[Ansteorra] Bad things

Cisco Cividanes engtrktwo at earthlink.net
Mon May 14 13:59:44 PDT 2007

As I understand it, legal guardianship, both temporary and long term, 
can be established to the satisfaction of the law with the proper 

and I think...I'm going out on a limb here, but... If an adult shows up 
at an event with the proper notarized paperwork, the SCA (and everyone 
else for that mater) is legal required to treat their signature and 
their presence as if it were the named youth's actual parent.


Brian O'hUilliam wrote:
> Your Excellency,
>    While I applaud your well thought out options and commend you for staying
> on topic, I must disagree with your first option.  As a former youth, I must
> say that I did attend a couple of events with persons other than my father
> and went through the necessary hassle of getting all the forms properly
> filled out, signed, and notarized.  I think it quite unfair to punish the
> children if their parents are called elsewhere or are no longer interested
> in the SCA.
>    One of the personal instances was when my father, Baron William of the
> Loch, was called to hold court in a shire in the south of the Coastal Region
> and there was a youth rapier tournament in the Shadowlands.  If I had to be
> in the physical presence of my father, I would have gone with him and not
> been allowed to fight because there was no youth rapier at the other event.
>    Also, I am reminded of a young lady who was in college but was only 17.
> Her parents do not play, but she came to several events under the
> guardianship of another member of her shire.  She is now over 18 and an
> officer of her shire.  However, if she had not been allowed at events, she
> probably would have lost interest and stopped playing.
>    This also gets us into a slippery slope.  What about a child who is left
> unattended while their parent is changing in the privy or went to retrieve
> something from their vehicle?  These are common slip-ups and, while I cannot
> disagree with the reasons behind this option, I do not find it practical.
>    As for your others options, I think they are fine.  Though option three
> may be a little too strict to be practical for things other than events.
> For instance, at the local (Loch/Stargate) practice last week, there were
> two young men about the age of 15 who came by.  These potential members, by
> this option, would need to be picked up by the authorities.  I do not think
> that is a good way to get new members.  But, then again, I may be
> misinterpreting what you are saying.
>    Thank you, Your Excellency, for your thoughts on this issue.
> Brian O' hUilliam
> On 5/14/07, Ian Dun Gillan <ian1550 at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> Now that this thread has an opportunity to stop being personal conjecture
>> and is now turning in a better direction I have something to say.  Thank
>> you
>> to Don Robin for the redirect, and thank you to Burke and Ivo for
>> following
>> along with that.
>> The first option would be to require parents to be physically present at
>> any
>> and all SCA activities involving their child. This also means that
>> children
>> of any age under 18 would have to be in the physical presence of their
>> parent at all times. If the parents are present and involved in the same
>> activity as their minor child then if something wrong does happen it would
>> most likely not be the SCA who is at fault. .
>> Sincerely,
>> Ian Dun Gillan
>> Baron of Northkeep
> _______________________________________________
> Ansteorra mailing list
> Ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-ansteorra.org

More information about the Ansteorra mailing list