Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 19, 2018, 02:34:18 AM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  Cadet Programs  |  Cadet Programs Management & Activities  |  Topic: CPPT Gray Area??
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 [2]  All Print
Author Topic: CPPT Gray Area??  (Read 2619 times)
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 28,545

« Reply #20 on: January 08, 2018, 02:40:11 PM »

CAP's policy states that there is a distinction between individuals who knew each other before CAP and those who met in CAP.

No, it doesn't.


Yes, it actually does. See "prior relationships."

Doesn't likely apply in this case, see below, (and I would argue that regardless it's a dangerous place to be).

CAPR 52-10, Page 9
https://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R052_010_C5B73B2B78712.pdf

c. Personal Contact Outside of CAP Activities. Normally, cadets and adult leaders are not permitted
to have significant contact outside of official CAP activities. However, CAP recognizes that there
are a limited number of situations in which contact between adult leaders and cadets outside of authorized
meetings and activities may occur because of chance encounters, pre-existing relationships, or other
situations described below.

(1) Chance Encounters. Brief conversations between adult leaders and cadets resulting from
chance encounters in the community are permitted.

(2) Prior Relationships. Non-romantic relationships between adult leaders and cadets that existed
prior to one of the individuals joining CAP
(e.g. family, neighbors, coworkers, etc.) are not improper
and may continue, including substantial contact outside of CAP activities. However, all CPP standards
of practice will continue to apply during CAP activities except the ďtransportation rule of threeĒ (2-3g) is
not applicable. Adult leaders with prior relationships with cadets may transport those cadets to and from
CAP activities under one-deep leadership with the parentís permission.


One could presume these are members of the same unit as Sierra_Ranger17, in which case those
relationships didn't likely exist prior to his joining CAP, considering the ages involved,
it's likely quite the opposite.

These are some of the most potentially dangerous situations, because people will look
for and maybe find loopholes to maintain a behavior which is potentially hazardous to
the cadets involved, and if something goes sideways, later everyone will ask "how could this have happened"?

The best course to to disengage and consider the totality of the situation instead of looking for loopholes.
Logged


foo
Forum Regular

Posts: 162

« Reply #21 on: January 08, 2018, 02:50:13 PM »

Agreed. My challenge was only to your factual error.

As a parent (not to mention a conscientious officer), I find rather disturbing the lax attitudes concerning the CPP expressed here by some CP officers.
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 28,545

« Reply #22 on: January 08, 2018, 03:00:12 PM »

I see similar issues the Boys Scouts "i.e. rulz is rulez, but we're all friends, amirite...?"

At least in this case the young man is asking the question, which means odds he's given it
more then a passing thought.
Logged


Sierra_Ranger17
Newbie

Posts: 4

« Reply #23 on: January 08, 2018, 03:20:44 PM »

Just some clarifications: I only drive my sister, since she's 15 and doesn't have a license. Other cadets drive themselves/ride with friends and we all meet up at the Chickfila by our unit. I do not drive other cadets.

My sister and her best friend are the only people I have a preexisting relationship with. The cadets I see after meetings are people I met through CAP. I joined as a senior so I'm not a former cadet with old friendships.

EDIT: Sometimes other seniors come to the post meeting meeting, and if they do I sit with them. However sometimes Iím the only senior so I do what I can to be social but professional. Let me know if you want further clarifications.

Thanks everyone for your help. Let's keep it civil and continue the discussion!
« Last Edit: January 08, 2018, 03:31:24 PM by Sierra_Ranger17 » Logged
foo
Forum Regular

Posts: 162

« Reply #24 on: January 08, 2018, 03:48:42 PM »

At least in this case the young man is asking the question, which means odds he's given it
more then a passing thought.

Yes indeed, kudos for seeking clarification on a vitally important subject.

... continue the discussion!

But why? Haven't your questions been answered?
Logged
Sierra_Ranger17
Newbie

Posts: 4

« Reply #25 on: January 08, 2018, 05:37:16 PM »

... continue the discussion!

But why? Haven't your questions been answered?

Yes, and I'm enjoying seeing others' insight.
Logged
TheSkyHornet
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,145

« Reply #26 on: January 09, 2018, 11:51:10 AM »

Eclipse, we're usually on the same page in most of these discussions, but I'm going to need to defend myself on this one here; some of these may already have been answered.

CAP's policy states that there is a distinction between individuals who knew each other before CAP and those who met in CAP.

No, it doesn't.

