why give money to childrens charities?

Heineken Helen

AmentsChick wrote:

Yeah, you're right...what good is infrastructure?! :roll:

when there are people starving?????????????????? :shock: are ya serious? I revert to your first post in this thread and LAUGH... hysterically! GREAT argument there. You've certainly turned the tables in this thread on who's the good guy and who's the bad guy

roads roads roads... yep, just keep building them while people are dying... GREAT oh actually no, that's not funny.

chromiam

Heineken Helen wrote:

AmentsChick wrote:

Yeah, you're right...what good is infrastructure?! :roll:

when there are people starving?????????????????? :shock: are ya serious? I revert to your first post in this thread and LAUGH... hysterically! GREAT argument there. You've certainly turned the tables in this thread on who's the good guy and who's the bad guy

roads roads roads... yep, just keep building them while people are dying... GREAT oh actually no, that's not funny.

building roads and other infrastructure employs both directly and indirectly millions of people.... but yeah I guess a job, benefits and being able to feed yourself and your family are all bad things.

Heineken Helen

chromiam wrote:

Heineken Helen wrote:

AmentsChick wrote:

Yeah, you're right...what good is infrastructure?! :roll:

when there are people starving?????????????????? :shock: are ya serious? I revert to your first post in this thread and LAUGH... hysterically! GREAT argument there. You've certainly turned the tables in this thread on who's the good guy and who's the bad guy

roads roads roads... yep, just keep building them while people are dying... GREAT oh actually no, that's not funny.

building roads and other infrastructure employs both directly and indirectly millions of people.... but yeah I guess a job, benefits and being able to feed yourself and your family are all bad things.

where did I say that? Just that ac berated me in her first post here for being some kinda bad person, and then goes on to argue that infrastructure is more important than starving people. I happen to think they're BOTH important... and I certainly wouldn't argue that infrastructure is more important than giving somebody the help they need :?

norm

so you want the government, who you say doesn't do a good job at helping children, to take more money?

Heineken Helen

norm wrote:

so you want the government, who you say doesn't do a good job at helping children, to take more money?

:roll: if they did a good job helping children, we wouldn't need charities... so I don't think that's just my opinion. I'm simply saying that if a child needs help, it shouldn't depend on whether people are generous enough to give to charities or not... that help should simply BE THERE. Is that REALLY so wrong? :roll:

battan1120

I give to a children charitys everyday...by going to work everyday so that MY 6 KIds don't go without

Brain of J.Lo

Heineken Helen wrote:

Seriously, if little Sophie is being raped and wants to contact somebody... shouldn't the help BE THERE?

Why are they asking for £2 a month so she has help... isn't that what the police/teachers/etc. are there for? What are they doing? Why do they want charities to do their job for them? :?

???
Teachers and police officers, through no fault of their own, are already stretched too thin and underpaid. So...until that changes, if you care about little Sophie, just keep giving. I understand the distaste for needing private donations to fund programs that the public should fund, but don't blame teachers and police officers for it. That makes no sense.

Brain of J.Lo

soulsinging wrote:

The demands we place on teachers are ridiculous. It's not enough that they educate, we also expect that they will guide their moral development, serve as police in the building, psychologists, social workers, doctors, and now rape crisis counselors?

Excellent post. I am from a family full of teachers, and I can't help but take offense when one suggests that they don't do "enough".

chiquimonkey

Brain of J.Lo wrote:

Heineken Helen wrote:

Seriously, if little Sophie is being raped and wants to contact somebody... shouldn't the help BE THERE?

Why are they asking for £2 a month so she has help... isn't that what the police/teachers/etc. are there for? What are they doing? Why do they want charities to do their job for them? :?

???
Teachers and police officers, through no fault of their own, are already stretched too thin and underpaid. So...until that changes, if you care about little Sophie, just keep giving. I understand the distaste for needing private donations to fund programs that the public should fund, but don't blame teachers and police officers for it. That makes no sense.

thanks for saving me keystrokes.

in a perfect world there would be no need for charity, everyone would be taken care of. sadly, utopia is never gonna happen.

JOEJOEJOE

did you read my points? I''m guessing no!

Of course kids should be helped... but this help should NOT be charity... our tax money goes towards stuff that doesn't even come CLOSE to being as important as kids getting the help they need. This should NOT depend on extra voluntary funding... EVER.[/quote]

But the same thing could be said for homeless people, starving people, abused women/kids, neglected animals, people with cancer, etc etc etc etc... Should any of those be helped with charity or should our taxes cover it?[/quote]
Of COURSE our taxes should cover it... there are government agencies that are supposed to deal with these things... but they tend to outsource the work to charities. I just chose kids charities cos they're usually the ones with the most sympathy. I think all charities do fantastic work, I just think these are things that our taxes should cover... cos you never know when any of them are gonna affect YOU.[/quote]

In order to improve services for children, they would have to cut other government-funded programs, or raise taxes. What other social services would you want to cut in order to give more dough to the kids? (Lets leave out military & foreign aid as answers!).

