to that. CAP asked questions in a survey that some parents found objectionable. And, whether you agree with them or not, that's their parental right.
We'll deal with the accommodations if and when it comes to that. Don't put words in my mouth. Find anything you want objectionable, but I sincerely doubt you'd say that to a transgender persons face, so I'll reserve my opinion on "overblown" until it somehow miraculously affects those with concerns. To clarify, if your kid isn't trans-gendered, what's your concern here?
Quote from: Spam on October 07, 2015, 09:41:24 PM
From the Advanced Course Content:
Fully agreed, which is why information was sent out weeks in advance to CCs and DCPs, and parents who had current contact info got the info as well...
Quote from: Spam on October 07, 2015, 09:53:17 PM
Captain H:
Fair enough on correction of my signature. I apologize for the inconsistency of my message.
Here's where I think you and I both went wrong:
On the boundary concern issue, (p. 9 of the CPPT basic course content) I raised honest concerns regarding electronic communication with cadets contrary to the CAP standards of practice, and based on the tone and content of your inputs here I felt that you were lacking in respect "Failing to respond to another person's boundary concern", p.10. What I want to do is make sure that neither of us (none of us) go further in breaking the manners and professionalism boundary, number 4, defined as "Disparaging other CAP adult leaders in front of cadets".
People get emotional regarding their offspring when others start pitching in such comments, and I apologize for my part in reacting emotionally to your comments.
Thanks for your service to CAP,
Spam
Guess we'll agree to disagree in terms of this being a "boundary concern". I've already quoted the relevant section on online communications, which, quite frankly, this wasn't. The regulations pertain to say, me, communicating one on one with a cadet. In which case I'll copy my CC, not the parent. If the parents are worried about my communications with the cadet, they are always free to check their kids email, and talk to my boss who gets all email copies. I'm not denying anyone their parental rights of control over what their kids are "exposed" to. But the word Transgender is neither scandalous, nor something most kids haven't heard of. It's listed in a list. No explanations, no obligations. They either put down Male, Female, or Transgender (or nothing), and no one will know. Outside of that, I'll carry on working with the cadets, and assume you'll carry on doing your CAP passion as well.
Quote from: abdsp51 on October 07, 2015, 11:14:20 PM
It's not about common sense it's about respect and decency of communicating with parents about things. Since you are not a parent you're not going to get it. Let's try this say hypothetically you have a child accused of a crime do you want LE talking to your child asking incriminating questions without YOU as the parent in the know? Or how about a teacher having a discussion or lesson in their class on a topic that you do not want your child expose too.
I get where Spam is coming from on this and honestly, if Ma Blue wanted they data fine, but honestly this survey is better off going to the cadets parents who are going to be more in the know about the type of information being requested than lil Jack and Jill.
Having taken surveys by the Rand Corp for Ma Blue it is very easy to skew the data and therefor skew the results. And honestly if my child has a disability depending on the nature of it it's no one's business but mine, his/her's and the Dr who renders treatment. It is not CAP's, some third party org hired by Ma Blue or Ma Blue's.
When you have children some day then you will understand where people are coming from.
Are we really going to compare an anonymous survey with LEO interrogation with potential self-incrimination? Or going to the point of accusing teachers of teaching "bad" things?
Parents got the survey. Notification went out weeks earlier. NHQ predicted some people might get a bit uncomfortable. Doesn't mean anything was violated or ruined. None of those questions were "kid breaking", nor out of line with any questions that come up when a cadet signs up, and participates week to week.
People need to understand that opinions are just that, and there's no "right to not be offended". Would this even be an issue if the letters "transgender" weren't on the page? If you don't like it, teach your kids to share these things with you. Or email NHQ, and let them know. Ask for a policy where you get copies on ALL NHQ communications. Just don't forget to update your email address!
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 08, 2015, 03:21:17 AM
I get where Spam is coming from on this and honestly, if Ma Blue wanted they data fine, but honestly this survey is better off going to the cadets parents who are going to be more in the know about the type of information being requested than lil Jack and Jill.
Having taken surveys by the Rand Corp for Ma Blue it is very easy to skew the data and therefor skew the results. And honestly if my child has a disability depending on the nature of it it's no one's business but mine, his/her's and the Dr who renders treatment. It is not CAP's, some third party org hired by Ma Blue or Ma Blue's.
When you have children some day then you will understand where people are coming from.
Are we really going to compare an anonymous survey with LEO interrogation with potential self-incrimination? Or going to the point of accusing teachers of teaching "bad" things?
Parents got the survey. Notification went out weeks earlier. NHQ predicted some people might get a bit uncomfortable. Doesn't mean anything was violated or ruined. None of those questions were "kid breaking", nor out of line with any questions that come up when a cadet signs up, and participates week to week.
People need to understand that opinions are just that, and there's no "right to not be offended". Would this even be an issue if the letters "transgender" weren't on the page? If you don't like it, teach your kids to share these things with you. Or email NHQ, and let them know. Ask for a policy where you get copies on ALL NHQ communications. Just don't forget to update your email address!
[/quote]
Really how many parents? How many CC's got notified it was going out? Bottom line this is something that should have been sent to parents to fill out and parents have the right to oversee what their child is exposed to. But wait you're not a parent so you don't get it.
How about you guys taking a 24 hour break on posting about this thread.
Most of you seem to be violating Internet Rule #1: Never post while you're mad.
abdsp51,
"But wait you're not a parent so you don't get it".
This was a cheap shot and yes I am a parent.
