AIBU not to contribute to a crowd-funding request?

[Patnotpending]

I've been asked to contribute to a crowd-funder to send a woman to the US for treatment at an 'amazing' hospital run by a former surgeon who seems to specialise in treating people who have been given only a few months to live. The patient has a cancer that has a very poor prognosis. She has a 1 in 4 chance of surviving a year and a 6 in 100 chance of living for five years. Apparently the US hospital specialises in treatments not available on the NHS but it's not clear what they are.

I've known other people who have died while spending all their money on quack and alternative therapies after refusing what the NHS has to offer and I absolutely hate the charlatans involved. I would really rather give some money to a charity that supports women and children – vaccinations for children or the Addis Ababa Fistula Hospital, for example. My partner tells me I'm being unkind and I should give £20 and then forget about it. I really don't want a penny of my money going to some quack who preys on the vulnerable. AIBU to refuse?

it is not the op's best friend's mum in this case though

I wouldn't donate, especially not three figures. If I didn't know them personally that would be enough for me to say no. I'd possibly make an undisclosed sum donation to a relevant charity that I trusted.

littlejalapeno, can you not see how utterly egregious it is to encourage scammers to prey on extremely sick people and their loved ones?

I think I'm allowed to hold that view.

Not in my name.

No, but the niece did.
Of course, you would grab any chance at a cure/ a longer life if you found out about it. Even a 1% chance.
That's not in question.

I agree with you OP. I can't imagine how awful it is going abroad when you're terminally ill and having uncomfortable treatment, because let's face it these treatments are never pleasant, only to die anyway, possibly overseas.

I understand people want to keep their hopes up but these dodgy treatments are terrible and I wouldn't want to pay towards them when they're are plenty of charities that go towards really helping people's lives.

And to be honest if she was the 1 in 4 she'd probably not be going abroad as she'd have been given a better prognosis by her doctors here.

A few of my patients with a terminal diagnosis went to various places abroad, USA, Germany, Austria, that promised them cures/extended lives, always at great cost, both financially and practically. They still died within the time frame we expected them to.

Alexa, yes! It's heartbreaking.

BitOfFun 💐

I've always been suspicious of these cures that can be had at great expense. People get sucked in, then the cures turn out to be useless. It's rare that one of these cures actually turns out to be any good.

YANBU to refuse, especially without knowing the detail. I don't subscribe to the idea that anything is worth trying even if there is a minimal chance of success. This would only apply if the chance of success didn't come with other risks/compromises. There have been cases where thousands have been raised for unproven treatment abroad, and then thousands needed again to get the patient home to die.

Your money. Your choice. Obviously.

Yes, this is evidently a horrible situation for that family. But it's ultimately your choice...
I myself might ultimately be swayed to give a 20 (but definitely not more). But I admit, I'd be more likely to give it to a charity I actually believe in.

*believe in the cause. Not necessarily the charity itself, I guess...

YANBU. I think it's very CF for your niece to have suggested an amount, especially since this isn't even someone you know. You can say thanks for letting you know, and you'll make your own decision about what you can give to this, if anything, since there are so many people and charities in need.

and my niece has asked me to contribute a three-figure sum.

What? You tell her NO. Leave off all the virtue signally fluff about the causes you find more worthy. She has a real cheek to demand a specific sum from you. 'Unfortunately I don't have funds to contribute to this.'

I think she could do with a reality check. I'm sure she sincerely believes she is doing A Good Thing, but she's actually perpetuating the exploitation of terminally ill cancer patients. Give her something to think about.

Niece's friend's mum is remote enough that I wouldn't contribute and wouldn't give it a second thought. You can't help everyone.

SmashingBlouse, you said:

Of course, you would grab any chance at a cure/ a longer life if you found out about it. Even a 1% chance.
That's not in question.

You may feel that way but having seen my mother and various other people end up having 'heroic' or debilitating treatment that has extended their lives but made them a complete misery I certainly don't share that view. Neither do a lot of doctors: they know that sometimes quality is better than quantity.

When I was younger I supported a neighbour with stage 4 breast cancer. When it became clear it had spread and there was no hope of a conventional cure she would ask me to drive her to a psychic surgeon who was later exposed on TV, faith healers, homeopaths, naturopaths etc. When she had only a few weeks to live she was persauded to pay a fortune to have her amalgam fillings replaced by a quack dentist who was subsequently struck off. It gave me a glimpse of an underworld where unscrupulous people make fortunes from the desperation of the dying. I won't give those people a penny if I can help it.

I wouldn't say no, but just decide if you want to or not and stick with that.

You shouldn't be guilt-tripped into donating a "3 figure sum" on a CF relative's say-so.

It's really not your place or business to declare that the person is being swizzed and preyed upon, you just say you're not contributing to it.

YANBU. I wouldn’t donate to this and being complicit in charlatans cashing in on their desperation and offering false hope. It’s despicable.

I got taken in by the Charlie Gard thing a few years ago and really wished I hadn’t. Not because of the £20 as that’s nothing but because in donating I contributed to that family’s false hope.

YANBU. I know someone who got ensnared by a fraudulent "cure" for cancer despite people's best attempts to convince her to get real treatment. She died very slowly and in a lot of pain. The NHS had caught it really early and her prognosis for chemo was great but she didn't want the "toxic chemicals" in her body. I would never pay a penny to people like that. If you're satisfied that this thing isn't legit, I think it's perfectly reasonable not to donate money. These sort of things survive on people's willingness to help with the best of intentions and I don't think you're doing your niece or her mum any favours by giving them false hope. Having said that, if the niece really believes in this twaddle she'll probably resent you for it in the long run.

OMG I'd give £20 with those odds. However, you say that is from the NHS not the treatment not available on the NHS that the woman will receive in USA. So those odds mean nothing and are irrelevant.
I'm thinking that the 6 months or a year could mean a big difference.
To my late fil it would have meant him seeing his first gc from his second son.

I wouldn’t donate either and would say why. We don’t give to any crowdfunding though and just support the charities close to our hearts where we know the money is used in a way we agree with.

I think it might be unkind not to donate at all

It is certainly not unkind not to donate to a particular cause.

If you reasonably think that cause is a con, offering false hope, I would feel that donating from some sense of etiquette is the unkind act.

I think it might be unkind not to donate at all.

YOU donate for all of us then if it means so much to you
Fill that void on your 'kindness' tank.

May I ask, is the money being collected through an official website, like Just Giving etc.? Or is it a case of transferring the money to the niece's bank account? It's just this all seems a little dodgy to me...