Heineken Helen

Brain of J.Lo wrote:

Heineken Helen wrote:

Seriously, if little Sophie is being raped and wants to contact somebody... shouldn't the help BE THERE?

Why are they asking for £2 a month so she has help... isn't that what the police/teachers/etc. are there for? What are they doing? Why do they want charities to do their job for them? :?

???
Teachers and police officers, through no fault of their own, are already stretched too thin and underpaid. So...until that changes, if you care about little Sophie, just keep giving. I understand the distaste for needing private donations to fund programs that the public should fund, but don't blame teachers and police officers for it. That makes no sense.

I'm not BLAMING them... I'm just saying that if little Sophie tells either her teacher or a police officer, she'll be told there's nothing they can do? I HIGHLY doubt that Doesn't matter how stretched they are, if they tell her she needs to go to this charity for help, well they've got serious issues.

Heineken Helen

JOEJOEJOE wrote:

In order to improve services for children, they would have to cut other government-funded programs, or raise taxes. What other social services would you want to cut in order to give more dough to the kids? (Lets leave out military & foreign aid as answers!).

why leave out military and foreign aid??? :? cos they're too obvious?

LONGRD

whoprincess wrote:

Heineken Helen wrote:

Seriously, if little Sophie is being raped and wants to contact somebody... shouldn't the help BE THERE?

Why are they asking for £2 a month so she has help... isn't that what the police/teachers/etc. are there for? What are they doing? Why do they want charities to do their job for them? :?

In a perfect world I'm sure the help would be there.

I really can't speak to the situation in the U.K. where I understand the situation is different. Here in the States I spent 24 years working at nonprofits/social service agencies (the preferred terms to charities). They serve as an adjunct to the police and teachers whose jobs are supported by taxpayers and who are always overwhelmed, teachers in particular. The staff in social service agencies have specialized training for dealing with different kinds of issues pertaining to children or domestic violence or whatever the problem may be. More and more often those agencies work in collaborative arrangements with police departments and school districts. So they are all doing their jobs together to take care of the children.

But social service agencies are not government funded in the U.S. They may receive some grants from government sources but for the most part they rely on donations, fundraisers, and grants from foundations (usually set up by philanthropic people for just that purpose). Staff are not highly paid and do the work more out of a sense of caring then for financial reward.

But before you donate to any organization, ask questions. Ask to see an annual report. How much money do they spend on fundraising? Visit the organization. Talk to the staff. Volunteer there. You'll get an idea of what kind of work is being done and how great the need is.

Very good post and good advice. I haven't donated money to any organizations lately because of my own financial struggles but volunteering is something I've been really interested in doing. I'm not sure what kind of cause or organization, but I'll look into it. I'll probably be laidoff next week so I'll have some time research locally.

I guess I can somewhat see Helen's view there as indicating that money shouldn't be the determine factor to get help for these causes and fights. It should be the community and volunteers' efforts but like everyone said there's just not enough help.

JOEJOEJOE

Heineken Helen wrote:

JOEJOEJOE wrote:

In order to improve services for children, they would have to cut other government-funded programs, or raise taxes. What other social services would you want to cut in order to give more dough to the kids? (Lets leave out military & foreign aid as answers!).

why leave out military and foreign aid??? :? cos they're too obvious?

Exactly!

chiquimonkey

Heineken Helen wrote:

Brain of J.Lo wrote:

Heineken Helen wrote:

Seriously, if little Sophie is being raped and wants to contact somebody... shouldn't the help BE THERE?

Why are they asking for £2 a month so she has help... isn't that what the police/teachers/etc. are there for? What are they doing? Why do they want charities to do their job for them? :?

???
Teachers and police officers, through no fault of their own, are already stretched too thin and underpaid. So...until that changes, if you care about little Sophie, just keep giving. I understand the distaste for needing private donations to fund programs that the public should fund, but don't blame teachers and police officers for it. That makes no sense.

I'm not BLAMING them... I'm just saying that if little Sophie tells either her teacher or a police officer, she'll be told there's nothing they can do? I HIGHLY doubt that Doesn't matter how stretched they are, if they tell her she needs to go to this charity for help, well they've got serious issues.

a teacher or cop is not going to tell a kid to go to a charity, that's nuts. they can only do so much with the resources they have.

is it fucked up? absolutely! as a society we should look after those that can't defend themselves (children, animals, handicapped). and just because it *should* be that way, doesn't mean that's how it is. all the more reason to have charities and people to champion those causes.

maybe the way you phrased the thread "why give money to childrens charities?" would be better stated as "why should children charities exist".