Quote from: PHall on October 08, 2015, 03:42:40 AM
How about you guys taking a 24 hour break on posting about this thread.
Most of you seem to be violating Internet Rule #1: Never post while you're mad.
It needs to be locked.
Quote from: PA Guy on October 08, 2015, 03:44:49 AM
Quote from: PHall on October 08, 2015, 03:42:40 AM
How about you guys taking a 24 hour break on posting about this thread.
Most of you seem to be violating Internet Rule #1: Never post while you're mad.
It needs to be locked.
But then admins will be accused of supporting the agenda and ignoring things. Despite PHalls assumption, I'm not angry. I'd love to discuss this, hell I even agree with the concerns to an extent, which is why I suggested going to NHQ for a policy change.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 07, 2015, 08:31:33 PM
Let's think about this for a second. The only reason CAP would need this information is to develop some kind of policy and accommodation for these cadets.
Certainly this information will help them develop policy and accommodations when the time comes to create those. However, taking one step back, this information is useful to decide whether or not to pursue creating general policy or wait until further federal guidance is issued and leave this question as a case-by-case.
QuoteWhat would those be? Exceptions to the uniform policy? Overnight accommodations? Any of these would require parental consent.
I do not know what those exceptions would be. Frankly I do not think any one really knows as this is relatively new to our country. Unfortunately, there are nearly 56 different rules as to what defines transgender.
The military is lifting its ban on transgender personnel in May 2016 (http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/pentagon/2015/07/13/pentagon-readying-plan-to-lift-transgender-ban/30092973/ (http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/pentagon/2015/07/13/pentagon-readying-plan-to-lift-transgender-ban/30092973/) and http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/08/25/military-transgender-ban-set-end-next-may/32345385/ (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/08/25/military-transgender-ban-set-end-next-may/32345385/)). CAP and the USAF are probably trying to prepare for this date.
The Office of Personnel Management has accepted that transgender starts when a person makes the decision to identify as something other than their biological sex. They are not required to pursue hormone replacement therapy (HRT), sex reassignment surgery, or other steps to be officially considered transgender:
QuoteSome individuals, however, will not pursue some (or any) forms of medical treatment because of their age, medical condition, lack of funds, or other personal circumstances, or because they may not feel the treatment is necessary for their well-being. Managers and supervisors should be aware that not all transgender individuals will follow the same pattern, but they all are entitled to the same consideration as they undertake the transition steps deemed appropriate for them, and should all be treated with dignity and respect.
The DOL has essentially the same guidance for the consideration of transgender:
QuoteSome may not undergo medical treatment for various personal, financial, or medical reasons, but may modify their gender expression – their dress, mannerisms, and so forth -- to be consistent with their gender identity.
As a look at states: Some states require a sex reassignment surgery before it will officially change your sex, while others do not, whiles will not absolutely change it. States such as California, Washington, Utah, Iowa, Minnesota, New York do not require an SRS. Texas, Georgia, Florida, Arkansas requires an SRS. States such as Idaho, Oklahoma, Kansas, Ohio, and Tennessee will not alter the gender.
QuoteSo, why not involve the parents to begin with?
As far as I know, there has been no actual discussion on how to proceed with this. At least not publicly. You do not necessarily need to bring in parents opinions when you are just trying to collect the data. Even then, parents may not get a voice if the USAF and the federal government states that we must recognize transgender individuals. Or the only say they may get is simply the withdraw of their child from the program. There are times when people do not always get a say, especially when it comes to the rights of individuals.
QuoteIf this is a sensitive (and controversial) issue that cannot be resolved at home, then there's not much that CAP can or should do. It's not our place.
Agreed. But asking a person how they self-identify is not getting involved in the home.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 07, 2015, 08:57:04 PM
And that's why we should involve the parents in these types of discussions.
This is not a discussion. It was just a simple question asking what the Gender of a person is. Asking a gender of person and including three options is no more a discussion on transgender issues than asking a gender and including only two options is a discussion on feminism. It was a simple question with no underlying agenda, discussion, or whatever.
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 08, 2015, 03:54:02 AM
Despite PHalls assumption, I'm not angry.
Not angry either. I deal with these types of situations quite often as a few of my friends and colleagues are transgender.
Quote from: PA Guy on October 08, 2015, 03:44:02 AM
abdsp51,
"But wait you're not a parent so you don't get it".
This was a cheap shot and yes I am a parent.
That was not directed at you.
I'm home for about 8 hours before my next flight, so let me try to hit a few things.
We sent the survey links to about 20,000 cadets and about 10,000 parents. Which was every parent for which we had a working email address. The response has been terrific. I'm not an expert in survey responses, but so far we have over 4,000 cadet responses and over 2,000 parent responses. In looking through the "open-ended question" responses on the parental surveys, they read like a commercial for CAP. A lot of praise for what our program does for their children. I didn't see a single negative response from a parent, but I can't claim to have read every one. Yet.
We will probably cut of responses on Friday, and turn the data over for analysis.
So far, the only complaint we have received in the shop is from Spam. Curt LaFond has been playing phone tag with him, but I'm confident that they will speak soon to address mutual concerns.
I suppose it bears repeating that that the survey is 100% about continuing the CEAP funding. There is absolutely no other agenda or purpose. It appears that many of you might have designed the survey instrument differently; adding to it or deleting questions that you feel are unnecessary. I'm sure reasonable minds could well differ on exactly how to construct the survey instrument. But it was designed by the Ph.D -level scientists at RAND which has an acknowledged reputation in this particular area. If they felt that certain data was necessary for analysis to support continued funding, given their long experience in catering to AF needs, I'm inclined to think they know what they are doing.
