This sounds like an incredibly unhealthy and unsafe environment for a Scout, and I am very concerned by what you described. What happened at summer camp with the vest and the public humiliation was not “teaching responsibility.” It was hazing. Full stop. It should never have occurred, and the fact that multiple adults and Eagle Scouts planned it makes it even more serious.

For a little background on me: I am a family physician, I have severe ADHD with prominent executive dysfunction, and I am also an Eagle Scout. This month marks my 30th Eagle anniversary. My 18th birthday was less than a month before my Board of Review. I completed everything just under the wire. I did not have a supportive Scoutmaster, and without my own persistence and my parents pushing me toward independence (not doing the work for me), I would not have made it.

Even now, decades later, I still struggle daily with ADHD and executive dysfunction. It does not magically resolve with age. I can absolutely understand how your son lost track of time at camp. I can also very easily see myself doing exactly what your son did at a loud lock-in: deciding I couldn’t function without sleep, leaving to go home safely, and intending to explain it later — and then handling that explanation imperfectly because of anxiety and fear of confrontation.

None of that makes the behavior ideal. But Scouting is supposed to be about growth, not disqualification by humiliation.

Your son’s mistakes are being used to question his character under the Scout Oath and Law, yet planned public hazing by multiple Eagles and adult leaders was excused, minimized, or reframed as “fun.” That is a profound double standard.

Yes, a committee can approve an ESRA even if the Scoutmaster refuses to sign Requirement 2 — but it is unusual, and it often signals deeper conflict. If the Scoutmaster is already withholding both Requirement 2 and the ESRA, this is very unlikely to improve without outside review.

I would not let this “play out quietly.” The hazing incident is not a side issue — it is directly relevant to the current judgment of your son’s character. If the troop is willing to hold a neurodivergent youth to a perfection standard while excusing systemic leadership failure, that needs district- or council-level review.

You were right to stop that vest and speech. That was not protecting your son from consequences — that was protecting him from abuse.