Prior Relationships. Non-romantic relationships between adult leaders and cadets that existed
prior to one of the individuals joining CAP (e.g. family, neighbors, coworkers, etc.) are not improper
and may continue, including substantial contact outside of CAP activities. However, all CPP standards
of practice will continue to apply during CAP activities except the ďtransportation rule of threeĒ (2-3g) is
not applicable. Adult leaders with prior relationships with cadets may transport those cadets to and from
CAP activities under one-deep leadership with the parentís permission.


Yes, it does quite literally make that distinction.



Quote
Regarding meeting someone in CAP, your private life is your private life, so long as your relationship is not what could be considered inappropriate.

No, it's not, at least in regards to adult and cadet interaction.

(3) Professional Relationships. Relationships of a professional nature between adult leaders and
cadets (e.g. teacher/student, doctor/patient, clergy/congregant, etc.) are not improper, and substantial
contact outside of CAP activities may occur, provided the interactions are made in the context of the
professional relationship.

(4) Other Organizations. An adult leaderís and cadetís mutual membership in another organization
is not improper, and substantial contact outside of CAP activities may occur when the interactions
are made expressly for the purpose of participating in that organizationís activities (e.g. a cadet and
senior join a Ham radio club and interact at radio club events, IAW club rules).

5. Childrenís Friends. When cadets become personal friends and a member of one of the families
is an adult leader, the adult leaderís interactions with their childís friend outside of CAP activities in
a non-CAP capacity are not improper. However, all CPP standards of practice will continue to apply during
CAP activities.


CPP applies to CAP activities, including traveling to/from.

Quote
There are numerous instances where someone can develop into being a personal mentor, granted there is no overstep in their relationship in CAP and with legal guardians (e.g., a senior member who tutors someone, helps them through substance abuse, etc.). That's a personal matter outside of CAP.

No, it's not.

See above.

Professional relationships apply.

Quote
If you travel with a cadet, that's between you and that cadet's parents.

No, it isn't.

g. Transportation. If an adult leader transports cadets other than his or her family members or
cadets known through relationships existing prior to their CAP membership to, from, or during a CAP
activity, the party must number at least three (adult leader driver plus two cadets; or adult leader driver,
second adult leader, and one cadet). See 2-7c for details on prior relationships. Regarding liability insurance,
transportation to and from CAP activities via member-owned vehicles is not considered part of
official travel and is therefore conducted at the memberís risk


Three-Deep rule applies.

Quote
There are ways to "CYA" on having someone else's kid in your car. But that's getting too detailed for what this topic is. As for your sister inviting friends over, there's nothing wrong with you sitting in the living when they're all hanging around in the living room. It's just a matter of how far you take that relationship. If there is any suggestion that it's becoming intimate between you and one of those cadets, it's a problem in CAP (regardless of what the law may say).

Spending time with cadets outside of CAP could well be considered a boundary violation as a minimum,
and is not a good idea.

Yes.  When you turn 18, you have decisions to make, at least in a CAP context.

5. Childrenís Friends. When cadets become personal friends and a member of one of the families
is an adult leader, the adult leaderís interactions with their childís friend outside of CAP activities in
a non-CAP capacity are not improper. However, all CPP standards of practice will continue to apply during
CAP activities.


It goes right back to this. It's not improper to be around a cadet in a non-CAP activity. It's up to the adult to be responsible in keeping the contact appropriate.

Quote
You can be friends with cadets as a senior member. Friends is a loose term. But you need to watch that relationship and make sure it doesn't go too far.
No, you really can't. It's a conflict of interest from both perspectives, and for every anecdotal "but I knew this one..."
there's 10 examples that go sideways, either in spectacular, media-related ways, or more generally, subtle, less
obvious ones.

This goes back to everything up above. "Friends" doesn't need to be people chatting on social media. You can be friends and maintain a professional relationship. Don't make it out to be more than it is. We don't need to get into making definitions here; CAP already has definitions provided in its policy.

If your friendship does not violate any of these policies, then you have a mutual, appropriate relationship in CAP. In fact, the CPPT slides from NHQ state: Seniors are Like Teachers. Senior members are a mentor, not an adversary.

Quote
Time for you to review the Cadet Protection regulations.

I think the regulations clearly backed up all of this.