I also wanted to address some concerns raised about whether sending a bulk email to 30,000 cadets and parents is somehow violative of our own CPP. It's not. I'm fairly sure I wrote the cited part of the 52-10 that talks about it. (Paragraph 2-7, excerpted above.) Bulk emails ("spam," if you will) are exactly what we were talking about when we said "email traffic distributed to two or more members."
Mostly because bulk emails present little or no risk of isolation and grooming.
Finally, the transgender discussion deserves its own thread. (I think we have indeed discussed it elsewhere, but I have to get up in six hours to catch a flight and I'm being too lazy to search.) It should have its own thread for two reasons: One, it's important that we get it right after an open and transparent process before we make any changes to existing policies and regulations. And two, because it really has nothing to do with the CEAP program (except as it may discover that TG troops are underserved by encampment.)
Thanks for a good discussion. I'll try to watch it during dull parts of meetings over the next couple of days.
Quote from: abdsp51 on October 08, 2015, 06:08:21 AM
Quote from: PA Guy on October 08, 2015, 03:44:02 AM
abdsp51,
"But wait you're not a parent so you don't get it".
This was a cheap shot and yes I am a parent.
That was not directed at you.
It doesn't matter who it's directed at, it's a cheap shot and you should be ashamed. Being a parent doesn't suddenly give you any insight that you didn't have before. As a parent of a cadet that probably received this survey (she only checks email when I tell her she needs to), I find absolutely nothing inappropriate about anything in it.
Also, as a parent, a member, and a commander I find it highly disheartening that someone such as yourself who has devoted so much to CAP would disparage and dismiss another dedicated and talented member just because he has not yet had children.
Ned, thank you for confirming what I thought, that the number of parents who find the gender identity question inappropriate is extremely low; in other words, it's really not a problem.
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 08, 2015, 03:21:17 AM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 07, 2015, 09:30:59 PM
If? It already came to that. CAP asked questions in a survey that some parents found objectionable. And, whether you agree with them or not, that's their parental right.
We'll deal with the accommodations if and when it comes to that. Don't put words in my mouth.
Sir, would you kindly point out which words I put in your mouth? Perhaps if you quoted the entire conversation and not just one post we could see who said what. But even on this single post I just don't see it.
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 08, 2015, 03:21:17 AM
Find anything you want objectionable, but I sincerely doubt you'd say that to a transgender persons face, so I'll reserve my opinion on "overblown" until it somehow miraculously affects those with concerns.
Did I say I found anything objectionable? Now, who's putting words in other people's mouth? I said "some parents found [it] objectionable." Not the same thing. My statement was a fact, as evidenced by this thread, not an opinion. But here we do agree. Yours is just an opinion, an "overblown" one, if I may add.
And what's with the statement regarding telling a transgender person something to their face? That doesn't seem like the type of respectful response expected from a CAP officer. I would treat a transgender cadet just like any other cadet. Gender identity is a non-issue in CAP. They're all cadets.
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 08, 2015, 03:21:17 AM
To clarify, if your kid isn't trans-gendered, what's your concern here?
I could ask the same about you. If your kid isn't transgender or if you don't even have kids, then what's YOUR concern here? Two can play this game.
Captain, you're entitled to your opinion just like everyone else on this Board. We can disagree respectfully. But you must be cautious not to confuse passion and conviction with disrespect. Many have posted disagreeing opinions here with respect and that's part of having a healthy discussion. Unfortunately, I can't say the same of every post.
I don't think some parents/guardians with cadets wanted to be told what they should believe or how they need to act. More of the postings had to do with this than the survey questions (posted below). It seems like the thing to do, a cause celebre in vogue these days: get with it or do you live under a rock?
Those that had an issue raised it. Ned took note, replied politely and has tried to smooth this over. And that is much more appreciated.
However what he can assert without proof I can dismiss without as much as well.
Glad NED is loving the numbers he got back and that only complaint came from SPAM. Who, incidentally, found god or a saw the caller id and issued an apology of sort after some phone tag from NHQ. Or maybe he just really is a nice guy.
These, folks, are the questions that will help USAF determine if CAP should receive funds. Really.
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/JJD3BZ5 (https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/JJD3BZ5) - cadet survey
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/JNCQ9ZW (https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/JNCQ9ZW) - parent survey
Perhaps the PhDs can tell Ned the implication for funding, when a cadet is asked 'his worth' or how he relates to others.
Those that have/had an issue raise it, those that don't, consider not telling people what to think just because respect doesn't exist in your world.
Quote from: jeders on October 08, 2015, 01:29:52 PM
Quote from: abdsp51 on October 08, 2015, 06:08:21 AM
Quote from: PA Guy on October 08, 2015, 03:44:02 AM
abdsp51,
"But wait you're not a parent so you don't get it".
This was a cheap shot and yes I am a parent.
That was not directed at you.
It doesn't matter who it's directed at, it's a cheap shot and you should be ashamed. Being a parent doesn't suddenly give you any insight that you didn't have before. As a parent of a cadet that probably received this survey (she only checks email when I tell her she needs to), I find absolutely nothing inappropriate about anything in it.
Also, as a parent, a member, and a commander I find it highly disheartening that someone such as yourself who has devoted so much to CAP would disparage and dismiss another dedicated and talented member just because he has not yet had children.
Ned, thank you for confirming what I thought, that the number of parents who find the gender identity question inappropriate is extremely low; in other words, it's really not a problem.
