Let’s be honest: as camp leaders, you deal with a lot of controversy. And it can be exhausting!

Controversy may stem from drama with staff, parents, or your board — and camper drama is ever-present. No summer will pass by without at least one complex situation where camp’s or individuals’ values are in conflict. Provided here are some examples of controversial situations you might face and how they may fit within your commitment to character development at camp. I encourage you to consider the applicability of these scenarios to your own camp and engage in open discussions with your leadership team about how to approach them.

Character Controversy: Differences in Interpretation of Values

Imagine you are the director of a camp where some or all of your counselors take a strong stance on supporting and affirming LGBTQ+ campers. However, your staff training program does not clearly articulate your camp’s stance or desired practices related to issues of gender and sexuality. Some of your counselors of high-school-aged campers feel that supporting them includes listening to and sharing stories about personal sexual experiences. Campers involved in these conversations return home and mention the discussion in front of their parents. When you get a call from one of these parents, you need to make choices about how to respond.

Consider these questions related to this scenario regarding applicability, prevention, and response.

How does our camp’s mission address issues of gender and sexuality?

• How do we incorporate clarifying our camp’s values on this topic within our training?
• Do our counselors share the same values, or are their values in conflict with our mission? How do we determine this prior to camper arrival (during applications, interviews, staff training)? If staff values are in conflict, what additional conversations, commitments, or training might be needed?

How do we want our staff members to approach issues of gender and sexual orientation as they fulfil their roles at camp?

• How do we communicate and model our expectations?
• What opportunities to practice difficult conversations do we provide during training?

What is our response plan if our staff members cross boundaries or behave in ways contrary to our camp values on issues of gender and sexual orientation?

• How do we respond at camp in direct interaction with the staff members?
• How do we respond if parents bring up a concern?

In the United States, gender identity and sexuality — especially among youth — are increasingly controversial topics we must be prepared to be clear about. As we clarify our organizational values, develop well-defined training and expectations for our staff members, and respond appropriately to challenging situations, we can run our camps with integrity, compassion, and respect.

Character Controversy: Who We Are Before Campers Arrive

You are a young volunteer counselor in the thick of staff training one week before campers arrive. As you and the rest of the staff are enjoying listening to music in the lodge during lunch, a song starts playing that you are not familiar with. As you listen to the lyrics, you realize they are not only explicit, but also promoting sexual violence against women. You feel increasingly uncomfortable and look around to see how others are reacting. Some of your fellow counselors are either oblivious to the song or are ignoring it. You see the lead counselor, some of the adult leadership, and even your director singing along. Though your director has encouraged everyone to skip a song if they aren’t comfortable with it, you instead decide to go into the bathroom until the song is over. For the rest of training, you worry about the music and hope that situation doesn’t happen again. The director has made it clear that the music played during camp sessions needs to be appropriate for children, so you are relieved when training ends and the campers arrive.

From this scenario, we can consider several questions related to organizational values as well as power dynamics:

What differences are there in expectations for the behavior of staff members at camp when they are with campers or not with campers (such as during breaks or staff training)?

• What do these different expectations say about our organizational values?
• Do we need to revisit any of these distinctions to align our expectations more closely with our goals for the camp culture?

Are there any power dynamics in play at camp that are similar to this situation?

• Are there any expectations that a staff member should ask camp leaders to stop behaviors they are uncomfortable with, such as in this scenario?
• Is the culture and environment of the camp staff truly a safe enough space that the power dynamic would not be a barrier to speaking up?

What are the staff expectations for behaviors that could be considered values related, such as music, media, language, or dress?

• How do these expectations relate to our organization’s values?
• What kind of communication or training happens related to these expectations and staff members’ personal values?

No matter how much we strive for a camp “family,” there are always power dynamics to consider, such as who holds hiring or firing responsibilities. It is worth exploring whether we are putting any of our staff members in unfair situations related to these dynamics.

Character Controversy: When They're "Outside Your Jurisdiction" 

You are the camp director and an adult you don’t supervise has volunteered to take photos at camp. The property manager of the facility your camp uses enjoys photography and especially getting dramatic shots of camper activities. When he sends over the files at the end of the day, you notice he has taken photos of campers participating in archery and riflery. You feel genuinely concerned, because some of the photos were clearly taken from the area between the campers and the targets. The dramatic photos show campers aiming bows or rifles directly at the camera. When you discuss the photo shoots with your staff who were present, they tell you that the property manager laughed off their requests for him to leave that area. You trained your staff to take safety rules seriously, but the property manager is not one of your staff. When you try to address the situation with him, he laughs again, saying he is not worried about his own safety, and he doesn’t think the rifles were loaded.

When you think about your response to this scenario, consider these questions related to volunteers or other individuals at camp who are not under your direct supervision:

Can we identify any individuals at camp who interact with campers but do not participate in our training?

• Considering our organization’s values, what expectations do we have for how they will interact with others while at camp?
• Have we observed any concerning behavior in the past that might be worth addressing proactively in the future?

How are our organization’s values currently communicated to individuals who may be at camp in a unique or peripheral capacity?

• If these individuals are interviewed for their positions (possibly by someone other than us), are the organizational values communicated at that stage?
• Is there staff training these individuals don’t usually attend that it could be valuable to invite them to?

What are the current procedures for responding to concerning behavior with individuals we do not supervise?

• Do procedures need to be developed or improved for these situations?
• Are the responses directly related to issues of safety, or do conversations refer to our organization’s specific values, such as role modeling respect and responsibility?

Each of these three scenarios is deeply interconnected with a camp organization’s values and culture. As camp leaders, considering the discussion questions may help you determine how best to apply your mission-based values to each scenario and move forward in a positive direction. As you consider these situations and other controversies you may have faced as a camp director, I encourage you to focus your thinking on your organizational values and how they can be applied to policies, rules, and procedures. If your practices are not aligned with your values, look for the disconnects and update either your mission statement or your practices to promote a positive and controversy-resistant camp culture.

Amanda Palmer, MS, is a camp researcher, trainer, consultant, and doctoral candidate at the University of Idaho, researching youth development within the camp industry. Amanda is a former camper, camp counselor, and mother of four campers of her own. She holds a master’s degree in Recreation, Sport, and Tourism Management. Amanda has designed and conducted on-site research studies for organizations such as 4-H, Girl Scouts, and faith-based camps, with a focus on assisting each camp to align staff practices with their mission-based values. Contact Amanda at [email protected].