New CAPR 52-16 Just Dropped

[MajorM]

Of course she had a say.. If you are kosher for example I'm assuming she'd say something.  But we can knock out a large swath of the population by setting some basic ground rules.  "When your kid goes on a Cadet activity there won't be drugs, alcohol, tobacco, or energy drinks".  Yes, some parents want to be more restrictive-ok. I honor those as feasible.  Want your kid to eat vegan? Then send the food.  Want him to avoid candy?  Well I'll watch out as best I can.

And am I missing something?  Do we think there will be some significant subset of parents who are so offended by the lack of Monster that they will have their cadet leave CAP?  Will they be so insulted at the "infringement on their rights" that they pull their cadet out?  I'm sure some small number exist.. I've just never met them in all my years.

[lordmonar]

Except often those parents aren't present.  The rule structure allows parents to have a reasonable assumption of what things will be like when they hand their kid over. 

And I seriously cannot believe the debating point is whether energy drinks, alcohol, or tobacco should be restricted at activities.  There are real issues to debate... And we're going to navel-gaze about whether a kid can have Monster?  Let's try debating the substantive stuff.

My mother wasn't present at BSA meetings didn't mean she didn't have a say on what I was allowed to eat or drink.

Good thing this is not the Boy Scouts.      

[Alaric]

Of course she had a say.. If you are kosher for example I'm assuming she'd say something.  But we can knock out a large swath of the population by setting some basic ground rules.  "When your kid goes on a Cadet activity there won't be drugs, alcohol, tobacco, or energy drinks".  Yes, some parents want to be more restrictive-ok. I honor those as feasible.  Want your kid to eat vegan? Then send the food.  Want him to avoid candy?  Well I'll watch out as best I can.

And am I missing something?  Do we think there will be some significant subset of parents who are so offended by the lack of Monster that they will have their cadet leave CAP?  Will they be so insulted at the "infringement on their rights" that they pull their cadet out?  I'm sure some small number exist.. I've just never met them in all my years.

Once again I care more about consistency if energy drinks are bad, what about those cold Starbucks drinks: high sugar, high caffeine.  My point is I do not believe that CAP should be making nutritional decisions for the cadets.  That's the parents job.

[Alaric]

I don't have any enthusiasm for restricting the food, alcohol or tobacco choices for Senior members, but if its good enough for the cadets then shouldn't it be good enough for us?

No....being more mature we can handle adult things better the younger cadet aged people.
Also being mature adults we don't need a nanny state dictating our behavior beyond that is necessarry to accomplish our mission.

So just like a beer drinking parent we are going to say to our cadets......do as I say....when you are older you can do adult things.

If only cadets had mature adults legally obligated to make decisions for them.  No wait aren't they called parents?

NOT ON CAP TIME.  That's where you argument breaks down.  I don't care what your parents allow you to do.  Eat Cheetos and Jelly Bellys for breakfast and 10-15 Monsters a day, 1/2 pack of Camel Unfiltered, and beer at dinner time. 

ON CAP TIME you are we as CP Leaders need to be treating them responsibly as if we were legally responsible for their health and well being.....oh wait we are.

If we are leaders shouldn't it be example.  Banned for cadets banned for seniors otherwise your hypocrisy is showing

[Eclipse]

My mother wasn't present at BSA meetings didn't mean she didn't have a say on what I was allowed to eat or drink.

You're assuming a level of parental involvement and even presence that is no longer the norm today.

My kids, 10/12 have a Wii they could take or leave, no cell phones, strict daily regimes, and we (as in my spouse) are involved
in knowing where they go, who they hang with, and also know those parents.  They spend far too much time
buried in a screen, but probably not 1/2 the time as their peers.

Everything that they use which communicates with the outside world is either parental controlled or filtered.
They go to church regularly and are invested in the community.

Knowing you personally I would hazard you benefited from a similar upbringing, I certainly did. 

Based on exasperated, clueless comments from the parents of some of their peers, I can say for a fact that
they are an island.  It brings me pride, but no joy to say that.

The problem with the comments about "nanny state" is that it presupposes the guv'mint is trying to
circumvent and replace the will of involved parents, when the reality is that in far too many situations
there is "parent" - struggling to get through the day, and possibly from Gen X would prefer to be their
kids' friend instead of their parent.