First off you and I both know that there are things that come with being a parent that parents just get, you can't explain it just is. It's the same as those who have been in combat, been (fill in the blank).
Is the Capt talented and dedicated never said he wasn't. But there are things that just come with being a parent that single folks do not get until they have kids. And it is entirely different when the kids are your own.
You're quick to call me disparaging and of accuse me of taking a cheap shot but yet when a parent is told to just get over something it's not a disparaging and a cheap shot?
I'm going to chime in here...
I was unaware of this survey, nor has it been brought to my attention; so, I am not completely aware of its contents, as I have not seen it for mysel. I assume simply asking some of my cadets about it that I could get the Intel that others are commenting on.
Anyway, while I understand the whole "gender issue" has been a sensitive topic lately, especially with the military, I don't understand how this relates to CAP aside from PT standards. I'm in the belief, as well as acceptance, that I may have cadets who have, well, I don't want to say "issues," but, perhaps, sexuality that may be outside of the norm. At the end of the day, it's not my business, and it really isn't NHQ's business.
So, I hope I'm not jumping the gun here. But from some of the comments I'm reading, I'm. It fully comfortable with some of the things it sounds like the cadets are being asked.
On the subject of "boundary concerns," as I have read, I fully understand where that may be coming from. It seems to be a common question on CAP Talk, and I wouldn't be surprised if some of the survey questions didn't come from some of the posts on here, but I'm still not fully understanding what the survey's intent was/is.
As I said, perhaps I'm jumping the gun and maybe skipping some of the posts on this thread, but I'm a little confused here. Maybe in the future, surveys that cadets receive can be sent to the Cadet Programs specialists in addition to the cadets, because I'm really lost at what occurred here. I have heard nothing of it until reading the forum.
Scroll up a couple of posts, and you'll see links to both surveys. You can continue through each survey without answering any of the Qs. I only looked at the cadet one, and didn't see anything I wouldn't have let my girls answer at cadet ages.
Quote from: TheSkyHornet on October 09, 2015, 07:37:17 AM
Maybe in the future, surveys that cadets receive can be sent to the Cadet Programs specialists in addition to the cadets, because I'm really lost at what occurred here. I have heard nothing of it until reading the forum.
Agreed. I'm a Group Commander and Cadet Programs Officer and, until I read this thread, I hadn't heard of this survey either.
Quote from: SarDragon on October 09, 2015, 07:50:27 AM
... I only looked at the cadet one, and didn't see anything I wouldn't have let my girls answer at cadet ages.
That's your prerogative as a parent, and the whole point of this thread.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 09, 2015, 12:59:15 PM
Quote from: TheSkyHornet on October 09, 2015, 07:37:17 AM
Maybe in the future, surveys that cadets receive can be sent to the Cadet Programs specialists in addition to the cadets, because I'm really lost at what occurred here. I have heard nothing of it until reading the forum.
Agreed. I'm a Group Commander and Cadet Programs Officer and, until I read this thread, I hadn't heard of this survey either.
You may want to check the email address you have listed in eservices it was sent out on Sept 25th to that address. (the email is below)
Upcoming Encampment Survey
Dear Unit Commanders and Directors of Cadet Programs,
1. In a few days, we will be asking all cadets aged 13 and older and their parents to participate in a survey regarding the CAP Cadet Program, with special emphasis on the value of the encampment program. This voluntary survey, contracted by the Air Force and developed by the Rand Corporation, will help show the importance of continued funding for the Cadet Encampment Assistance Program. Through this memo, we're asking for your assistance in publicizing the survey and encouraging cadets and their parents to complete it.
2. Here are some basic facts about the survey:
Survey Title:
CAP Cadet Encampment Survey 2015
Purpose of Survey:
Identify the encampment program's short-term outcomes, use that data to justify further AF support of encampments, and generally improve the encampment experience for future years.
Invitations:
All CAP cadets aged 13 and over – whether they participated in encampment or not – and their parents will be invited to participate via an email on 5 October.
Opt-In Status:
No one is required to participate in the survey; it's completely voluntary.
Strategy:
By inviting non-encampment cadets to participate, we'll have a baseline against which to measure encampment success. (One would expect encampment graduates to report greater confidence in their leadership skills, and better awareness of STEM careers, for example, compared to non-encampment cadets.)
Survey Design:
At the Air Force's request, researchers at the Rand Corporation, one of America's most prestigious think tanks, developed the survey for CAP.
Confidentiality:
Individuals' responses to the survey will be kept confidential. CAP will share the data only in the aggregate.
Availability:
We plan to email cadets and parents invitations to the survey on 5 October, and would keep the survey open through 18 October.
Legal Compliance:
The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act regulates how organizations collect information from youth under age 13. To prevent any potential compliance issues, CAP is only surveying cadets aged 13 and older.
3. If you have any questions about this survey project, please contact us at cadets@capnhq.gov. Thank you for your continued, outstanding support of the cadets.
Best regards,
- curt
Curt LaFond
Deputy Director for Cadet Programs
Facebook
Google Plus
Twitter
View this email in your browser
You are receiving this email because of your relationship with Civil Air Patrol. Please reconfirm your interest in receiving emails from us. If you do not wish to receive any more emails, you can unsubscribe here.
Quote from: TheSkyHornet on October 09, 2015, 07:37:17 AM
I'm going to chime in here...
I was unaware of this survey, nor has it been brought to my attention; so, I am not completely aware of its contents, as I have not seen it for mysel. I assume simply asking some of my cadets about it that I could get the Intel that others are commenting on.
