not to contribute to the Shoebox Appeal

[teamboleyn]

because it has a Christian message 'attached'? I have nothing against Christianity but can they not do a charitable act without having an ulterior motive?

Whizzpop. I have checked the packets of Haribo that I have left over from Halloween and ALL of them have pork gelatine listed in the ingredients. If you did not check beforehand, you were very lucky to buy the vegetarian version.

Even M&S Percy Pigs now come in a pork gelatine free version!

A black or Asian child may prefer to play with a doll of the same skin colour or features as themselves. They may not of course, but it is something I would consider, yes.

My points were not ridiculous. How very sad would it be for a child to be given a present (after sitting through their christian indoctrination) but to not be able to eat the sweets. If you are going to do something special, then you should make sure you put some thought into it, otherwise it could be an empty gesture, only bringing joy to the giver - when it should be all about the recipient. Why is that a ridiculous view?

It is actually ridiculous, and a little sad, to say that a child can only play with toys that look the same as themselves, otherwise they can't play with it.
The fact that you'd be willing to do that with your children is up to you, but I personally think encourage my children to play with toys regardless of whether it is the same as them or not.
It's a pretty closed mind to say that they won't be able to play with them otherwise.
So, from your point of view, I'll only buy my children white skinned, blonde haired and blue eyed dolls, as that's 'what we are.'
After all, we might be one of those who don't play with others who don't look like ourselves.
(Which we most certainly are not, and find it sad that anyone would think like that.)
Why would a black or Asian child automatically say 'we don't want to play with a white toy?'
Some skewed thinking there from yourself.

Rogue think in one of those sentences, sorry

Whizz, I said may prefer. I am not attacking you, what is your problem? Can't you see the other side?

I spent time living in an overseas location where is was almost impossible to buy a 'white skinned blonde haired' doll, because the country had very few 'white skinned blonde haired' locals. When I left I came home with a collection of dolls of differing ethnicity's that I gave to my nieces, and have now been returned for my DD to play with.

Other countries are actually far better at being diverse than the UK. Go into any ToysRus and you will see shelves and shelves of white dolls, maybe one shelf of black dolls and maybe one or two Asian dolls. Children quite often like to relate to their toys, that's all.

Well, I hope the child who gets our box looks like Hello Kitty...

And I don't see the point in trying to do exhaustive research myself. Blythswood Care include a checklist on the leaflet describing the items they want included - sweets, but not chocolate, with a long date; toothbrush and toothpaste; hat/scarf & gloves; doll/toy; soap. I'm taking it on trust that the boxes will go to where those things are appropriate.

Children all have different tastes, regardless of where they live, Are we supposed to never buy toys if we don't know what their preferences are, then?
Some might hate sweets, some might love them. Some little girls might prefer dumper trucks and racing cars to dolls and teddies, some little boys might prefer toy kitchen appliances to aeroplanes.
Should we do no presents then just in case the box inadvertently ends up in a household where there's a little girl who doesn't want a doll that has a different skin colour to herself, or a household that won't touch sweets because they might be vegetarian/Muslim?
You'd never send anyone any presents ever if you worried to extents like that.
As has already been pointed out on the thread, the boxes are unsealed so they can be checked for any unsuitable items anyway.
MsHighwater, Hello Kitty?! I hope you've taken into consideration that it might go to a house where someone's got a phobia of strange looking cats!

Fine, you don't want to hear a different POV, your choice. When I give my shoebox to Link Romania I take care NOT to put items in that may offend or upset. I purposely buy vegetarian friendly sweets because many of the boxes go to Muslim children and most 'jelly' sweets have pork gelatine in them - and chocolate is not accepted. I purposely put in good quality soft toys so they can be passed on to younger siblings. I purposely buy non-toxic felt tips. I take this level of care because it's not about me, and I've seen first hand the confusion that can be caused by unsuitable items.

I purposely take care to put in good quality toys that can be played with by all ages. I have also taken care to buy non toxic felt tips.
I have read the list of accepted items, taken note of the fact that chocolate is not allowed, sweets are.
Boxes are all checked before they get sent off at the centres as well.
I take care to select quality stuff, as it is is not about me, and I wouldn't dream of putting in any toys in that weren't brand new and of good quality suitable for all ages to play with.

MsHighwater just googled Blythswood Care and they send boxes to the country DH worked with where toothbrushes and toothpaste are not used, which kind of proves my point.Obviously it would be better to send something else instead and it needs someone with local knowledge to make suggestions.

.....This is why sending boxes of stuff, in general is just not a good idea. This is why real professional humanitarian charities don't do it.

Who knows best what an individual child needs/wants and what would be inappropriate? Those children's parents, foster parents, teachers, carers etc... Not some good hearted randoms half way around the world.