If we are leaders shouldn't it be example.  Banned for cadets banned for seniors otherwise your hypocrisy is showing

To some extent it highlights the proper separation between those capable of making their own decisions,
and those who still must have some made for them.  If a person wants the power, they can become
CAP "adult" (i.e. senior member).  Until that time, and while others are responsible for their safety
restrictions apply.

When mom and dad are around, and in control, they can allow whatever behavior is legal, when they
have abdicated their responsibility to another, usually to the benefit of all involved, different rules apply.

It's different then telling someone eles's kid to "stop jumping on the couch" if you are babysitting them.
What they do at home doesn't apply.

[MajorM]

I don't necessarily disagree that those should be off-limits. I do disagree about nutritional choices.  The AAP clearly says kids should not have energy drinks.  They also say kids shouldn't have caffeine, though their recommendations focus more on energy drinks.  Monster will have up to 40% more caffeine than a Starbucks drink.  And more sugar too.  But if the backstop is the American Assoc of Pediatricians, then yes, we should ban them all.  Why didn't they?  I don't know.. Though manageability and social norms I imagine played a role.

The encampment workgroup batted around nutritional guidelines for a bit.  I believe we should have them.  Especially for something like a week long event.  At that same time we have to be realistic on what can be done within the skillsets and budgets we have.  But to simply ignore medical guidance (and not some random study here or there, but recommendations from a defining organization) is not good risk management nor wise.  But yes.... Toss the Dew, Sundrop, Mello Yellow (anyone still drink that?), frappacinos, and other stuff out.  Replace it with scheduled naps and sleep.  It's a better footing to be on.

[Eclipse]

The encampment workgroup batted around nutritional guidelines for a bit.  I believe we should have them.  Especially for something like a week long event.  At that same time we have to be realistic on what can be done within the skillsets and budgets we have.  But to simply ignore medical guidance (and not some random study here or there, but recommendations from a defining organization) is not good risk management nor wise.  But yes.... Toss the Dew, Sundrop, Mello Yellow (anyone still drink that?), frappacinos, and other stuff out.  Replace it with scheduled naps and sleep.  It's a better footing to be on.

They bring no advantage to the activity, and are expensive.  That alone should be enough to end the conversation.

One of the parts of encampment is imparting life skills, nutrition is a huge part of that.  It's kind of hard to
stress PT on one hand and then allow junk food in the same conversation.

[lordmonar]

Once again I care more about consistency if energy drinks are bad, what about those cold Starbucks drinks: high sugar, high caffeine.  My point is I do not believe that CAP should be making nutritional decisions for the cadets.  That's the parents job.

Not on CAP time.   It is that simple.  It is the parents to job to decide what is right and wrong....but not on CAP time...that's our job.  It is a parent's job to decide was is safe or not safe.....but not on CAP time....that's our job.   Are you beginning to see the pattern? 

Sure....let's go and argue about if we should be consistent in where we draw the line.  I'm all with you on that one.   Set a standard and write the guidelines.

But you can't say we can't do the parent's job in this case.....when we do it in so many other cases.

[lordmonar]

I don't have any enthusiasm for restricting the food, alcohol or tobacco choices for Senior members, but if its good enough for the cadets then shouldn't it be good enough for us?

No....being more mature we can handle adult things better the younger cadet aged people.
Also being mature adults we don't need a nanny state dictating our behavior beyond that is necessarry to accomplish our mission.

So just like a beer drinking parent we are going to say to our cadets......do as I say....when you are older you can do adult things.

If only cadets had mature adults legally obligated to make decisions for them.  No wait aren't they called parents?

NOT ON CAP TIME.  That's where you argument breaks down.  I don't care what your parents allow you to do.  Eat Cheetos and Jelly Bellys for breakfast and 10-15 Monsters a day, 1/2 pack of Camel Unfiltered, and beer at dinner time. 

ON CAP TIME you are we as CP Leaders need to be treating them responsibly as if we were legally responsible for their health and well being.....oh wait we are.

If we are leaders shouldn't it be example.  Banned for cadets banned for seniors otherwise your hypocrisy is showing

It is not hypocrisy.    An adult member is thought to know what is best for themselves.   A cadet is not. 

[Alaric]

Once again I care more about consistency if energy drinks are bad, what about those cold Starbucks drinks: high sugar, high caffeine.  My point is I do not believe that CAP should be making nutritional decisions for the cadets.  That's the parents job.