Anyway, while I understand the whole "gender issue" has been a sensitive topic lately, especially with the military, I don't understand how this relates to CAP aside from PT standards. I'm in the belief, as well as acceptance, that I may have cadets who have, well, I don't want to say "issues," but, perhaps, sexuality that may be outside of the norm. At the end of the day, it's not my business, and it really isn't NHQ's business.
So, I hope I'm not jumping the gun here. But from some of the comments I'm reading, I'm. It fully comfortable with some of the things it sounds like the cadets are being asked.
On the subject of "boundary concerns," as I have read, I fully understand where that may be coming from. It seems to be a common question on CAP Talk, and I wouldn't be surprised if some of the survey questions didn't come from some of the posts on here, but I'm still not fully understanding what the survey's intent was/is.
As I said, perhaps I'm jumping the gun and maybe skipping some of the posts on this thread, but I'm a little confused here. Maybe in the future, surveys that cadets receive can be sent to the Cadet Programs specialists in addition to the cadets, because I'm really lost at what occurred here. I have heard nothing of it until reading the forum.
You may want to check the email address you have listed in eservices, a notification was sent on Sept 25.....
Upcoming Encampment Survey
Dear Unit Commanders and Directors of Cadet Programs,
1. In a few days, we will be asking all cadets aged 13 and older and their parents to participate in a survey regarding the CAP Cadet Program, with special emphasis on the value of the encampment program. This voluntary survey, contracted by the Air Force and developed by the Rand Corporation, will help show the importance of continued funding for the Cadet Encampment Assistance Program. Through this memo, we're asking for your assistance in publicizing the survey and encouraging cadets and their parents to complete it.
2. Here are some basic facts about the survey:
Survey Title:
CAP Cadet Encampment Survey 2015
Purpose of Survey:
Identify the encampment program's short-term outcomes, use that data to justify further AF support of encampments, and generally improve the encampment experience for future years.
Invitations:
All CAP cadets aged 13 and over – whether they participated in encampment or not – and their parents will be invited to participate via an email on 5 October.
Opt-In Status:
No one is required to participate in the survey; it's completely voluntary.
Strategy:
By inviting non-encampment cadets to participate, we'll have a baseline against which to measure encampment success. (One would expect encampment graduates to report greater confidence in their leadership skills, and better awareness of STEM careers, for example, compared to non-encampment cadets.)
Survey Design:
At the Air Force's request, researchers at the Rand Corporation, one of America's most prestigious think tanks, developed the survey for CAP.
Confidentiality:
Individuals' responses to the survey will be kept confidential. CAP will share the data only in the aggregate.
Availability:
We plan to email cadets and parents invitations to the survey on 5 October, and would keep the survey open through 18 October.
Legal Compliance:
The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act regulates how organizations collect information from youth under age 13. To prevent any potential compliance issues, CAP is only surveying cadets aged 13 and older.
3. If you have any questions about this survey project, please contact us at cadets@capnhq.gov. Thank you for your continued, outstanding support of the cadets.
Best regards,
- curt
Curt LaFond
Deputy Director for Cadet Programs
Facebook
Google Plus
Twitter
View this email in your browser
You are receiving this email because of your relationship with Civil Air Patrol. Please reconfirm your interest in receiving emails from us. If you do not wish to receive any more emails, you can unsubscribe here.
My email in eServices is my wing email and has been since I joined CAP, as Wing automatically gives us an email upon acceptance and being added to the roster.
I received no such survey. There is a possibility it went to my CC, as, until today, she was the CDC in addition to her other duties; however, I have been acting as CDC for most of our cadet programs responsibilities in an unofficial, supervised capacity. Even though I'm a CP specialty track since June, and CDC as of today today, I was never sent any such survey by NHQ nor within my own squadron. In squadrons where there may be as many as 5 CP specialists, I would think they would all receive the same email, not just the CC and CDC.
The email you have copied and pasted above does not contain the survey other than informing the recipient that a survey will be sent out in the future. I would assume that we would still be copied in on the actual survey, as us in the CP specialty are accountable for the training, satisfaction, and well being of cadets in our units.
Quote from: TheSkyHornet on October 12, 2015, 06:54:41 PM
In squadrons where there may be as many as 5 CP specialists, I would think they would all receive the same email, not just the CC and CDC.
This is totally separate from the topic at hand, but why would you think that? The purpose of the email from NHQ was to notify commanders so that they could direct cadets and parents to check their email and take the survey. It was not to push the survey itself out. I'm honestly curious, why would you expect national to send a notice to every CP rated member?
Quote from: jeders on October 12, 2015, 10:18:11 PM
Quote from: TheSkyHornet on October 12, 2015, 06:54:41 PM
In squadrons where there may be as many as 5 CP specialists, I would think they would all receive the same email, not just the CC and CDC.
This is totally separate from the topic at hand, but why would you think that? The purpose of the email from NHQ was to notify commanders so that they could direct cadets and parents to check their email and take the survey. It was not to push the survey itself out. I'm honestly curious, why would you expect national to send a notice to every CP rated member?
I guess it may be fair to say that squadron CC's have the responsibility of passing along the information from NHQ to the appropriate personnel in each squadron, such as the cadet programs specialists and character development officers.
Part of the CP specialty at the squadron level is to train to become a better leader and mentor of cadets, which is described by CAP as a purpose of the CP specialty track. I would think that squadron officers engaged in cadet programs specialties would be in the should-know category as to national efforts to improve the CAP Cadet Program so that the specialists can help to better their own squadron's cadet corps. I would expect all of the cadet programs specialists in my squadron to be aware of national's efforts to strive for improvement, including if it involves cadet surveys. What is the survey content and how can we use it as the squadron level?
