To give a homeless man a meal deal rather than the money?

[TheSeventhHorcrux]

There is a homeless man sat outside the Tesco Express with a little cup asking for money. Instead of giving him
Money I went inside and bought him a meal deal (crisps, ham sandwich and drink) and gave that to him. He was very polite and grateful about it and I thought nothing more of it until my friend then later accused me of being patronising by presenting him with food rather than te money.
When I lived in South Aftica I would often give food rather than money as in many cases the money went on drinks and drugs etc.
Am I being unreasonable to "control" the expenditure of this man (as put by friend) and not just give him money. I'm quite concerned now that he would have been offended, as my friend certainly thinks so!

Unless you just meant "End of" your post?

In which case that's fine

I give money and I don't give a flying fuck how they spend it.

Yeah, whatever green sleeves. The op didn't actually have to give anything. Sometimes I give money to people, sometimes I'll buy them food instead, sometimes I'll nip home and make someone a packed lunch if I haven't any cash. I could just do nothing, generally I don't though. As I'm not that persons employer though, I don't actually have to give them money or anything at all. You are a little OTT. Focus your rage on trying to change the situation for homeless people if you feel so strongly about it rather than shouting at people because they didn't give the right thing

and once they get their£200 , it"s a taxi home ,home being a spacious des res where they count all that lovely money and stash some under the very expensive mattress.. put in the hours and what ? £1400 per week....Hmmmm.

Am I shouting?

Thanks for the "yeah whatever", I was missing my 10yo's company.

I do contribute in other ways (again, I posted that upthread) but this thread is about spending the money you ARE prepared to part with on something you consider worthy, rather than giving the sum to the recipient and allowing him to exercise full adult control over what he chooses to buy with it.

Well, you sound like you are shouting to me. And no I'm not your ten year old, I'm sure it would be a surprise to you to find your ten year old responding to you on here.
I'm prepared to spend my money on how I see fit. When I see the homeless guy with his bottles lined up who sleeps near by to where I live, then I'm not prepared to give him cash. I'm happy to bring him food, for which he usually says thank you for and starts eating it. When he's asleep, I leave it in a lunch box next to him for when he wakes up. He's never accused me of being patronising for not giving him the cash instead, he actually seems vaguely pleased about it. I don't give him adult control over what I am prepared to give, because I don't want to. Hell would freeze over before he actually spent that money on food. My money, my choice. If he doesn't want it he can say no. His choice.

I agree with LittlechimneyD

An employer won't pay you in food vouchers because you work for money. You provide a service for money.

Being homeless does not provide a service, so you are asking for someone to be kind and share what they have with you. 9 out of 10 times I will give someone money but if they stink of booze or are obviously on drugs, I am not going to give them money. I am making an ethical choice to not provide something to someone that I have no obligation to provide to. A person who has shown that their addiction is making them ill and ruining their life. I will if the possibility arises give them food, they need food. They have no obligation to accept food and I have no obligation to provide food but if they accept it who are you to judge?

Now it is all fine for those of you sittin behind the warm glow of your computer to say it's better to give nothing at all than to give a sandwich, but again you have food in your stomach and a roof over your head. Who are you to make that decision for a homeless person in need if that is all that is on offer?

You offered food, he accepted it. If he found it patronising or didn't like the sandwich I'm sure he'd have said no. Stop beating yourself up for trying to do a good deed. It's far better than people walking past & ignoring him. Out of interest, did your friend give him some money? If not, I'm not sure she's in a position to judge. X

I always buy the big issue and never take the change (felt guilty years ago when it went from 80p to £1 because I still handed over a £1).

I have given money, usually when there is a dog, I know I'm a sucker.

I once gave a homeless person a sleeping bag, it was worth about £50, I wasn't going camping again and I used to pass two guys on my way into work. They seemed regretful. I didn't have £50 spare so had I given money it would have been £1 or £2.

I did say, if you can't use this can you give it to someone who can.

I bought a big issue from a seller in Preston a couple of years ago. His dog would not stay wrapped in the blanket the seller had brought and the dog's own coat had been stolen.

15 mins later I was back with a child's fleece costing about £2.50 that fitted the dog nicely.

I think there is no harm in asking.

Beggers make on average, £200 a day on the streets of London if you pick the right spot.

I'd love to see some actual evidence for that. Looks like made-up shite to me.

Of course the OP did the right thing. She did something, which is by definition better than pointless moralising.

When we lived in a place with a lot of homeless people, I used to invite one or two 'regulars' to come to our house for a shower and the use of the washing machine. We also said they could use our address for mail. This offer was always gratefully received, as it meant they stood a chance of getting temporary work.

Was that patronising?