Not on CAP time.   It is that simple.  It is the parents to job to decide what is right and wrong....but not on CAP time...that's our job.  It is a parent's job to decide was is safe or not safe.....but not on CAP time....that's our job.   Are you beginning to see the pattern? 

Sure....let's go and argue about if we should be consistent in where we draw the line.  I'm all with you on that one.   Set a standard and write the guidelines.

But you can't say we can't do the parent's job in this case.....when we do it in so many other cases.

Yes actually I can we don't do the parents job (at least not in any composite squadron I've belonged to YMMV):

We do not make sure they are clothed, housed, educated, fed, see doctors, are kept safe (other than on meeting nights or activities), make decisions about the type of activities they may participate in (other than CAP), are taught right from wrong, are raised with the morals that their parents hold important, learn about their culture.  At best, we support these activities.  We are not their parents, any more than teachers, priests, scout leaders are their parents.  We may be adults that have influence, but the responsibility, and authority rest with the parents.

[Alaric]

I don't have any enthusiasm for restricting the food, alcohol or tobacco choices for Senior members, but if its good enough for the cadets then shouldn't it be good enough for us?

No....being more mature we can handle adult things better the younger cadet aged people.
Also being mature adults we don't need a nanny state dictating our behavior beyond that is necessarry to accomplish our mission.

So just like a beer drinking parent we are going to say to our cadets......do as I say....when you are older you can do adult things.

If only cadets had mature adults legally obligated to make decisions for them.  No wait aren't they called parents?

NOT ON CAP TIME.  That's where you argument breaks down.  I don't care what your parents allow you to do.  Eat Cheetos and Jelly Bellys for breakfast and 10-15 Monsters a day, 1/2 pack of Camel Unfiltered, and beer at dinner time. 

ON CAP TIME you are we as CP Leaders need to be treating them responsibly as if we were legally responsible for their health and well being.....oh wait we are.

If we are leaders shouldn't it be example.  Banned for cadets banned for seniors otherwise your hypocrisy is showing

It is not hypocrisy.    An adult member is thought to know what is best for themselves.   A cadet is not.

Cadets have parents and/or guardians to know what is best for their child

[lordmonar]

Cadets have parents and/or guardians to know what is best for their child

Right up until the time they drop them off at my door step for CAP.....then they belong to CAP with CAP's best judgment on what is good for them.  If the parents disagree they are free to remove their kids from the program at any time.

That is point you are missing.   When the parent is not there....CAP becomes the parent.   Loco Parentis is the legal term IIRC.

[Alaric]

Cadets have parents and/or guardians to know what is best for their child

Right up until the time they drop them off at my door step for CAP.....then they belong to CAP with CAP's best judgment on what is good for them.  If the parents disagree they are free to remove their kids from the program at any time.

That is point you are missing.   When the parent is not there....CAP becomes the parent.   Loco Parentis is the legal term IIRC.

I'm not missing the point you are.  In loco parentis only goes so far.  If for instance I tell you that my child is medically restricted from certain activities, you cannot force him to do those activities because he is in CAP.  If I tell you he is required to wear a yamaka, or keep his retainer in you can't give him permission violate that.  They don't belong to CAP, we are not the military and parents don't give up their rights when they drop them off for a 3 hour meeting.

[lordmonar]

Ah....now you are changing the story.

If you come to me and say that your child must have monster energy drink under doctor's order....by all means Little Timmy get's the drink.

But if not....I don't care how if you let Timmy pop caffeine Pills....he does not get to have energy drinks on a CAP activity.

If little Timmy is restricted from certain activities....by all means he will not be forced to participate.
If little Timmy needs to wear his Yamaka...I will follow the rules in 39-1 for a waiver.
If little Timmy needs to wear his retainer....he gets to wear it.....if there is some safety reason why wearing the retainer prevents him from participating in an activity....he won't get to play.

But that is not what we are talking about....we are talking about keeping little Timmy safe and healthy on CAP time.
And I most assuredly have a moral, legal and regulatory duty to do just that to the best of my ability.   

   

[Alaric]

Ah....now you are changing the story.

If you come to me and say that your child must have monster energy drink under doctor's order....by all means Little Timmy get's the drink.

