To think voluntourism needs to be called out?

[icreaminbarnsley]

I've had numerous requests this year by parents of teen dc who are going to various African countries to contribute to their crowdfunding "to help the people in [insert country]". They further explain that said child will be building schools/wells, teaching English, designing sanitation projects....but the latest I received was that their child would be "advising locals on how to set up a business". This in particular has really annoyed me, as the child is doing A Levels, has no business of their own, and no business acumen that I'm aware of. How can you be so brass necked and unaware to be spouting stuff like this? I totally get going to a different country is going to be a fantastic experience for the dc, but who is dressing it up to make it sound like these teens have something important to offer and are needed abroad, in areas that they have absolutely zero experience? I also get that the locals might benefit from the money that the dc need to pay to undertake such an experience, but is it really the locals who benefit, or is it the mainly the 'charitable' organizations that are based in the UK?

AIBU to feel we need to call this a unique opportunity to experience life in [insert country] and not delude ourselves into thinking the locals are benefitting from groups of western teens, who are not builders, engineers or business advisers?

You seem to use the charity think it is a good idea as a justification a lot.

What they think is a good idea is based on what their aim is.

How do the children in Kolkata gain from the Irish teenagers coming?
Would they gain more from the money raised and the money spent by family going directly to them?

The charity on the ground is run by flawed people (we all are flawed), so the ultimate aim of the charity is it's own existence.

Aid that relies upon selling access to vulnerable people, fuels the creation of more vulnerable or "vulnerable" people. It's been seen time and time again, all over the world - orphanages full of "orphans" whose parents were promised an education, residential schools for "street kids" who have a family and wpild have been better off with help paying for school supplies.

It's a very complex issue, and "not ideal" is really unplaying the damage that poverty tourism can do to entire communities, for generations. A lot of it is rooted in racism and supremacy, and that does include charity bosses unfortunately. It's so easy to do better and to know better these days. Choose wisely where to send your donations, and encourage people to go on wonderful holidays to these destinations instead.

Your average teenager is not going to fundraise thousands (sometimes by lazily asking family) for the needy children of wherever altruistically. These experiences are transactional at best. I think charities endorse them as they will get a proportion of the money however small. A bit like clothing banks for whatever charity in car parks. I read the small print and they promised 8% of the profits would go to the charity.

I refuse to fund stuff like this as I think people should pay for their own jollies.

I think charities endorse them as they will get a proportion of the money however small.

Where did you see 8%? Is that the clothing banks? I admit I’ve been surprised at the small percentage going to charity in the case of some charity Christmas cards too. Agree reading the small print is essential.

The Hope Foundation says overall 84% of all donations go directly to projects, 16% to costs. From what I’ve looked at, it seems the fundraising trips are responsible for about half the money coming in. I don’t think that proportion sounds very small.

Would they gain more from the money raised and the money spent by family going directly to them?

Yes, probably.
Realistically I don’t think that will happen unfortunately. I think donations would fall.

Then so be it. Poor children are not tourist attractions, and treating them as such exacerbates the problem.

So it is OK to treat poor Indian children as a tourist attraction?

Do you really think someone saying this is right.
"It's OK that this foreigner is posting pictures of you on Instagram because they given us some money"

Surely someone ethical wouldn't be thinking like that.

The 8% was the clothing banks they are run by an independent operator and they donate on ecchangr for having charity on the bin. It does seem really low.

Possibly the hope foundation is better but I suppose it depends on whether money is being spent that properly benefits the community?

I’ve noticed an increase in people who take up these challenge type holidays. Cycling / trekking and the cost of trip is roughly half the minimum sponsorship amount plus fees paid by participant. Participant picks a charity. Essentially charity will get over £2k for little involvement. Participant will get 75% off the cost of trip for something they fancy doing.

I don’t donate to them personally, if I’m donating to charity I might as well give them the cash plus gift aid. They get £1.20 per pound rather than 50p.

One charity I know of , purportedly helping breastfeeding mothers in South Africa, is actually 2 charities . The real charity in SA does the actual work. The UK charity organises bike rides in South Africa visiting the clinics on the way. All the funds are in aid of the UK charity , 100% of which goes to admin costs of the UK charity. 100% ! It’s justified by the UK charity based in Central London, as being useful to lobby for funds for the real charity from Comic Relief ( not clear why they can’t do this themselves…..)

So I was being asked to support a jolly for the bike rider , exploiting babies and their mothers with voyeuristic photo opportunities and fund the salary of someone in the UK working in Central London! With zero money for anything happening in SA but of course the literature , promotion and crowd funding information was all about the SA charity.

Yes it's wrong, cringe, unethical. My dc's school sends students to Africa for 5K where they engage in scuba diving for a week and volunteer for less than 1/3 of the time they're out there. All culminating in the predictable photos of British teenagers posing with poor African babies. It's disrespectful and damaging to the local communities. I've heard of schemes where they tear down the newly built school, wall or what not as soon as the group has left so that the next group of British rich kids can go and 'make a difference'. My dc asked if they could go and I explained all the reasons why we wouldn't support such an activity. It's very much white / Western saviour mentality. Why not ask them to renovate and update their own school, which is falling apart in places?

Yes...smacks of white imperialism....
Africans are a target for the western do-gooders. Aid is poured into the cesspit of corruption. If only the african men stopped butchering each other in civil wars maybe they could dig their own toilets and stop creating orphans.

Countries in Africa are completely capable of deciding if they want this type of tourism or not. There are lots of paid for volunteering opportunities in Europe (in places like Greece, Italy and Spain), Australia and the USA. Are you going to 'call them out' as well? I wouldn't donate but I don't think it is something to get worked up about.

If people want to do anything, l have always thought , why don't we build factories for people to produce their own goods, making people proud that they are earning a living and helping others and their country.
I never give to charities, all money raised never gets to where it was intended, just makes a load of celebrities feel good about themselves. Years ago when my dc were at school, l would do the shoebox gift box for xmas. I was able to track where the boxes went to, but unfortunately was told they got lost in transit. Someone somewhere is making a good living off others generosity . All the adverts l see now for red nose day is a joke. I will not be donating at all...