Christmas fund given to charity AIBU

[FlatOnTheHill]

Me and my sister get on really well. Very close family. Never argue about anything. More like best mates so very lucky. Ok this is where its all gone wrong. Re xmas. None of us want for anything and the kids have everything. I made a decision this year that all off my £200 xmas fund for family (not my son). Is being donated to a local wonderful hospice. Im a working single mum by the way. I have given plenty of notice to everyone and told people myself and my son dont want anything as we dont need it. To save their money and not to worry. She has gone mad and said she would never give to charity at xmas and its about the kids. I said you might need a fucking hospice one day. She said its a weird thing to do. All the rest of the faimy think its a good gesture to donate. I have only bought presents for my son. Am i wrong? Feel like shit now for doing a good deed.

You're missing the key bit of asking for nothing back. So the op has given up her own gifts really, there is no impact at all on the sister financially.

I am not missing the "key bit" at all. Her family probably will still buy her son a gift so they probably will lose out financially but that isn't really the issue. Gift giving isn't really about monetary gain as presents are exchanged OP could have given up her gifts but telling her family she would like them to donate to charity rather than buying her a gift.

It's not about "reaping more" - and I disagree that it's about money spent/"value" - it's about how it feels to have bought for a family member's child for 15 years and to have younger children yourself and have a not unreasonable expectation that your children will be bought back for. She could spend 1/3 of what is spent on her child on each of her sister's 3 for all you know (so the ££ spent is the same).

I'm saying it's quite possibly not about £££, it's about feeling like you give for years and years and then don't get that reciprocated. Like her son merited getting a present every year till he was 15, but her sister's only merited them for 8, or 11 or whatever.

The number of children being bought for is a red herring imo and turns it into a purely monetary calculation, rather than about present buying as a way of showing you care/value your family.

Because a discussion implies that if the extended family said 'no, I want to give gifts' then The OP has to go along with something she doesn't feel comfortable with.

To me, discussion implies making everyone feel that their opinion matters and if possible coming up with a solution that everyone is happy with. You may find you get a long better with people if you try that...

Good lord, is this still going on?

I think there's a massive amount of projection going on here, tbh - and the level of entitlement from some is off the scale.

By the way, what is so wrong with feeling good about yourself for making a kind gesture that helps people out? It's not a crime.

Oh for god's sake. "I bought for 15 years and you only bought for 11years. You owe is four more years! Waah!"

Do people seriously think that way?!

The op DID discuss it with her sister, plenty far in advance and what her sister said was "fine, as long as you're not expecting me to give to charity too". So she did know about it, this wasn't some big surprise.

I am gobsmacked that for some of you, your sister could say "five of my friends in the past year or so have died, I'd like to give the money I'd usually spend on presents to the hospice, in return, don't get me anything" and you'd somehow think that that wasn't ok and your need for a token gift was more important. Genuinely, think about this in real life if you were in that situation yourself and think how you'd react. Unbelievably selfish and out of touch if you really would think you were more important than a hospice that has cared for your sisters dying friend.

Oh and let's not forget that the op has told us how close she was to her sister, meaning that her sister likely knew some of these friends and certainly knew how upset the op was during their illnesses

or to put it another way LeaLeander

"so presents were OK while your son was young, but now he's not you won't do them anymore, how sad/selfish".

It's not that hard a concept to get that her sister's feelings might be hurt by a sudden cessation of present buying after 15 years of exchanging presents for the kids. That she might feel that her sister doesn't care for her children the way she cares for her nephew.

The OP said in her first post that they were a close family - surely she might want to consider the possibility that this isn't about anger at donations to a charity, but is about hurting her sister's feelings/a sense that having benefited from her families generosity to her own son for years (someone she admits she is still buying for this Christmas) she has now decided that the rest of the family doesn't merit that same generosity back?

You may find you get a long better with people if you try that...
How patronising.

Not all things need or warrant a discussion and this, the OP deciding where her money should go, no one else gets to decide that.

There's no reason why she couldn't have donated most of the money to the hospice and still bought small presents for her nieces/nephews.

