To think if teenage girls from a private school can afford plane tickets ...

[Morgansports]

.... To visit the orphanage in Africa that they have been fundraising for, then the orphanage would be better served by just receiving the money they spent on their tickets. Seriously, what actual use to the orphanage is a group of hair-flicking, ugg boot wearing blondes???

And the bit that made me laugh is that other parents at the school were asked to help fundraise for the girls' trip.

AIBU?

So, if we decide that a bunch of sixth formers have nothing of any really value to offer, as their time and money is virtually worthless, then I still don't understand why people have such a big problem with it.

I think it is beneficial to everyone involved, but if its not, then where's the harm? What makes it such a terrible thing to do?

Outraged Its not the fact that they're going there, but the fact that they often fund raise to finance the trip in a way that is competing with other charities eg taking up bag packing places in supermarkets that more legitimate charities ( in my view) could avail of.

LaQueen, are you being deliberately obtuse? Blondes should walk to Africa and give the money they saved on an air fare to the orphanage. Easy-peasy.

Even that'a bit daft because, by definition, blondes could never do anything useful when they get there - let alone qualify as engineers or (God help us) doctors.

People are free to donate or not donate to these trips if they want to. I tend not to pay bag packers when I see them at the supermarket because I like to choose the charities I support myself. It's an amazing gift, but I can say no if I don't want to hand over my money so that some hair flicky blonde can have a jolly to Africa.

On the other hand, if I want to donate because I see the value in it for the girl with the flicky hair, and I see the value in it for the community she intends to visit, then I don't think anyone else has a right to tell me I'm making other charities miss out.

Anyway, there are enough supermarkets that every interested charity can have a turn, but as far as I'm aware, they don't let non registered charities do it anyway.

They do it in my supermarket and it is very awkward as you do feel mean if you ignore them and pack your bag yourself. My point though is that real charities are actually competing for donations from members of the public as most people only have so much to give. I would far rather see it being given to worthy causes like medical research, help for the homeless, dogs for the blind etc than to blonde/brunette flicky/shorthaired schoolgirls undertaking a trip for personal development.

It's up to you where you would rather see your money go.

But you have no say on where other people donate their money to.

If you don't want to donate then just say you don't donate to anyone who isn't a registered charity. That's absolutely fair enough. And if it is a registered charity, then it has been deemed 'worthy'.

Whether or not a charity is worthy is often a matter of opinion, not fact.

Jus so, just because you don't like to be made to feel a bit guilty in Tescos...children in an African orphanage shouldn't be allowed to have groups of lively, energetic, commited teenagers and undergraduate doctors/engineers/teacher volunteer at their orphanage.

Nice [quote]

I said they make people feel 'mean' even though they are not actually collecting for a charity. I also voiced concerns about them taking charitable donations from a very limited pool (the real point in my post which you didn't address). I don't think it's 'nice' for kids from private schools to look for charitable donations for personal development experiences to the detriment of other charities.

I'm personally not very keen on the "going out for a fortnight and building some classrooms" type of trips. They are inevitably to destinations where there's high unemployment and locals would benefit more from being trained and employed themselves.

One of the local schools here runs trips like that. The local newspaper covered it and one of the pupils was quoted as saying they expected it to be very moving to see all the poverty. It turned my stomach, it's not a fucking film.

I think the ones where volunteers stay for months are much more worthwhile. Or, if you want to go out for a week or so and have a holiday and see what the money you've raised is going to, then fair enough - but be honest that that's what it is. And don't take up work that your plane fare could pay for locals to do.

No one's dictating, I am entitled to my view LaQueen. One thing that annoys me about it is that a lot of people also just throw money into the bucket because they assume its for a third world charity and don't realise its to pay the air fares of schoolkids. Where did I say people shouldnt go and get a personal experience?? I just said if they were kids in private school they should pay their own air fare not compete in a limited pool for charitable donations.

It's not a limited pool though. Well, it's limited, but it's not a pool. It doesn't work like that.

We all give to the charities and cause we care about. One of my monthly donations is to Cancer Research. If they suddenly find a cure for all cancers and they don't need to research any more, then I can keep my £5 a month. It's mine, it's not just there waiting to be donated to something else. I might decide to give it to something else but I might not. The point is, it's my choice. 'Charity' does not have money until someone chooses to give it to them.

You don't know that these kids asking for donations is to the detriment of any other charities. Someone that supports a regular charity won't be put off continuing to do that because he donated a few quid to a one off thing. For all you know, that might be the closest that particular person has ever come to donating to charity and if it weren't for the flicky hair, he never would.

YANBU - the really sad thing about this kind of "hug an orphan" charities is they can create demand for children to be in orphanages where they attract well-meaning but ill-informed westerners to visit. If a charity instead places children in foster care or supports them to stay within their extended family then there is no heart-rending orphanage to visit.

read about it here

Schools should teach kids about development and encourage cultural exchange and philanthropy.

But they should also teach them to be good donors - which means accepting that however much they might want to, a bunch of teenagers flying over to "help" at an orphanage or by building a well or whatever is completly nonsensical.

It does actually outraged. There has been concern amongst charities of late that they are competing from a diminishing availability of spare cash amongst the public due to the recession. As an example, if someone goes into a supermarket and a crowd of schoolgirls are bag packing with a white bucket infront of them and tell a shopper its for a 'third world project' the shopper will probably donate. If they then go outside and someone is shaking a tin and collecting for a homeless charity they will often decide they've just made a donation to a charity and can't really afford to give to everyone shaking a bucket or tin. Hence the 'genuine' (in my view) charity loses out.

its really idiotic to suggest that people the people who think that these visitors serve not much of a useful purpose are jealous or displaying inverted snobbery

OP has already said her children go to the same school. I have laid out my families situation and my perspective. For what it is worth I also have blonde flicky hair

why is it so hard to consider that these children/your children will not be as useful as they what/expect to be?? and they they will mostly benefit from the trip(s)??

frustration and disappointed is an important life lesson itself

if you have a point, make it. But the ad hominem attacks are crass and tedious

Floating, yes, I realise that charities are losing out on money because people have less to give, but those people still have the right to make a choice. They have as much right to donate their own money to a few teenagers dong a trip as they have to donate their money to a homeless shelter. It is their choice to make. Other people have no right to take away their options. Other people have no right to tell someone else what they should ad shouldn't be trying to raise money for.

I don't understand why people want to donate money to things like the RSPB when there are people dying of cancer, but it's not up to me what other people do with their spare cash.

I doubt it LaQueen.

They would have been seen as 'worthy' of having the experience.

There are serious ethical issues around sending a bunch of untrained teenagers to look after emotionally and physically vulnerable children.

Think about it.

These teens turn up, form a rewarding relationship with the children, learn about how the other half live and then fuck off again.

It ain't right.