Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

to think the money should go to charity?

28 replies

VicarInaTinselTuTu · 27/12/2009 21:09

the couple who bought my old house had a child who became gravely ill and sadly died of a brain tumour just a couple of months ago. i can only imagine how devastating this is - my son was gravely ill when he was a toddler and i just couldnt imagine what id have done if he hadnt recovered.

the people of our town raised alot of money for this couples child - over £20,000, but sadly it didnt do any good for their little one and she died.

they have gone on an extended month long holiday, and are doing house improvements with the money that was raised. am i being totally unreasonable to think that at least some of that money should have gone to the hospice that helped them or to the hospital? i understand that the money thats been donated was donated to them, and i can understand them keeping a proportion of it i guess, but i think id have felt that the best use of it was to donate for other children in a similar position.
when my son was gravely ill,(he was in a coma for a week and in hospital for nearly 2 months, he lost all of his learned abilities and had to learn to walk/talk etc all over again, and was brain damaged) i raised loads of money for charity to research meningitis. id never have dreamed of keeping any of it for a holiday, even if he had died id have still handed it all over.

am i being unreasonable? id never say anything to anyone in real life but i cant help but feel that that money was donated for a reason.

OP posts:

LetThereBeRock · 27/12/2009 22:04

How do you know that they haven't donated money to the hospice? Just because they haven't talked about it doesn't mean that they haven't or won't do so in the future.

I think it would be nice for money to go to the hospice but I couldn't criticise them for not doing so should that be the case.

It's been just a few months and if working on the house,going on holiday etc is keeping them sane then I couldn't begrudge them a penny of it.

I can't imagine how people cope when they lose a child. The pain would be overwhelming and a coping mechanism for some may be to keep themselves busy in an effort to try to distract themselves from the full realisation of the hell they're going through or in order to continue to function rather than going into shutdown mode.

tiredoftherain · 27/12/2009 22:09

Agree with LetThereBeRock, you can't really know what's going on there and they may well have been saving money themselves for their dd which they're now using elsewhere. I think it's best left.

LetThereBeRock · 27/12/2009 22:16

Besides I can imagine that they've incurred a lot of expenses having to take time off work, the cost of the funeral etc.

cat64 · 27/12/2009 22:18

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

fishie · 27/12/2009 22:20

if it was for the family to help them through their ordeal then that is exactly how it is being used.

if it was for something else (hospice, hospital etc) then a crime is being committed.

LetThereBeRock · 27/12/2009 22:20

Well put Cat.

MitchyInge · 27/12/2009 22:20

yabu for reasons already stated above

Original poster

VicarInaTinselTuTu · 27/12/2009 22:25

i dont begrudge them a penny of it. no money in the world could compensate for the loss of your child, but i just really hoped that some of it would go to charity, people were so generous.

ulitmately it is their money to do with as they wish, and i cant imagine going back home can be much fun - i certainly dont begrudge them a holiday, i was talking to to their friend who was telling me that they have all this money to spend now etc. i just felt that some of it should go to help others in the same position, but it is their choice at the end of the day. their friend indicated that the money is going on house improvement (which is taking place while they are away) and their holiday.

it is up to them i guess how to spend the money, and i doubt very much that anyone here would begrudge them of it.

OP posts:

LetThereBeRock · 28/12/2009 13:13

I don't see the issue then as you said it is their money to do with as they wish,and it was given as a gift which generally means there are no strings attached, or there shouldn't be at least.

If people had felt strongly about giving money to the hospice then they could have suggested that the person who managed the donation collections,presuming that there was a person who did so, should set aside a percentage of the money for the hospice and given the remainder to the family.

The hospice is a very worthy cause of course but surely equally so are the family? Or is it seen as less worthy to donate to individuals?

lisad123wantsherquoteinDM · 28/12/2009 13:27

the thing is when someone in the family is ill, every moment every penny goes toward them, their crae, their hospital extras ect. I totally agree they might be in need of a holiday and TBH if sorting out the house keeps them busy and helps them, who are you to say its not on.

Divatheshopaholic · 28/12/2009 13:38

200.00 is loads of money to help other ill children`s treatment.
but as everyone here said you, how do you know if they are using charity money.

NancyDrewRocks · 28/12/2009 16:50

diva there isn't any "charity money" though is there? It was given as a gift.

wannaBe · 28/12/2009 17:40

tbh I think it depends.

Personally I don't really get this idea of raising money without an intended goal, and I think that handing over a cheque is just a bit patronising.

I can see the idea of raising money for a piece of equipment/a treatment that's not funded/a holiday for the child and her family/raising money and delivering shopping every week (but with someone else having control over the money) etc, but the idea of just raising a load of cash (and in order to raise that much they must have gone to considerable lengths) and to then just hand over a cheque seems odd to me. al

What was the intended purpose of the money that was raised?