Donating to charity is great, but is more understandably done in place of presents for adults who have all they need, not kids, who typically love christmas and presents and all that and who will have a harder time understanding that the rules that were in place about who bought for whom have suddenly changed for reasons beyond most 8 year olds understanding.

Christonabike. I have been riveted by some of the attitudes on this thread. And cannot help suspecting that some of you feel massively put on the spot by the OP's decision to give a tidy little sum to a hospice (which for the record supplies an increasingly needed service while being voluntarily funded).

If her sister really does feel short-changed she can obviously spend the money she'd have spent on the OP's present on presents for her own kids. And/of get all the other people involved to donate to her poor deprived mites.

Personally, much as I like receiving Stuff, if someone told me they weren't doing presents but were giving to a hospice/ the local food bank/ the work being done to support refugees in Calais, I would be absolutely fine with it. And rather impressed.

Me too MotherInferior.

If my sister did this I might feel mildly put out (she gives great presents ) but once I'd got over myself I'd be thinking - wow, good for you.

Queenbean I doubt the very much that the OP said "five of my friends in the past year or so have died, I'd like to give the money I'd usually spend on presents to the hospice, in return, don't get me anything"

I think that if OP really did discuss it all with her sister and her sister agreed, her sister wouldn't be so upset about it now. I don't get the impression from the OP that her sister is normally unreasonable. She says that they never even argue.

Mary so you don't know, haven't read the op's posts properly but are determined to paint her in a bad light? I am going on what op has actually written in her posts but if you're going to completely ignore that and project whatever you'd like to fit in to your bit of the story then go ahead - I think our debate here is finished.

Blimey. The vultures don't stop picking. OP has admitted that had she known her sister was going to overreact the way she did, she may have done things differently.

She has said she is a direct person. And could have done things differently. I can relate to that.

None of this removes what she has done is not malicious. It was not done for saint hunting. She did not announce this publicly, but tried to get a better insight here as to why her actions has resulted in 5 weeks of cold shoulder.

She's got that in spades. For all of you that are infallible, ever, then what wonderful beings you are. But for those of us that recognise that we occasionally get things wrong, no matter how positive the original intent was, but we hopefully learn from it.

Let's beat her up some more though shall we, as it seems yesterday was clearly not enough.

"If her sister really does feel short-changed she can obviously spend the money she'd have spent on the OP's present on presents for her own kids. And/of get all the other people involved to donate to her poor deprived mites."

And if it's not about the money spent, but the effort/thought involved? Hell, the OP could have got herself on one of the handmade threads on MN and made something for the kids (reindeer hot chocolate, chocolate bark etc) that costs peanuts but shows that she cares in a way that a younger child can understand?

Given that the sister hasn't responded in 5 weeks (which I agree is unreasonable) we don't know why she's upset, so it seems rather mean to assume it's about money spent rather than hurt feelings.

It's actually possible for both the charity / present giving perspectives to be valid.

As many people have said, there can be little argument that charities who care for the dying are utterly deserving of our money and support.

However, there are many people (not necessarily the OP's sister!) for whom a Christmas gift is a rare sign that someone else is thinking of them - perhaps those who live alone, as Midnite described,or who have lost their own family. For those people, the vitriol about how selfish it is to exchange 'tat' for Christmas could be pretty hurtful - it isn't just about the monetary value, it's a tradition which encourages people to pause and show appreciation for others. Presents are not the only way to do that, of course, but it's culturally accepted in the UK.

If we're being honest, how many of us survive on the bare minimum we possibly could and then donate the rest to charity? I know there are many on here suffering through the austerity cuts, but there are also many who have been able to buy alcohol, extra food, holidays, make-up, new furniture - do we really need it, or is it 'tat' that we could have done without?

It looks as though lots of people are quite happy to draw a line in the sand where they think it should go, and then declare that people on the other side are selfish or immoral. The Op herself judged that her own child deserved Christmas gifts while her nieces and nephews did not, so it isn't even as clear cut as saying that the charity needs the money more than we all need gifts - there's a hierarchy of how deserving people are judged to be. Disagreeing about where to draw the line isn't inherently selfish, it's the surrounding behaviour that becomes selfish.

