To be really irritated by Children in Need

[Timeforanap1]

Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with the concept of helping CIN. But it seems that it's schools which are targeted for the fund raising. Schools which include the very children the charity is trying to help. So schools are asked to hold special days and raise money, asking those very children and families who are in need to give money they don't have. Isn't this just twisted?

I have not criticised anyone! As I said its personal choice whether you want your child to participate. no right no wrong - personal choice!

I have no objection to CIN fundraising - I have seen the benefits first hand. You object - I have no problem with that. But please don't make people, who agree to participate, out to be stupid when it is the people who object who cannot make the decision whether to send their child to school or not, or allow their children to dress up or not, or to take money or not.........

Personal choice......

That post made absolutely no sense whatsoever Gabby.

You are missing the point, and no one is making you out to be stupid. You're just being asked to open your mind a little bit and see the downside of CIN.

I think you'll find that the vast majority of parents want to send their healthy children into school on school days, that's not a choice, it's what's expected of parents and rightly so. Keeping your child home for no valid reason isn't an option, and I'm amazed that you would think it is. So as that's not an option, parents are forced into either donating to a charity they don't support, or having their child singled out. Can't you see that? Can't you see that's not a good thing?

Why would you even want people to donate begrudgingly? That completely misses the point of charity.

Parents are perfect of capable of making choices over whether to dress their child up or to allow them to be the odd one out, or to give them money or not, but the point is that they shouldn't be put in the position where they are forced to make those choices by charities or schools. It's not that hard a concept to understand.

Nobody is forcing you to subscribe to a charity you don't agree with. A few posters are saying they don't want their child to participate as they feel strongly against CIN charity. But they don't want their child to miss out either. If you don't want to keep your child home then DONT!! But don't try to belittle posters when they suggest the most obvious course of action for a parent who does not want their child to participate in a school event but doesn't want them to be left out!

Also why are posters asking for suggestions because they cant (or wont) afford a superhero costume. Then when cheaper alternatives are provided the reply is "My child doesn't have a white t shirt"!! Pftt..

As I have stated many times if you want your child to participate - that's fine. If you don't that's fine too! Your choice!!!!!

It might be the most obvious course of action to you - it's certainly not to me. And why the "pffft" because none of my DCs have old white t-shirts?

I know you have stated many times "if you want your child to participate - that's fine. If you don't that's fine too!" - but it's already been explained what the consequences of that would be and why it's not a choice.

Can you try and stop simply repeating yourself, because you're not being constructive and are sounding like a stuck record, irrespective of the number of !!!!!! you add to your posts.

Oh, and as was already explained - the superhero criteria did not include Pudsey.

I always thought CIN was for children in real need, now if you are quite happy giving your money to the 'Charities and projects' like of which I have provided examples well then that's fine we live in a free society and that's you're choice to do so.

It does not sit comfortable with me that an nationwide event such as CIN donates large sums of cash to charities that serve only one section of the community, imagine if they had given money to 'The Anglo-Saxon white youth community group' everyone would have been rightly outraged.
Money when given should be to local charities and projects that all inclusive are serve all sections of that locality that need them.
Or giving money to a Turkish and Kurdish children's group so they can develop good social skills and gain a
greater understanding of their cultural heritage, or giving over a 100k to a project that will provide support and activities to young people from
Gypsy and Traveller communities in Sussex helping to increase
confidence, health and wellbeing and improve relationships.
While the above may be laudable and good causes in there own right can you really say it is a need?
As for community awareness/action groups and the like well these may start out for the right reasons but in many instances end up being simply self perpetuating with the main aim of keeping paid employees in work rather than helping the wider community.
I came from a 'socially deprived' area of the NE and we had a youth group staffed by 4 full time youth workers, most of the kids didn't bother with it unless it was raining or to bum a fag from one the workers, on Fridays we would drink beer there the youth workers could not do out yet our parents thought we were ok and 'off the streets', some years later the council stopped funding the project due to cut backs, there was the usual headlines in the local rag over the 'loss of an essential youth project' however what amazed me was the sums of money involved non of which was spent on the facilities of kids but ended up as salaries etc.