The gift of food is not patronising because it can be declined.
It is surely more patronising to assume that a homeless person is incapable of refusing offers that he or she views as patronising. They could say money only if they wanted to and then the OP could choose accordingly whether to give money or not.

OP if homeless people are refusing offers of sandwiches from you then maybe stop offering. If they are generally pleased then carry on.
Your friend sounds a total pita

I haven't tea all the messages yet (I went to bed at 10) but just in response to a few - I had no cash to give him, there was no cah machine, so I really couldn't give him money (without really faffing about) anyway.
My reasons were twofold, firstly; yes, I admit that I was more comfortable knowing that my money was providing him with a meal rather than anything else but secondly; giving him food felt more personal than just dropping a few coins in his cup. I had a brief chat with him, asking him his opinion on the food and wished him a good evening. Something which would have been more difficult to achieve had I just slipped him some coins as I went past.

I didn't do it just for the "warm feeling" in fact, if anything, it made me feel worse that I couldn't have done more.

Right, going to read those messages!

It always comes back to 'my money'.
If you grudge it, or feel it is still 'yours', then (I feel) your belief behind the giving is flawed.
Not to say, you should stop giving, but what are you doing it for?
To help another human being, or to make yourself feel good?
If the former, then allow the givee the dignity of choice. If the latter? Hmmmm.

I think the Salvation Army official advice is to give food rather than cash, and to give cake/chocolate as well as something healthy. The SA argues that giving cash is likely to discourage the person from accessing homeless outreach. I think; I'm obviously willing to be corrected.

DH once told me I was 'patronising' homeless people by giving them money So no, you can't win, but I think your friend is a teensy bit of a dick for having a go at you if she's not going to do anything herself.

Im still laughing at the thought of Electric giving someone a moon cup!!

A cut and paste:

John Bird, founder of the Big Issue magazine and Thames Reach, a large-scale organisation with more than 350 staff, said that most people who beg on the street have some form of accommodation to go to.
Its spokesman Mike Nicholas said: 'Giving to people who beg is not a benign act. It can have fatal consequences.
'Many people asking for your money are caught up in a desperate cycle of begging from the public, buying drugs from a dealer and then taking these drugs.'
He added: 'There are many services seeking to help people sleeping rough. Please work with them, not against them.'

Tbh I think it is more patronising to say you should only give homeless people money. There are very few people I give money to. I usually give gifts. Birthdays/xmas/friends/visiting/ Why should I treat homeless people different to how I treat others. Surely that is being patronising by saying they wont appreciate a token or a gift. They are all individual and have their own story. A kindness is a kindness and that has to stand for something. I remember having a cousin and it was her birthday and her mother told everyone not to get her a present that money and a card was what she wanted. Well she can fuck off. If I am giving then I chose what to give. Its not a demand and I give what I can give at the time with a good heart and thats what is important behind the giving. If you want to give money give money if you want to give food give food. Its not for anyone to take the higher moral ground by undermining your choices. Most times I give nothing.

I think time of day is a factor. I saw someone outside a tube station at breakfast time recently and bought him a hot cheese breakfast pasty thing because it was bloody freezing, on the basis that it was exactly what I might have fancied in the same position. He seemed delighted, so I think I guessed it right that time. It's also polite to make a bit of small talk and pass the time of day during the exchange. That's somebody's uncle/son/brother/husband sitting there.

But scrablet, if someone is using drugs, then it probably isn't allowing them 'dignity of choice' to give them cash; the addiction is interfering with their dignity and their choices already.

The universally accepted advice to anyone who lives with, knows or is friends with an addict is always the same: don't give them money that might be used to support their substance misuse. It's known as 'enabling' the addiction. Why would this advice be different for someone begging on the streets?

We usually don't know that someone begging has a drug/alcohol problem, but if we think they might, then it's reasonable to give food instead of money, to avoid 'enabling' and contributing to a possible problem.

But this is a hotly-debated issue. Here are two opinion pieces, giving different sides of the argument.
It's OK to give and
Why it does more harm than good

For the record, with the exception of my friend - who was there - and mumsnet for the purpose of hearing people's opinions on the issues my friend raised - I haven't told anyone about the food. It was done on a whim when presented with someone who looked hungry. Frankly, had my friend not bought up an interesting debate I would have forgotten about it (well, other than worrying about him I mean)

I agree that many are not homeless.

My friend was a heroin addict - on incapacity benefit, in a nice flat on hb etc he begged all the time - I hated bumping in to him when he was begging.

I try & ask the people if there's anything I can get them, that way I'm not just giving them cash.

Once I got into an argument with a friend of my boyfriend as the big issue seller had asked for a coffee. I went out of my way to find a coffee for him then went back & gave it to him. Friend said I shouldn't have done, so words were exchanged.