But if not....I don't care how if you let Timmy pop caffeine Pills....he does not get to have energy drinks on a CAP activity.

If little Timmy is restricted from certain activities....by all means he will not be forced to participate.
If little Timmy needs to wear his Yamaka...I will follow the rules in 39-1 for a waiver.
If little Timmy needs to wear his retainer....he gets to wear it.....if there is some safety reason why wearing the retainer prevents him from participating in an activity....he won't get to play.

But that is not what we are talking about....we are talking about keeping little Timmy safe and healthy on CAP time.
And I most assuredly have a moral, legal and regulatory duty to do just that to the best of my ability.   

No I'm not changing my story. We are not their parents, therefore we should not be making nutritional decisions for them. If we are going to make nutritional decisions for them then we should at least man up and follow those same decisions.  Obviously National disagrees which does not surprise me as they seem to feel that the "nanny state" is the desirable state.  My opinion is and remains we are on a slippery slope and I look forward to the time that CAP bans meat, donuts, pizza for the cadets as they are unhealthy to.  And as long as the adults don't have to follow the rules, they don't have to worry about how restrictive or random they are.

[lordmonar]

Maybe Ned can chime in with the legal mumbo jumbo....but as I understand it as a layman......on CAP time we are their parents.

I know that I am the one going to get sued if Little Johnny goes into a diabetic shock on my watch.
I know that I am the one who will have to answer to NHQ on down for any accidents that happen on my watch.
I know that I am the one who's job is to keep Johnny save on my watch.

So....why are nutritional decisions different then all the other health and safety decisions I make for other people's kids.....EVERY TIME I AM AT A CADET ACTIVITY?

All the rest of you statement is not germain to this key point here.   Explain why CAP can say "You can't run on the flight line" to someone else's kids....but not say "you can't drink energy drinks on CAP activities"?

[Eclipse]

In loco parentis only goes so far...

Yes, as far as when you are the "local parent"...

...parents don't give up their rights when they drop them off for a 3 hour meeting.

Legally?  No.  Practically?  They certainly do - in the same way they do when they drop Johnny
over at Mikey's house.  During that time, within the bounds of due care, Mikey's parents are in charge.

We do not make sure they are clothed, housed, educated, fed, see doctors, are kept safe (other than on meeting nights or activities), make decisions about the type of activities they may participate in (other than CAP),

As you say, during encampments, for example, we do exactly that.

Just like parents, CAP's authority begins and ends when it is conferred or abdicated.

In this case, during any CAP activity. 

If the kid wants to pound 3 monsters on the way to the meeting, and two on the way home, that's their court appointed guardian's problem.

[LSThiker]

Once again I care more about consistency if energy drinks are bad, what about those cold Starbucks drinks: high sugar, high caffeine.  My point is I do not believe that CAP should be making nutritional decisions for the cadets.  That's the parents job.

You keep talking about the caffeine as though it is the only factor.  Unfortunately, it is not.  There are numerous factors that play into the monster drink vs. coffee debate. 

1.  Coffee is not usually binge drank as opposed to energy drinks.  Time is a factor as with alcoholic drinks.  5 drinks is not necessarily the same.  If I drink 5 alcoholic drinks in 1 hour as opposed to 5 alcoholic drinks throughout the day, the effects are different.  Within 1 hour and I may end up drunk.  Throughout the day and my liver has the time to process the alcohol.

2.  FDA does not regulate caffeine content as they do with soda (<0.02%).  So the fact that monster energy drinks claim there is only 160 mg per 16 fl oz is misleading.  Look at the ingredients list.  You will see caffeine and guarana listed separately.  Why do you suppose they do that?

3.  Caffeine interaction with adults is relatively safe as demonstrated by numerous studies.  However, caffeine interactions with adolescents is not as well studied.  A study in Ohio demonstrated that most 7-9th graders only take in 53 mg per day with 20% taking in 100mg per day.  Children's bodies are less adapted to caffeine intake than an adult who has been drinking coffee for years.  Unfortunately, the FDA refuses to put recommendations for caffeine intake for children since the energy drink business alone is $5.4 billion/year.  Hence the reason why DHHS and other organizations are willing to put out recommendations.     

4.  Caffeine is the only active ingredient in coffee.  However, this is not the case with energy drinks which have a variety of "active ingredients", of which the interactions have not really been studied either.