Brain of J.Lo

Heineken Helen wrote:

Brain of J.Lo wrote:

Heineken Helen wrote:

Seriously, if little Sophie is being raped and wants to contact somebody... shouldn't the help BE THERE?

Why are they asking for £2 a month so she has help... isn't that what the police/teachers/etc. are there for? What are they doing? Why do they want charities to do their job for them? :?

???
Teachers and police officers, through no fault of their own, are already stretched too thin and underpaid. So...until that changes, if you care about little Sophie, just keep giving. I understand the distaste for needing private donations to fund programs that the public should fund, but don't blame teachers and police officers for it. That makes no sense.

I'm not BLAMING them... I'm just saying that if little Sophie tells either her teacher or a police officer, she'll be told there's nothing they can do? I HIGHLY doubt that Doesn't matter how stretched they are, if they tell her she needs to go to this charity for help, well they've got serious issues.

"Why do they want charities to do their job for them?"

That sounds like blame to me.

As far as what a teacher can and cannot do for a victim of abuse, you have to realize that there *are* limits to how far they can go to intervene. It has nothing to do with their willingness, or lack thereof, to help a kid out.

Charities exist to fill in the gaps that the government can't handle, and often to provide some compassion that a large bureaucracy isn't capable of providing. They aren't meant to the the only option, or even the first option.

Heineken Helen

LongRd. wrote:

Very good post and good advice. I haven't donated money to any organizations lately because of my own financial struggles but volunteering is something I've been really interested in doing. I'm not sure what kind of cause or organization, but I'll look into it. I'll probably be laidoff next week so I'll have some time research locally.

I guess I can somewhat see Helen's view there as indicating that money shouldn't be the determine factor to get help for these causes and fights. It should be the community and volunteers' efforts but like everyone said there's just not enough help.

thank you :oops: this should definitely not depend on money :(

You should definitely volunteer... I hope ya don't get laid off... but if ya do, it's important for your resume to have something to put on it rather than say 'i took a break'

redrock

Heineken Helen wrote:

Seriously, if little Sophie is being raped and wants to contact somebody... shouldn't the help BE THERE?

Why are they asking for £2 a month so she has help... isn't that what the police/teachers/etc. are there for? What are they doing? Why do they want charities to do their job for them? :?

Well Helen... I agree completely with Al's post. The police have their job, they will catch (hopefully) the rapist. The teacher has her job, she/he educates - she/he is not a rape counsellor. They each have a part in the life of little Sophie. She can tell her teacher - her teacher will tell the police, the police will go after the guy. Little Sophie can tell her parents who will most likely be horrified and not know what to do besides give her lots of love and support. There are counsellors/social workers for the 'expert' advice.

These charities that we choose to give to or not do not replace the systems in place, they top them up/offer different and specialised support. You say that we should have these specialised support systems in place (which they are but obviously not enough) and they should offer ALL the support/help necessary via our taxes. Fair enough... I agree with that. Get ready to pay up then. Your taxes will increase massively. As others said, it is not just children's charities - we are then talking about ALL of them. Forget about Red Nose Day which raises an incredible amount of money for many different charities, forget people's altruism, generosity, wanting to help out in some way for something close to them. Let's just all have our taxes raised and forget about humanity. Remember, these charities are not only for little Sophie who got raped but are far more reaching than that.

covered in bliss

Heineken Helen wrote:

I'm not BLAMING them... I'm just saying that if little Sophie tells either her teacher or a police officer, she'll be told there's nothing they can do? I HIGHLY doubt that. Doesn't matter how stretched they are, if they tell her she needs to go to this charity for help, well they've got serious issues.

some parts of the world DO have serious issues.. http://congolesechildren.org.uk/

Here's a video if you can stomach it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nd0LCdBAQU

The teacher cant help Sophie because her bladder was torn out with a stick and the soldiers that are supposed to protect her raped and killed her mother and made her dad eat the corpse.

Heatherj43

I spent my career working in a non-profit for abused and neglecteted children. The police and teachers send children to us when they become aware of these things.
As someone already wrote, we get grants from the government, but most money comes from donations. Kids just aren't a priority in government spending. And we are trained, cops and teachers aren't, or wouldn't even have the time if they were. Abused and neglected kids need a lot more than can be done by a teacher or cop.
There's a lot to it.