Maybe this comes from my belief that composite squadrons aren't always structured per CAPR 20-1, nor managed as such. There are often squadrons where the CC is also the CDC, or the CDC is relatively absent, and junior officers are tasked with managing the squadron's cadet corps. If this information isn't passed down to those running the cadet program, whether they're the CDC or not, it's a break down in the communication process. At this time, I don't know if any of my cadets ever got wind of this survey, because I was not in a position to pass this information along to them. This could be a further breakdown in the chain of command where a CC is not passing along this email or assumes that cadet programs officers would know of its existence and deal with it themselves.
I'd be curious to know why you don't think cadet programs specialists should be included in NHQ-initiated emails about cadet surveys for the betterment of the CAP Cadet Program.
We can start with the fact that they are not commanders or deputy commanders....
Hmmm. Be careful what you wish for.
We literally send out dozens of emails a day that concern "The betterment of the cadet program." Do you really want us to turn on the spam machine and send them to you? >:D
If you would like the "state of the art" CP information, you should subscribe to the RSS Feed to the Cadet Blog (http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/cadet_programs/) (or follow us on Twitter or like us on Facebook), or visit us at the The Proving Grounds (http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/cadet_programs/library/proving-grounds/) where we post the latest draft CP materials, white papers, etc.
We try very, very hard to be open and transparent as we develop and administer the CP. And I actually think we do a pretty good job at it. We routinely send our draft regs / updates out to the field for comment, revise the materials based on the comments, and then get units to beta-test the improvements before making things final.
Thank you for the work you do supporting our cadets.
Ned Lee
Col, CAP
National Cadet Program Manager
Quote from: tkelley004 on October 09, 2015, 06:06:06 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 09, 2015, 12:59:15 PM
Quote from: TheSkyHornet on October 09, 2015, 07:37:17 AM
Maybe in the future, surveys that cadets receive can be sent to the Cadet Programs specialists in addition to the cadets, because I'm really lost at what occurred here. I have heard nothing of it until reading the forum.
Agreed. I'm a Group Commander and Cadet Programs Officer and, until I read this thread, I hadn't heard of this survey either.
You may want to check the email address you have listed in eservices it was sent out on Sept 25th to that address. (the email is below)
I rechecked my e-mail, including the spam folder, and I got nothing.
Quote from: Ned on October 13, 2015, 03:55:41 PM
Hmmm. Be careful what you wish for.
We literally send out dozens of emails a day that concern "The betterment of the cadet program." Do you really want us to turn on the spam machine and send them to you? >:D
If you would like the "state of the art" CP information, you should subscribe to the RSS Feed to the Cadet Blog (http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/cadet_programs/) (or follow us on Twitter or like us on Facebook), or visit us at the The Proving Grounds (http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/cadet_programs/library/proving-grounds/) where we post the latest draft CP materials, white papers, etc.
We try very, very hard to be open and transparent as we develop and administer the CP. And I actually think we do a pretty good job at it. We routinely send our draft regs / updates out to the field for comment, revise the materials based on the comments, and then get units to beta-test the improvements before making things final.
Thank you for the work you do supporting our cadets.
Ned Lee
Col, CAP
National Cadet Program Manager
I would actually like that very much.
It's hard enough to stay on top of the occasional changes. I'd LOVE to be copied on anything sent in general direction of cadets, because when they have a question, they won't email NHQ, they'll ask me at the meeting.
Ned / all:
Thanks for your patience and your inputs (I've been absent dealing with work, family stuff, unit stuff, an ELT alert last week, etc.). I have been playing phone tag with NHQ to chat with Curt, and will try again.
There's a bit of a gap, IMHO, between the new federal mandates on the services to widen their accommodation of represented groups (e.g. Pvt. Bradley Manning - although I'm sure there are better examples out there than him), and CAP's requirements to reasonably accommodate protected groups as defined in our regs and under current federal law. I don't see this gap being easily put to rest on this discussion group. However, I begin to see how this mismatch could have produced an honestly intended survey that, in my view at least, went too far afield in asking minor volunteers the same sort of identity questions intended for adult recruits, and without parental notification in some cases. In my specific case, that disability question hit emotionally due to my past experience with an autistic son, and I again apologize if my tone went over the line, or triggered anyone else to do so.
Constructive suggestions:
I'd like to respectfully suggest that, going forward together, such survey tools and assessments be posted in draft format on the Proving Grounds, with a notice on the eServices page, for team review. There might be blind spots where members might suggest additional metrics or improvements not apparent to the CP team or to a select upper leadership team. I've been greatly encouraged over the past few years by the CP team's use of the Proving Grounds, and their willingness to seek continuous improvement, in the spirit of transparency to the membership and parents. I've even seen a couple of my past inputs adopted in subsequent regs, to my surprise.
Posting such pending items on the Grounds, coupled with a publicly posted notice on the eServices home page, should avoid blind siding the truly active members who log into eServices regularly and would view the notice. Coupled with avoiding sending future assessment instruments to cadets with no parent emails listed, that would seem to solve the notification issue completely.
As the OP, I'd like to thank you, Ned, for your time in responding.
