To disagree with Children in need

[BrokenBrit]

Perhaps I should preface this and say I do give to charity and I recognise we don’t live in a fair and decent society where services are properly funded.

However, I think it’s pretty shameful having children plastered all over the tv revealing their private medical diagnosis so as to get some money for essential funding.

I also hate the narrative of disabled people needing pity and charity with the sad music and dimmed lights (I’ve not watched it this year but that has been previous years experience!). Either that or as some sort of inspiration! I just hate this narrative!

Then there are the jolly celebs making themselves feels good singing a song and raising a few £ when what really needs is change to policy and practice, a properly funded NHS, proper provision for children with SEND and much, much more. But let’s donate a quid and feel good about ourselves hey.

AIBU?

I spent many years volunteering for taking calls on the night and it was always brilliant fun. Even met “Pudsey” aka my boss who got sent a costume from the BBC

As a result some of our colleagues got to visit a local centre who were funded by CIN and some of the stories they came back with was heartwarming. They wouldn’t be able to provide that support without charity (also funded by the national lottery that funnily enough doesn’t get the same comments as CIN, I wonder why!)

Sadly charities prop up the needs of many without them so many would suffer.

When will BBC learn though with having sex pest Manford as a presenter.

I watch a bit. But fast forward all the tragedies.
im not a fan of all the grinning celebrities, who are paid, or using other people’s heartbreak to get on tv. I’m the same about that awful thing davina presents

I'm on the fence. My dc have benefited hugely from children in need. They can't access mainstream activities such as scouts, ballet lessons etc and CIN subsidies their sn sports club and allows them to have enough adults supporting them. My dc love the awareness side of things. Dc1 once said that it's the one day in the year that people notice the challenges that children like him are coping with every day.

On the other hand, some of the charities that CIN help shouldn't need to exist, the gov should be funding it. I know so many parents who have to fundraise to get appropriate wheelchairs, physiotherapy and specialist equipment for their disabled children. And also parents who have had to fight in court to get their children into the schools they need. It isn't right.

What annoys me is celebrities with loads of money preaching at people with much less. I send a donation into my child's school but never watch it on the telly.

Totally agree, it's a bit cheeky of them standing there asking people to donate when they are getting paid for a few hours 'charity work'

I went out to the pub as I hate Children in Need. I do however give to children's charities of my choice.

Are they paid?

A vanishingly small number of people are prepared to pay higher taxes (look at the constant whining on here about IHT and having to pay for your own social care in old age if you have a house to sell) so without charity who exactly do u think will support the vulnerable in society? I guarantee you it won’t be the average voter who, at election time, doesn’t give them a second thought 🙄.

Nope. One year Terry Wogan did as part of his regular contract with the BBC and it caused an outcry. He donated the money and since then, even if the presenter is under contract it is very clear they don’t get paid. Same as the guests

I get very cross about rich people telling me to donate money, do they not realise that they're part of the inequality?

I also agree it's wrong to be giving out confidential and private information regarding children's medical diagnoses.

I don’t think this is fair. Take Vernon Kaye. He could just give a million quid. But his awareness raising has directly raised four times that and indirectly probably a lot more. Or for all you actually know he might be doing both. He certainly put the volunteer hours in.

Plus it’s not only the poverty stricken watching. Plenty of others with cash could be inspired to give too.

If the lesser known celebs aren't paid, I think it's telling that higher profile celebrities won't appear without a fee. So good on last nights bunch.... but it still was 💩

Agree OP

I'd pay not to watch that rubbish. Alot of the sketches make me cringe 😬

Totally agree with you. Britain is supposed to look after the vulnerable. Sadky years of tory rule means this isn't happening. But it should

Yes, very much this. I'd object to any of my money going to charities that actually harm children (imho), by pushing puberty blockers and physical mutilation.

Plus, even if you don't work in any area relating to that contentious issue, I'm sure I read somewhere that you're forced to toe the 'woke' line before they will even consider your application.

I agree with you. It's never sat comfortably with me.

Another charity bashing thread. 😳

Way to go MN 👏

But that's just CIN themselves, who are a 'wrapper' charity. 5% of all money is instantly gone in admin, before the remainder (well, whatever they don't hoard) is given to the successful applying charities - and then those charities have to pay for their own admin and other costs out of whatever they receive.

It’s easy for charities to say 95% goes to the cause, they can use all sorts of justification for that, including in some cases huge salaries of CEO and directors, don’t believe the hype I’m afraid, have worked for several well known charities and it’s heartbreaking how much is smoke and mirrors

I don’t donate or watch it because I don’t want to be a “white savior” 🤣🤣

CIN also collects money when Labour’s in Government.

To be fair, you have no idea how much of their money they may (or may not) quietly give to CIN - or any other charity.

Jason Manford did instantly donate £5K of his own money in return for two celebs in a sliming challenge who had managed to avoid it getting slimed after all.

Even giving their time is a sacrifice for TV stars who can command high appearance fees, when they could potentially have taken a very well-paying job in the same slot instead.