I think there is a load of projection from all directions!

Frankly, we didn't hear the conversation she had with her sister. We don't know who the other family members are, or what they think.

We only know that the OP was moved to give money to a worthy cause and did so. When she looked at her available funds, she felt this money should come from the money she planned to spend on her extended family for Christmas. She expected her extended family to be OK with that; they weren't. Her relationship with her sister is now badly strained.

If we all agree that the sister is wrong and selfish: what does that gain the OP? She can be "right" and have no relationship with her sister? This doesn't sound like a great result to me.

It comes down to how you present things to others:

Option 1 (Sister speaking to her sister/family): I really felt the loss of X and Y this year and I feel that the hospice that cared for them deserves a donation. I would appreciate it if you could donate the value of any gifts you were going to give to me to their service.

Option 2: I'm not going to give any presents this year because I think this hospice is the most worthy charity this year. But feel free to send me presents because I know you don't always like donating to charity.

Mary so you don't know, haven't read the op's posts properly but are determined to paint her in a bad light? I am going on what op has actually written in her posts but if you're going to completely ignore that and project whatever you'd like to fit in to your bit of the story then go ahead - I think our debate here is finished.

I have read the posts but I am sceptical that the OP originally had the discussion you say she had considering her sister's reaction and taking into account that she never even argues with her sister normally (so hardly an unreasonable argumentative person). That may be projecting but I think you are doing a lot of that yourself. As 2016IsANewYearforMe neither of us heard the conversation.

So you're suggesting that the op is lying? How classy.

Midnight a donation to a hospice which has helped friends who have left children behind is far more thoughtful than a small "well thought out" gift.

That depends on the receiver. That 'small well thought out gift' may mean a great deal to the recipient who doesn't receive any other gifts. A donation is not necessarily 'more thoughtful'. It may be a cause the giver supports, it may be an important cause for them, but unless the recipient feels the same way about the donation 'cause', then it's a fairly irreverent gift.

I currently have a people carrier outside my house full of items I have purchased and wrapped with the intention of giving to people.

Should I elect between now and midnight tonight I could just decide to change all the tags so they say things like child age 3 and drop them all off at the nearest homeless shelter or supported housing project instead.

And you know what if I did not one person who is currently listed on the tags would even raise an eyebrow.

One of them is a nice case of wine I could even just drink them myself if I wished.

This is because at the moment they all belong to me should they get to anybody at all they will hopefully be a unexpected plesant surprise that the intended reciepiants will like at that point they will belong to them and not me.

Queenbean no I am not suggesting OP is lying. She said the original conversation was as follows:

Me: I wont be buying xmas gifts this year
Family: why is that then
Me: i was going to but decided the money i have set aside im going to give to The hospice.

This is not the same as your sentence “five of my friends in the past year or so have died, I'd like to give the money I'd usually spend on presents to the hospice, in return, don't get me anything"

Do people really count how many presents have been bought for their own dc vs how many they have bought for theirs? How does that even enter someone's head?

All the "it's not about the monetary value ....but" type comment remind e of when people go it's "I'm not racist but..." And the go on the say something racists.

I keep returning to this thread thinking it couldn't get any shittier then someone suprises me.

People keep saying it's the thought that counts, but going by some posts, it's " the thought about me and my dc is what counts and if my family don't show that by presents and have cheek to spend their own money on someone else less fortunate they've thought about they are selfish"

and they see the presents as an indication of how they are appreciated, it is the thought that counts but no body should measure how much they are loved/ aprreciated by the gifts they receive and if you pass this attitude on to dc they will be hurt at some point because not everyone can afford/ has time to do presents.

Families show their love all year round, a present doesn't do that, I know I'm loved because my SIL insists on dropping everything to take me to breast appointments, my other SIL looks after my dd for me to go, my mum listened to me worrying, each and every one of them are annoying fuckers at times but I know they love me, would do anything for me and be the first there if I needed anything, I know they think about me as they show it all year round. If any of them said they're not doing gifts, the convo wouldn't even get to "why?" I think most families would be "ok, no problem" not no contact for five fucking weeks.

It's the thought that counts yes, but not the thought about yourself.