V/R,
Spam
As a transgender person and a 3-year cadet, I don't think including a gender-nonspecific option is offensive at all. I think it might be important to know who identifies as gender non-conforming (transgender or otherwise) within the organization. Since as we've seen, there are probably more than a few. (http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=19381.0) In fact, one person I have a great deal of respect for is Arin Andrews (a female-to-male transgender person) who spent time as a cadet himself. (http://books.simonandschuster.com/Some-Assembly-Required/Arin-Andrews/9781481416764/reading_group_guide)
While I don't think it's offensive, I don't think it's necessarily effective to ask the question in this format. I think, from a statistical perspective (which is what I have to imagine that this was for), it's an ineffective exercise because only around 0.5% - 1% of the US population identifies as transgender or gender non-conforming (out of the 3% - 5% that identify as LGBTQ). It's unlikely that any response from individuals on this particular survey would be statistically significant. To be honest, when I was younger (when under 18 especially) I would have been far too paranoid to select such an option on a survey, primarily for fears cited earlier in this thread. Is this anonymous? Am I protected? What if XYZ person sees/finds out/etc. These are genuine fears for someone who maybe lives with unaccepting parents or family, or in an area of the country that tends to be more hostile (which unfortunately is still most of it).
Anyway, that's my two cents. I hope a different perspective is helpful to this discussion. I definitely think NHQ should explore regulations and policies surrounding trans* and gender non-conforming cadets, but it's definitely a hard topic. My only hope is that they don't make such decisions in a vacuum and consult with & consider all parties that could be affected by their decisions.
If you don't mind my asking, do you wear the uniform for your biological gender? Or has NHQ made some type of accommodation for you?
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 21, 2015, 01:19:28 PM
If you don't mind my asking, do you wear the uniform for your biological gender? Or has NHQ made some type of accommodation for you?
To chime in on this...
I think that's an interesting point you brought up: accommodations. What is considered an accommodation? Wearing the uniform of the opposite gender, or being authorized to wear the uniform of the gender you identify with?
If there's a male cadet that wants to wear the female uniform, we don't allow that. And if they say "I'm female," what is it about them that identifies them as a female outside of them saying (or believing/feeling/what have you) they are? It's a very slippery slope when it comes to the discrimination side of things, and I do believe that are federal legal implications on this if it goes the wrong way.
That being said, the military has discussed quite a bit, and we even saw the conversation pop up on CAP Talk, gender-neutral uniforms. Why should females and males wear a different cover, or belt, or blouse? It's really just tradition. That's pretty much it. In the modern era, since most military jobs are open to both genders, and all of CAP's positions are open to all genders, there isn't a "need" for a different uniform for opposing genders. So, if we want to keep the different uniforms in place for tradition, so be it, but recognize that that's the reason.
Adding to that, there are separate grooming standards for males and females. The military really hasn't moved from that. However, there are certain questions that have really never been clearly answered. What about women who have excessive facial hair (not peach fuzz, but that mustache or goatee growing in)? What about women who want to buzz their heads, or even shave them clean for that matter? In some circumstances, men's chest hair shouldn't stick out from the top of their undershirt. But there's no rule for women on that (if they were to have that "issue"). Women aren't required to shave their legs or arm pits for PT. The military, and CAP, have come out with a blanket statement that doesn't clearly answer those questions, but gives an answer to our social norms: "Professional appearance."
If someone says "I was born male, but I identify as female" and they grow their hair out, keep it cut off the shoulders, wear the female uniform as it is supposed to be worn, groom to female standards as we would culturally accept it, the only question remaining is "Is this professional?"
This is not an easy discussion to have. We can most certainly get some strong opinions on the topic, and I have my owns, but that doesn't put it into writing "These are CAP's regulations on this matter." 50 years ago, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Things are different today. I think it needs to be addressed, and it needs to be done so in a professional, rational manner.
To answer your question, Storm Chaser, I actually don't currently visit any meetings. My transition (and beginning to present as female all the time) was combined with a move across the country, so while I'm still technically a cadet, I'm not actively involved at any squadron at this time.
I'd like to join a local squadron again, but I've decided to wait until I have my legal name & gender marker changed on my identity documents, which should be within the next month or two. This will make it easier to avoid any issues.
I also intend to send an email to (someone, as yet undetermined - any suggestions?) at NHQ to inquire about any extra steps I should take to remain within the good graces of regulation and avoid any problems.
SkyHornet, I think, from my perspective.. I present as female. Just looking at me, you'd likely not think twice about the fact that I am. While my identity documents say 'Male' and the TSA gets really confused by me, I am female. What you're asking sounds a little deeper though - if you're asking what I think you are, it's when should we believe someone that says they're transgender? I think in the vast, vast majority of cases, by the time someone (if they're over 3-5 years of age) says something about being trans*, they've almost certainly thought it through to the extent that they are completely dead-certain of that fact. It can be pretty traumatic to be open about yourself, so it's something people tend to avoid until they feel they don't have any other choice. On the scientific side, there is mounting evidence that the construct of transgender peoples' brains are actually closely aligned with that of the gender the identify as.
Regarding "when is someone officially X gender?" .. well, it's not very clear. Only 30-35% of people who identify as trans* go through any surgical procedures at all.
On the concept of trans* military service, there are actually over 15,000 servicemen and women that serve in the U.S. military that are transgender but are presenting as their biological genders in order to serve. I nearly became one of them - and I'd still like to serve (my dream job is as a geospatial intelligence analyst) in the future, but unfortunately as we're the only NATO country that bars transgender persons from service currently, I won't be able to do that just yet. This is a great article on the topic: http://www.hrc.org/resources/entry/transgender-military-service (http://www.hrc.org/resources/entry/transgender-military-service)
It really is interesting, because I think that female-to-male cadets & others might have a bit of an easier time with this. Traditionally, a more masculine expression by a female in a military-oriented culture is acceptable - even in CAP, with few exceptions, females can wear 'male' uniform items. It's a little ironic, but even though the amount of male-to-female and female-to-male trans* people are 50-50, cultural perceptions are skewed.