I am sure I read a[sic] article last year that a lot of the money donated didn't even go to the charities.

You may object to Children in Need on several levels - self-promoting celebrities are annoying, as are bathtubs of baked beans and that awful bear - but as a charity it is totally credible, audited and above board. Just think what the Daily Mail headlines would if there really was something to bother about - unfortunately for BBC haters there are no skeletons in that particular cupboard.

And unfortunately saying 'Im sure I read something somewhere...' doesn't really cut it in terms of hard evidence. That's just what tight people say when they don't want to give money to charity.

But don't try to belittle posters when they suggest the most obvious course of action for a parent who does not want their child to participate in a school event but doesn't want them to be left out!

You are still missing the point. It shouldn't be a school event. And if it must be a school event, then it should be a very minor event, like wear something red, and if you want to put some spare change in a tin then there will be one available, and if you don't, no one will notice. My school dies that for Comice relief, and while I still have some reservations about comic relief, I can get on board with that just tell my child to find their red socks or their red hair band or whatever.

And no matter how many times you say it, it's not fine not to participate when you're four or five years old and you can't join in with your friends. It's not fine at all, it's actually a very big deal in little minds. Which is why parents end up feelng emotionally blackmailed through their children and by the place that is supposed to educate and care for them.

It does not sit comfortable with me that an nationwide event such as CIN donates large sums of cash to charities that serve only one section of the community, imagine if they had given money to 'The Anglo-Saxon white youth community group' everyone would have been rightly outraged.

Or god forbid the Cystic Fibrosis foundation because, GASP, mostly white people are effected!

Our school requests donations on a regular basis and between my 2 children they usually have to dress up every fortnight. They say we don't have to buy something new, we can make it - yeah because I have a cupboard of materials in just the right shade, the sewing ability to make it and a spare few hours at short notice!

I do feel for those families that would struggle enough with the extra £1. I have no idea how they fund the dress-up requests. It's not on.

So pleased that I am not alone in hating the Chris Evans thing. It is all he has talked about this week. Most of the radios in my house/car tune to R2 automatically and every time this week that I've turned it on, he's been banging on about that amazing things rich people can have - woopy-doo. It has been a great opportunity to reacquaint myself with other stations.

This is now an anti-CIN thing though. I've caught the One Show a few times recently and the Rickshaw challenge has had me in tears. It would be interesting to know which out of Chris Evans or the Rickshaw Challenge raises that most money.

it should be a very minor event, like wear something red, and if you want to put some spare change in a tin then there will be one available

Exactly, when i was at primary school (in the 90's) Children in Need was always wear own clothes, sometimes they'd mention a colour but never anything more specific than that, and there would be a pot by reception if you wanted to put some change in, sometimes the TA would bake cakes and sell them to parents at the school gates.

Jasonandyawegunorts while cystic fibrosis is more prominent among the Caucasian population it also affects other ethnic groups as well, as for your cheap comment the Cystic fibrosis foundation does not discriminate and helps suffers from all ethnic groups that is the point, it would be intresting to know how many grants CIN has given to CFF and similar organisations.

I am not saying that CIN does not do some good work but when you dig deeper there are for me anyhow cause for concerns on what the CIN public image presents (such as the tear jerking films) to where some of the money is actually given, once informed if you are still happy to give then that's fine but don't have a go at people who make informed choices on who the will and wont donate to.

As for the two projects I commented on in Liverpool I am sure the people involved are good and have there hearts in the right place but having come form a so called 'socially deprived area' I am very dubious about the impact and effects such schemes have in the long run on young peoples lives, I personally believe that the nearly 200k would be better used by an organisation such as Alder Hey children's hospital but that's just my opinion.

volkswin

You have a problem With Children in need giving to charities set up by and for religious groups, not "ethnic", Religion is not a race.

