To not donate because I dislike voluntourism?

[notstevienicks]

I was in a charity shop today, passing the time before an appointment. I was in there maybe 10 mins. I arrived at the start of a speakerphone phone conversation between 2 women working there and another woman on the other end. They were talking about an upcoming trip and the itinerary etc. I was idly listening as I browsed and assumed they were planning a holiday but then the shop worker mentioned Uganda and I made the connection between that and the charity shop itself. It’s not a chain, but an independent Christian shop whose aim is to raise money for vulnerable single pregnant women in Uganda (including delivering health education to schools and churches in the country) according to their website.

I left the shop and noticed a sign in the window asking for donations towards the repair of a damaged water well and got out my purse to go back in and donate but then stopped myself. I’m already about voluntourism/ white saviourism and had just heard these women (at least 3 of them, maybe more are going on this trip I have no idea) talking about getting a good deal on their £2000 flights.

In their defence, they did chat about getting the cheapest flights possible even if it meant long layovers etc, plus they were talking about their garages full of donated items that would be shipped to Uganda (I have no idea what specifically) but I can’t help thinking about the fact that the 3 of them (at least) are taking £6000 (at least) out of the donations to travel to Uganda. Perhaps they’re good value and the work they do is worth it. Maybe they bring skills and knowledge that local people don’t have and therefore are invaluable. But I hate this “my 18 year old is going to Africa to build schools for 6 months” thing because they quite often do a shit job, take jobs away from local workers and it’s generally a huge waste of money that could be better spent directly helping local people. This explains my concerns well: afropunk.com/2018/06/white-savior-your-volunteer-trip-to-africa-was-more-beneficial-to-you-than-to-africa/?amp=1

Considering these women were of retirement age (and therefore not on a fun but meaningless pre uni gap year) and have been to Uganda many times before (according to my googling), AIBU to have put my purse away because I got annoyed by the thought of my measly £5 getting swallowed up by travel costs?

That's not my concern. I offer to purchase items they need to serve their cause. For example, I support four different animal rescues. I buy food/supplies that they need to care for the animals. That is what I am willing to do. If they don't want my donation, on my terms, they can refuse it.

There are so many scams around and charities creaming off money from donations towards 'expenses' I have more or less stopped donating to charities.They have jsut got too greedy.

This is so clearly made up to get people to froth at 'white saviours'.

Some corrections:
Flights to Uganda cost nowhere near £2000 per person
You imply that the flights are funded by the charity, but have no evidence of this
It sounds highly improbable/convenient that you just happened to hear this conversation.

The 'white saviours' narrative has become so deeply entrenched and toxic that it puts people off volunteering. For example, doctor colleagues are criticised for wanting to volunteer in Africa, providing much needed skill that sadly isn't available locally.

Yes I agree wholeheartedly

Some people go there and act like idiots and saviours

Some people are genuine and give a lot from their own pocket

Instead of just donating to ones with good financials and ethics?

OK.

Instead of just donating to ones with good financials and ethics?

The problem is that it's often far from straightforward to tell the good ones from the rest. Even the ones that seem very responsibly run by people who actually believe in the cause can turn out to be a massive disappointment when you delve deeper; or they can start out really well but then later go rotten and make you feel that they've betrayed your faith in them.

Also the ones where they do a lot of genuine good work, but then get captured and expand into questionable territory; so you have the dilemma of whether you support a charity that feeds and improves the opportunities of hungry, deprived children, but also jumps right on the Mermaids wagon.

It's a great shame, because there are so many really great charities out there that fully deserve support.

You do your homework and check every time you renew.

I will say I've swapped from the Red Cross to smaller, grassroots charities.

I might be wrong but certainly in every church I’ve been part of all the volunteers would fund their own flights and would then give the donations directly to benefit the overseas community. People wouldn’t be taking their flight money from the donations.

The money used for the longhaul flights and hotels would be of far better use donated directly to the charity
Maybe, maybe not, but ultimately, these are people who dedicate many hours for free where others get minimum wage at least to raise money, which they do, so giving up a small percentage for them to go and see the fruits of their effort is not so shocking.

I think people who don't volunteer and never have are not really in a position to judge.

I made this comment in response to someone talking about people who sponsor children, going to visit them, not charity volunteers.