Anyway - if I walked up to a squadron and tried to rejoin right now, I'm not really sure what would happen. Do I, as someone presenting as female and with hair down my back, need to cut it to a high-and-tight? That wouldn't seem very reasonable to me.
All things considered, it's that unknown that needs to ultimately be clarified, and as trans* acceptance becomes more common, trans* people will start to feel more comfortable trying to be themselves in environments like CAP.
I'd be happy to answer any other questions anyone has regarding my perspective, and I appreciate the respect I've seen here thus far.
Quote from: Wispin on October 21, 2015, 07:53:38 PM
To answer your question, Storm Chaser, I actually don't currently visit any meetings. My transition (and beginning to present as female all the time) was combined with a move across the country, so while I'm still technically a cadet, I'm not actively involved at any squadron at this time.
I'd like to join a local squadron again, but I've decided to wait until I have my legal name & gender marker changed on my identity documents, which should be within the next month or two. This will make it easier to avoid any issues.
I also intend to send an email to (someone, as yet undetermined - any suggestions?) at NHQ to inquire about any extra steps I should take to remain within the good graces of regulation and avoid any problems.
SkyHornet, I think, from my perspective.. I present as female. Just looking at me, you'd likely not think twice about the fact that I am. While my identity documents say 'Male' and the TSA gets really confused by me, I am female.
It really is interesting, because I think that female-to-male cadets & others might have a bit of an easier time with this. Traditionally, a more masculine expression by a female in a military-oriented culture is acceptable - even in CAP, with few exceptions, females can wear 'male' uniform items. It's a little ironic, but even though the amount of male-to-female and female-to-male trans* people are 50-50, cultural perceptions are skewed.
Anyway - if I walked up to a squadron and tried to rejoin right now, I'm not really sure what would happen. Do I, as someone presenting as female and with hair down my back, need to cut it to a high-and-tight? That wouldn't seem very reasonable to me.
All things considered, it's that unknown that needs to ultimately be clarified, and as trans* acceptance becomes more common, trans* people will start to feel more comfortable trying to be themselves in environments like CAP.
I'd be happy to answer any other questions anyone has regarding my perspective, and I appreciate the respect I've seen here thus far.
Good info. But just a point of clarification: are you a cadet? Here: http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=19381.msg356972#msg356972 (http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=19381.msg356972#msg356972) you state otherwise.
Sorry, no - to be clear, I'm not currently an active cadet. I didn't mean to imply that I was, merely that I had been one for three years. I was in the process of becoming a senior member, but I allowed my membership to lapse a few months ago due to my move (I was still officially a cadet at that time, as I never finished processing the paperwork required to make the change to a flight officer). And in any case, I turn 21 next month, so I will likely rejoin as a senior member directly.
Wispin,
Feel free to contact Curt LaFond or his sidekick Jo at the NHQ Cadet Programs shop for any information and clarifications on current or possible future policies. Several other trans cadets already have called us to discuss the issues.
And again,
Quote from: Ned on October 08, 2015, 06:14:58 AM
[T]he transgender discussion deserves its own thread. (I think we have indeed discussed it elsewhere, but I have to get up in six hours to catch a flight and I'm being too lazy to search.) It should have its own thread for two reasons: One, it's important that we get it right after an open and transparent process before we make any changes to existing policies and regulations. And two, because it really has nothing to do with the CEAP program (except as it may discover that TG troops are underserved by encampment.)
We have transgendered males (guys who appear female) get arrested often..... and make an attempt to get booked in and housed in the female pods. They are always surprised when it doesn't happen.
Quote from: Flying Pig on October 21, 2015, 08:31:54 PM
We have transgendered males (guys who appear female) get arrested often..... and make an attempt to get booked in and housed in the female pods. They are always surprised when it doesn't happen.
I take it they haven't gone under the knife yet.
Even those who have end up in protective/segregated custody. If you ever want to witness natures food chain, spend a couple years working in a prison. When you take off all the fluff, people aren't to far off from the animals roaming the Serengeti looking for their next meal.
Quote from: Flying Pig on October 21, 2015, 08:31:54 PM
transgendered males (guys who appear female)
I would like to point out that just because they are men that appear female, it does not mean they are transgender. Cross-dressing is different than transgender as cross dressers are usually heterosexual that dress as the other gender but still identify as their biological sex.
Quote from: Flying Pig on October 22, 2015, 01:21:16 PM
Even those who have end up in protective/segregated custody. If you ever want to witness natures food chain, spend a couple years working in a prison. When you take off all the fluff, people aren't to far off from the animals roaming the Serengeti looking for their next meal.
That probably speaks less to the issue of transgender, but more to the issue of how our prison systems are conducted. That is of course outside the scope of CAPTalk and really no clear answer to it.
Good to know.....
Quote from: Flying Pig on October 21, 2015, 08:31:54 PM
We have transgendered males (guys who appear female) get arrested often..... and make an attempt to get booked in and housed in the female pods. They are always surprised when it doesn't happen.
I can only imagine what gets asked at intake...
"Uh, yeah, I identify as female and as such demand I be housed with the female population"
"OK. Do you have a ____?"
"Um...yeah..."
"Sorry. Not gonna happen."
"But..."
"Nope! Cut it off and we'll talk."