For example While most Muslims maybe of Muslim heritage there are also many Caucasian Muslims.

As for you cheap shot about...
and so on, i can't be bothered to continue parodying your entire idiotic and ignorant post, but you get the point.

For example While most Muslims maybe of Muslim heritage there are also many Caucasian Muslims

I meant Indian there... not Muslim, see what parodying you has done to my vocabulary?

I have no problem with money going towards projects for Turkish and Kurdish youth groups to develop social skills and gain a greater understanding of their cultural heritage. These young people may well be socially excluded in all sorts of ways, and it may be a really important project for the young people involved, that changes their lives immeasurably. Same with the gypsy/travellers in Sussex getting money to I prove confidence, health and wellbeing and relationships. These are very real issues within these socially excluded communities, so why shouldn't there be projects to address them? Dismissing them outright because you don't believe it's a 'need' probably says more about your (lack of) knowledge about the issues than anything else.

Ds2's primary school has a wear something spotty day (or ruin and old tshirt with a sharpie day as I like to think of it). DS1's secondary has an own clothes or dress like a scientist day. I told him to say that he's come in his own clothes and dressed as an (unnamed) scientist, because the vast majority of the research scientists I know go to work in jeans and tshirts too. . There's a £1 donation, but neither school is going to force the donations issue so you could just send your child in wearing their own clothes with no money (although I'm sure plenty of people would send in a donation they can't afford anyway).

Jason, I think you'll find that most Indians practice Hinduism - c.80%

"I'm just glad DP will walk in and say "what are you watching this shite for" which brings me back to earth again. Then we turn over and watch films with Nazis or zombies or preferably both."

Ooh, was someone else watching Dead Snow the other night - thought it was just me! 'Twas fab!

jason I think you'll find that most Indians practice Hinduism - c.80%

yes, look what i put and read carefully, i didn't say "most Indians are Muslim" i said "most muslims are of indian heritage" which has a completely different meaning:

most Muslims maybe of Indian heritage there are also many Caucasian Muslims

Terry wogan is so irritating and CIN should stop employing him at £1300 per hour. His jokes are useless, he is not funny and wooden. Take a seat please.

And people should consider donating directly to the charities rather than CIN.

Whilst all charities are crucial, I do get a feeling of 'overload'. The constants requests are everywhere, at work, colleagues requesting sponsorship, in the supermarket (tills and doors), on television, on the street, my children's schools, absolutely everywhere.

Eventually it gets to the point where you become deadened to the requests.

I contribute by direct debit to chosen charities but when I last explained to a collector of one if these charities that I already contribute, they laughed and said "yeah they all say that".

On the subject of schools, the contributions should be a 'family' contribution, it's not practical if parents have 3 kids at the same primary.

I will continue to make my donations, but I do get that sinking feeling every time I see someone rattling yet another collection box.

Which is a rather sad response, bearing in mind the importance of many if the causes.

I have to agree. I feel inundated with requests to give for this or that cause, some more worthy than others IMO, and often some that I've never ever heard of. I will be the first to admit that I do prefer to give to local charities and that benefit local people, simply because I struggle with the idea of sending money to other countries when we have people in need in our country. That's not dismissing the need of the other country, but I have limited funds to give from, and I don't want to give to an "out of country charity" at the cost of not being able to contribute locally. But that's just my personal opinion.

The bigger the charity, the more edgy I get about how much of the money actually gets to the needy and how much is eaten up in admin costs and advertising?

Yes, the overseas charity requests are a good case in point. Our workplace decided we would contribute to an overseas charity (purely because of client pressure and as a PR stunt) and cut out the money going to local hospices.

This made many people very angry and they simply stopped giving.

I remember in the states a charity that has a very close link with giving directly from pay cheque through employers (by means of an automatic donation out of each pay cheque), that decided (stupidly) one year to go with the theme "Give your fair share." They proposed that everyone's "fair share" was a certain percentage of your income. They lost a LOT of contributors that year. I don't like being told how much I should be giving.