5.  Due to the increase of drinking caffeinated beverages, children and teens are decreasing calcium intake through milk.  As this is the time calcium is crucial for bone development, a decrease in calcium intake is detrimental to proper growth.

Also, a mission given to the Health Services Personnel is to:

h.  Promote the Air Force's health, wellness and fitness philosophy.
i.  Educate members about and encourage behaviors which result in increased safety,
health and wellness including, but not limited to:

(4)  Proper hydration.
(6)  Eating of healthy and nutritious foods, snacks and beverages.
(10) Importance of self-care and personal care in maintaining an operationally ready
member.

Furthermore, commanders and leaders in the cadet program are required to:

CAPP 52-18:
Commanders and the leaders they designate to supervise this program must emphasize the value of physical training and clearly explain the objectives and benefits of the [physical fitness] program

The physical fitness program includes proper nutrition education and implementation (chapter 3).


Besides, if a cadet cannot go for a typical weekend activity without an energy drink or even an encampment without an energy drink, is not that telling you something? 

[LSThiker]

Maybe Ned can chime in with the legal mumbo jumbo....but as I understand it as a layman......on CAP time we are their parents.

I know that I am the one going to get sued if Little Johnny goes into a diabetic shock on my watch.

Well no not really. 

CAPR 160-1:

4-1. General Rule. The taking of prescription medication is the responsibility of the individual member for whom the medication was prescribed or, if the member is a minor, the member's parent or guardian. Except in extraordinary circumstances, CAP members, regardless of age, will be responsible for transporting, storing, and taking their own medications, including inhalers and epinephrine pens.
a. A CAP senior member, after obtaining all the necessary information and receiving documentation of the written permission from a minor cadet's parent or guardian for the administration of prescription medication during the activity, can agree to accept the responsibility of making sure the minor cadet is reminded to take any prescribed medication at the times and in the frequencies prescribed; however, no senior member will be required or encouraged to do so. This regulation does not prohibit senior member staff from monitoring medication compliance with directly observed medication ingestion, having medication forms for the cadet to initial when doses were taken, performing pill counts, or other compliance verification.
b. When a cadet is unable to safely self-medicate and senior member supervision is not available, one option may be to postpone attendance at the activity until the cadet can handle the self-medication task. Another option may be to have a parent or guardian attend the activity as a CAP member or cadet sponsor member to supervise the cadet's medication.
c. In the case of a severe reaction requiring use of an epinephrine injection pen where a cadet has become so ill as to have difficulty in administering his or her own epinephrine injection, senior members may assist the cadet in administering the epinephrine injection in order to save the life of the cadet. It is encouraged that health service officers or senior members who may have contact with this cadet be made aware of the potential for severe reactions and become familiar with the operation of the cadet's particular epinephrine device.
d. Members who require refrigeration for medications should carefully coordinate with activity officials well in advance of their attendance at the activity to ensure that refrigeration will be available. CAP cannot guarantee the availability of refrigeration at all activities.

[Alaric]

Maybe Ned can chime in with the legal mumbo jumbo....but as I understand it as a layman......on CAP time we are their parents.

I know that I am the one going to get sued if Little Johnny goes into a diabetic shock on my watch.
I know that I am the one who will have to answer to NHQ on down for any accidents that happen on my watch.
I know that I am the one who's job is to keep Johnny save on my watch.

So....why are nutritional decisions different then all the other health and safety decisions I make for other people's kids.....EVERY TIME I AM AT A CADET ACTIVITY?

All the rest of you statement is not germain to this key point here.   Explain why CAP can say "You can't run on the flight line" to someone else's kids....but not say "you can't drink energy drinks on CAP activities"?

First I'm not saying they can't say it, as that would be stupid they have said it.  I'm saying it's wrong and is a slippery slope that we shouldn't be making.  There is a difference between decisions that need to be made for immediate dangers to health and safety (don't run on the flight line) and decisions about nutrition, which at the end of the day are meaningless because even if we are "their parents" for the 3 hours we have them since the other 165 hours of the week we have no control over them at the end of the day, it will have no real effect.  We are making a random decision of what should be forbidden based on someone's opinion, drawing an artificial fence around a particular kind of beverage without consistency to other sources of the same "problematic element" in this case caffeine.