Can you imagine if your kids school decided to 'spread some joy' by giving your children boxes of gifts donated in this way from the other side of the world. Some kids in the class would be lucky and get "good boxes" of culturally appropriate good quality stuff they happen to like,
others would get boxes of stuff they don't want - sweets that taste weird, hats that don't fit, tat, products they've never heard of etc.. It could cause as much heartache as joy.

. Wouldn't you think it better for the well wishers to give the school some money to buy culturally appropriate gifts and sweets locally?

I'm surprised by all this.

Feel a bit mixed. I'm Agnostic myself, but at the same time, want to help children... I remember packing shoeboxes myself as a child, and had been thinking about doing one with DS this year after a friend linked to OCC on facebook.

Don't know what to do now!

Hi SirBoob, if you look back up the thread there are links to the Rotary Club and Link Romania box appeals, that have none of the nasty connotations of OCC (DD and I do link Romania) and Mary's Backpacks that whilst religious, do it in a supportive and non-judgemental way. HTH

I have changed my POV considerably. I used to organise shoebox collections at school whne DH worked for the charity, but I think now I would probably opt for something in this country (because of transport costs) or donations (so things can be bought that are really needed.

I do send shoe boxes every year. Are you unreasonable not to do so? No of course not, there are 5000 other causes you can choose instead.

I do want to say this: I am a Christian, but if receipt of the boxes were in any way conditional upon accepting a Christian message I would not take part as I would feel this inappropriate. However this is not the case. A leaflet is offered and only where this is culturally appropriate. I'm not reading this from a promo leaflet, I know this from people who have been out there.

I don't think anyone is going to argue that a poor child needs toys more than food/clothing/education/clean water. That is missing the point. The point is that every child deserves some happiness, to feel special, to have something that is theirs to cherish. It doesn't solve their problems. It does but some sparkle in their lives, for once.

I don't think anyone is going to argue that a poor child needs toys more than food/clothing/education/clean water. That is missing the point. The point is that every child deserves some happiness, to feel special, to have something that is theirs to cherish. It doesn't solve their problems. It does but some sparkle in their lives, for once.

This. For whoever it was that said 'they need water more than tat' (sorry, can't find it now) I do wonder what it must be like to live such a joyless, miserable existence where they can't envisage anything but the basics as all 'the poor' need.
A bit of frivolity is sometimes needed too.

Why should we think that children in poorer countries have no happiness, aren't special, have nothing that they cherish, never have any fun etc... Unless they get a personal gift from us?

Himalaya I hope you apply that standard to every bit of charitable giving you do? Fact is, with most charities you have no idea what is actually being done with your money. Do the people the money goes through really want a goat? Maybe they'd rather have chickens?

So it's easy to attack Samaritans Purse in this way because for a change you do know exactly what is being done with the money.

Madmouse - that may be true of you but I actually read charity commission reports into charities I consider supporting. One of the explicit aims of SP is spreading the word of JC. I disagree with proselytising so I will not support a charity that has that as a fundamental aim, however much children might like getting shoeboxes filled with tat

Kindly thanks for your assumptions Dowager I read those too. Still that does not mean that you have a clue what your particular contribution is used for or whether 'the recipient cannot be happy without a personal gift from us'.

Madmouse - I give to humanitarian and development charities. They don't aim to "make people happy", so I don't judge them against that standard (if that is what you meant).

You are right I have no idea what is done with my specific money - but you can have a fair idea of what the organisation does with the big pot of money - particularly if they commission and publish evaluations of their work.

"Buy a goat" etc is a marketing gimmick for supporters which I think is fair enough, but it doesn't drive programs. It says really clearly in the small print that you are not really buying a goat, but supporting livestock related programs. You might be buying a chicken, contributing towards animal husbandry training, or start up funds to set up a community dispensary or whatever.

Obviously I'm not a Christian so it would be odd for me to donate to an organisation whose aim is to spread the gospel. I can see that if you are religious then this might be a "good cause" . But even then I would wonder if is ethical for organisations to go into schools to prostyletise giving out free gifts and religious literature without parental consent?

As Himalayas says - I think I can be pretty sure that my contribution would be used to proselytise. And the point is - as it is every year when these threads come up is that SP is fundamentally dishonest (or at least rather vague) about that point. And I think that's despicable. If that's what you're about as a charity, then be upfront and honest about it

There's a weird statement now on OCC's website "The Truth About Opperation Christmas Child"

Countering "misinformation" that the gifts are given out in order to promote (a particular brand of) Christianity, rather than unconditionally:

"Our offer of new life in Jesus Christ is absolutely unconditional, as was the free gift of God's Son that first Christmas time. It is this that we celebrate in the giving of shoebox gifts."

....seems to be missing the point somewhat

Stillsmarting, care to identify the country concerned. I'm prepared to do little googling myself...

So I'm pleased to say I've done the John Lewis Refuge gift list, and feel better now I can tell my boys what we're doing instead of the shoe boxes.

They helped me choose what to get, although DS1 was a little concerned about the school beating it's record of how many boxes they do. Ah well!