Try reviewing the PowerPoints from the website:
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/Cadet_Protection_Basic__slides_09E39B8D2C1A7.pdf
https://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/Cadet_Protection_Basic__classroom_s_89B8883AFEC66.pdf

Cadet protection is an extremely big deal, as well as a big responsibility, which needs to be instructed precisely to the regulation. CAP has training tools available with further expound on the regulation, providing examples and scenarios for reference. There is no need for "But I knew this one..." It's covered. You either can or you can't. Let's leave the dramatic scenarios out of it (like a cadet not having been picked up after a meeting and everyone else left).
Logged
Ned
Resident Philosopher

Posts: 2,176

« Reply #27 on: January 09, 2018, 01:13:01 PM »

As a legal type guy and the primary author of some of what we are discussing here, I enjoy a hair-splitting theoretical argument as much as the next guy.  Maybe more. And much of what Bob and Skyhornet have said is both true, and not, depending on the context.

The BoG created the CPP to limit risk to cadets, and part of that is severely limiting contact between seniors and cadets outside of CAP activities (at which the two deep and other CPP policies apply), with a few necessary exceptions like the above-discussed prior and professional relationships, chance encounters, etc..  The basic rule is "no clear exception means no contact."

I did want to address one comment that seemed to imply that a senior could spend substantial time "mentoring", tutoring, or "helping" a cadet outside of CAP activities under the "professional relationship" exception.  (If that is not what you meant to say, I apologize for misreading it.)

And without further information,  that would be an incorrect interpretation.  Sure, we could add some hypothetical facts like the senior is a professional therapist counselor and the cadet just happens to be part of the senior's practice, or maybe they were both enrolled in Big Brothers, and the cadet had been matched as the senior's "little."  Or some other unusual hypothetical facts.

But an ordinary senior member may not spend substantial time with a CAP cadet outside of CAP activities for plain vanilla "mentoring."  Otherwise, the exception would eat the rule.  "Um, we wasn't being peer-to-peer friends or engaged in a romantic relationship, we was, ummm, mentoring.  Yeah, that's the ticket.  I was mentoring the cadet while we were hanging out chilling. You can't discipline me."

I can and do mentor and coach cadets.  I think it is one of the most rewarding things I do, frankly.  But I do it at CAP activities, following the rules.  And not on extended phone calls, IMs, or in-person visits or meetings away from CAP.

Please keep teaching, mentoring, and coaching our cadets.  You are truly making a difference in America's future.

Just follow the rules.


Ned Lee
National Cadet Program Manager

Logged
Alaric
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 781

« Reply #28 on: January 09, 2018, 02:26:20 PM »

As a legal type guy and the primary author of some of what we are discussing here, I enjoy a hair-splitting theoretical argument as much as the next guy.  Maybe more. And much of what Bob and Skyhornet have said is both true, and not, depending on the context.

The BoG created the CPP to limit risk to cadets, and part of that is severely limiting contact between seniors and cadets outside of CAP activities (at which the two deep and other CPP policies apply), with a few necessary exceptions like the above-discussed prior and professional relationships, chance encounters, etc..  The basic rule is "no clear exception means no contact."

I did want to address one comment that seemed to imply that a senior could spend substantial time "mentoring", tutoring, or "helping" a cadet outside of CAP activities under the "professional relationship" exception.  (If that is not what you meant to say, I apologize for misreading it.)

And without further information,  that would be an incorrect interpretation.  Sure, we could add some hypothetical facts like the senior is a professional therapist counselor and the cadet just happens to be part of the senior's practice, or maybe they were both enrolled in Big Brothers, and the cadet had been matched as the senior's "little."  Or some other unusual hypothetical facts.

But an ordinary senior member may not spend substantial time with a CAP cadet outside of CAP activities for plain vanilla "mentoring."  Otherwise, the exception would eat the rule.  "Um, we wasn't being peer-to-peer friends or engaged in a romantic relationship, we was, ummm, mentoring.  Yeah, that's the ticket.  I was mentoring the cadet while we were hanging out chilling. You can't discipline me."

I can and do mentor and coach cadets.  I think it is one of the most rewarding things I do, frankly.  But I do it at CAP activities, following the rules.  And not on extended phone calls, IMs, or in-person visits or meetings away from CAP.

Please keep teaching, mentoring, and coaching our cadets.  You are truly making a difference in America's future.

Just follow the rules.