What about someone fit and healthy running a marathon for a charity when they get all the health benefit out of it and the achievement why should we support them get fitter or have a nice day out climbing a mountain or running when it's not a physical miracle for them eg not severely disabled for example? You see it as they're out having fun on the expense of good willed donations but everything has someone benefitting along the chain, it's life!

and you still have not explained why such people are not allowed to enjoy travel and holidays, as well as sponsoring a child

I know church folk who self fund trips to areas of deprivation. They are often uplifted by the determination and creativity of the people they visit, and when they get home share stories with the congregation that encourage further fundraising.
These are often smaller charities, run by a small group as a result of direct links to a place. There's one which provides a safe refuge for street children, employing local staff, but with visitors doing some project work like redecorating, or taking the DC on outings, that there wouldn't be time/money to do without them.

It's a mile away from voluntourism.

I know someone who returns in retirement to an area they were posted to for work, visits old friends, and works alongside whatever community efforts are underway.

People who do this are often regulars, making contacts and relationships that endure.

I know church folk who self fund trips to areas of deprivation. They are often uplifted by the determination and creativity of the people they visit, and when they get home share stories with the congregation that encourage further fundraising.

Maybe yours are lovely. I hope so.

I met missionaries in Africa who were all white (mostly American) and none of whom would spend 5 minutes volunteering in the deprived parts of their own cities. They came to Africa to feel good, spread the gospel in places where the only brick building was a church, and bugger off back with their 'uplifting stories of hope'.

Africa doesn't need white missionaries. It needs a restructuring of global financial systems. A reduction in racism. And support for governments that benefit the people rather than the military and industrial aims of the west. Maybe I should pray for that.

I have real issue with transactional charity, I don't think it's right to go somewhere and donate money/skills/resources etc if it's in exchange for having to listen to preaching. It should be given freely and fairly anything else is to me a bit of an abuse of power and I say that as a practicing Christian.

Yes same here.

The people I know who did this were lovely and weren't preachy. They also did loads of basic community work locally, not just helping 'poor forrin' children'.

One bloke was a bit of an arse, but in a harmless irritating way rather than actually problematic! Put me off going with them, mind!

Put me off going with them, mind!

On the basis of what you heard, YABU.
They might be volountourists but that usually applies to teen gap years. Which I agree, I dislike.
Or they might be women supporting other women, through a charity with direct local links in Uganda working in partnership with local people, taking entirely useful items over and funding their own travel. This is actually far more likely, usually people fund their own travel. Anyone saying 'oh but the money they spend on flights could be directly donated', I hope you never go on any holidays and instead donate it all to charity, and say the same to anyone you know who goes on holiday anywhere ever that they shouldnt and should donate the money instead.
The donations box didn't say 'fund a trip' it said 'donate to a specific project'. Probably for the building materials!
I also notice that you have ascribed a 'white saviour' label even though one of the women was on a speaker phone and you are only assuming she is white.
Don't donate if you aren't sure, or research further first, but don't make a song and dance about not donating on mumsnet based on spurious assumptions.

Fair enough, if you want to spend your holiday money visiting that country and combining it with a visit to your sponsored child, no problem.
It just doesn't sit right with me personally and it isn't something I would do, because it would be purely for my own curiosity and not beneficial for the child. The child I sponsor is ten years old, he should be getting on with life, thinking about school, friends, football - he shouldn't be giving a woman who lives thousands of miles away and doesn't even speak his language, any of his head space just because I contribute some money to his food, school etc. I'm very happy to stay in the background.

I think the family actually want you to be involved so they can form connections, improve their English and find a way to thank you if they see you.

Yes and no op. If they have a long-standing relationship with the country they may be making longterm changes that include training up local people. It really depends.

Depends, doesn't it? Nobody had an issue with rescue teams and logistics experts flying out to Turkey after the earthquake. Most of the large household name charities take the approach of sending the minimum of British/Western European experts, and use them to train up local people to provide the aid, dig the wells, immunise the kids and distribute the food packages.

You don't know who's funding the trip in this case, if these women have been involved in the charity for a long time and are passionate about the cause they could well be happy to put their own money into it.

YANBU but I know someone who was part of a massively expensive trip and several dinners with luxurious freebies all on the dime of Unicef.

These people had been generous donors and did NOT need the freebies or trip to patronise the recipients of their donations. They presumably enjoy the ego stroking though. I thought it in terribly bad taste and crass and would never donate to Unicef again.

It has made me aware of the need to donate wisely and to not feel bad about saying no to donating.

It depends what money Unicef were using, it could have been money given specifically for this purpose, in which case, it is all they could legally spend it on