Ned Lee
National Cadet Program Manager

If people are worried about the line, join a senior squadron where you will likely not be in contact with cadets (except for O-rides) or establish yourself in a specialty that does not cross over with CP (Finance, Personnel, Professional Development all leap to mind).  Whereas I believe our CPPT is a huge overreach and a direct product of the Nanny State environment the country seems to like, those are the rules.  We follow them or we get out.
Logged
TheSkyHornet
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,145

« Reply #29 on: January 09, 2018, 02:36:07 PM »

As a legal type guy and the primary author of some of what we are discussing here, I enjoy a hair-splitting theoretical argument as much as the next guy.  Maybe more. And much of what Bob and Skyhornet have said is both true, and not, depending on the context.

The BoG created the CPP to limit risk to cadets, and part of that is severely limiting contact between seniors and cadets outside of CAP activities (at which the two deep and other CPP policies apply), with a few necessary exceptions like the above-discussed prior and professional relationships, chance encounters, etc..  The basic rule is "no clear exception means no contact."

I did want to address one comment that seemed to imply that a senior could spend substantial time "mentoring", tutoring, or "helping" a cadet outside of CAP activities under the "professional relationship" exception.  (If that is not what you meant to say, I apologize for misreading it.)

And without further information,  that would be an incorrect interpretation.  Sure, we could add some hypothetical facts like the senior is a professional therapist counselor and the cadet just happens to be part of the senior's practice, or maybe they were both enrolled in Big Brothers, and the cadet had been matched as the senior's "little."  Or some other unusual hypothetical facts.

But an ordinary senior member may not spend substantial time with a CAP cadet outside of CAP activities for plain vanilla "mentoring."  Otherwise, the exception would eat the rule.  "Um, we wasn't being peer-to-peer friends or engaged in a romantic relationship, we was, ummm, mentoring.  Yeah, that's the ticket.  I was mentoring the cadet while we were hanging out chilling. You can't discipline me."

I can and do mentor and coach cadets.  I think it is one of the most rewarding things I do, frankly.  But I do it at CAP activities, following the rules.  And not on extended phone calls, IMs, or in-person visits or meetings away from CAP.

Please keep teaching, mentoring, and coaching our cadets.  You are truly making a difference in America's future.

Just follow the rules.


Ned Lee
National Cadet Program Manager

It was a misinterpretation due to how I worded it, and I totally see how that triggered everything. We're on the same page here.

I think the PowerPoint deck does a great deal of justice to back up 52-10 in regard to the point that you can do these things as an adult, but not as a senior member in CAP, and if you want to remain a senior member in CAP, then you need to forfeit certain practices.

For example:
CAP is not telling the mom who she can or cannot allow to transport her child.
However, CAP is saying that if an adult wants to be a senior member, he or she must
comply with the transportation rule of three because it is such an effective way to
thwart a would-be abuserís efforts to isolate and groom a potential victim.


I think that's a pretty spot on principle that applies across the board. CAP is not telling parents what their kids can/can't do, or who they can hang out with. CAP is, however, telling senior members, that if they want to be part of this organization, they still have to apply these practices despite what mom says. It's a boundary.

So we're tracking here, Ned. We're all getting caught up in word games.

If people are worried about the line, join a senior squadron where you will likely not be in contact with cadets (except for O-rides) or establish yourself in a specialty that does not cross over with CP (Finance, Personnel, Professional Development all leap to mind).  Whereas I believe our CPPT is a huge overreach and a direct product of the Nanny State environment the country seems to like, those are the rules.  We follow them or we get out.

This.

This applies to everything, not just the CPP---uniforms, promotions, all of it. One's opinion of how it should be does not change how it is on this date at this moment.
Logged
Cadetter
Seasoned Member

Posts: 221

« Reply #30 on: January 09, 2018, 02:45:48 PM »

As a 17-yo cadet, I appreciate it when SMs pay attention to CPPT. I'm good personal friends with one 22 yo SM, but we met before joining CAP, although we've shared a substantial amount of contact during our intersecting 4 years as cadets. Sometimes CPP rules seem silly in a given circumstance, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Most of CPP isn't seriously inconvenient for the majority of members, in my very limited experience, and if extra caution in 100 cases can prevent abuse in one, it would be worth it for me.
Logged
Wright Brothers Award, 2013
Billy Mitchell Award, 2016
Earhart Award, 2018

Planned: Eaker Award, late 2018 or early 2019; Spaatz Award, summer 2019
Pages: 1 [2]  All Print 
CAP Talk  |  Cadet Programs  |  Cadet Programs Management & Activities  |  Topic: CPPT Gray Area??
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.498 seconds with 20 queries.
click here to email me