Obviously no-one would think to demand this family give the money to charity as they have suffered such a horrific loss, but if the money was raised with a specific purpose and the family have now used the money to fund a holiday and renovations to their house then it does seem a little unreasonable of them.

But if people were just asked to give money for no specific purpose then obviously they're happy for it to be spent as the parents see fit.

Original poster

VicarInaTinselTuTu · 28/12/2009 20:16

thats the thing - it was raised as a form of charity and as far as i knew it was being raised to fund some kind of treatment for the little girl.

obviously they must have incurred some expenses - i know we did when my son was ill, i couldnt work and lost my job as i was caring for him in hospital, i really am not begrudging them the money at all, i was far luckier than them, my child lived, but i just thought that because they couldnt use the money for its intended purpose then it seems strange just to pocket it. but i am obviously being unreasonable. i do feel really bad for them, and i wish them well.

OP posts:

Tryharder · 28/12/2009 20:25

YANBU.

If the money was donated to the family specifically to pay for medical treatment /loss of earnings due to parents having to give up work, then I believe the family are acting criminally.

Even if the money was donated with no specific intent, then it seems a bit - I dunno - in poor taste perhaps to spend it on luxury holidays and new kitchens. Sort of like profiteering from the death of a child?

I wouldn't donate money if I thought it would be used in this way.

FabHasHadALovelyXmas · 28/12/2009 20:57

I understand a bit where you are coming from but you don't know if all the money has been donated and the parents are using their own money.

fairycake123 · 28/12/2009 21:02

But is anyone really obliged to be reasonable and sensible when their child has just died?

ilovemydogandmrobama · 28/12/2009 21:07

They are probably living in a bubble at the moment and would be mortified if they thought others were of the opinion that the money was being misappropriated.

I think your are right -- the money was given in the spirit of helping a sick child in the local community, so it would have been kind if they put the money to use, in the spirit in which it was given.

Perhaps next time, god forbid another child is ill, but more from a fund raising stance, make it clear that the money is the be used for xxx and name trustees.

ilovespagbol · 28/12/2009 21:11

Their child died only a couple of moths ago FFS. They are hardly in their right minds to be making a rational decision about anything. Who knows what they will end up doing with the money. And perhaps they might decide to support the hospice in other ways.

Stephief · 28/12/2009 21:21

I guess everyone has their own opinions on this.

My gut reaction would be to say give the money away, but they have just lost their child, I would say they damn well need a holiday right now. I lost my daughter a few years ago, the most devastating day of my life. I dare say a good chunk of the money donated has probably helped pay towards the funeral/gravestone etc (I spent well over £5k on all of that) As for the home improvements, maybe they are trying to make their home feel different. No one wants to forget a child that has died, but living with things the same as before can make it so hard to move on-living in a house that still has so many memories of their child may be impossible for them, so to spend money on home improvements may seem unnnecesary for most people, but for them it may be a way of moving on when they get back.

wannaBe · 28/12/2009 21:28

ah no if the money was raised for a specific treatment then I don't think it should just be pocketed and spent on a holiday/home improvements.

Presumably there must be other children out there who would benefit from the treatment this poor little girl did not live long enough to receive - the money should go towards that instead imo.

I think that perhaps a holiday would be slightly more justifyable on the basis that it would give the family time to get away from everything and take stock after their tragic loss, but anything material ie renovations to the house/anything else material just devalues the act of raising the money IMO.

easyoptionwoman · 28/12/2009 21:30

Dear God! I can't believe some of the replies. YA totally BU. I hardly think these poor people are sitting there rubbing their hands with glee at the thought of all that money when their child has just died. Keep your nose to yourself and stop being so bloody judgemental!

GoldQuintessenceAndMyrrh · 28/12/2009 21:31

But the townsfolk chose to donate to THIS FAMILY not the hospice, not another charity raising money for similar causes. Presumably the money raising effort would not have taken place if it was not to benefit this particular family.

Yes, the money was meant for treatment, that could possibly save the childs life. And no, it didnt.

I dont think a holiday, or a renovated kitchen can ever replace a child. I think it is a little tasteless questionning this couple, to be honest.

tatt · 28/12/2009 21:34

I'd feel a bit disturbed by house improvements too. However you don't really know if they are using money of their own that they had saved towards the child's treatment. They could have given away some or all of the donated money.

wannaBe · 28/12/2009 21:40

I guess the question is - would people have donated money if they knew it would go towards a new kitchen? I imagine most wouldn't.

In order to have raised twenty grand I imagine considerable effort was made - probably even local businesses became involved on the basis that they were helping to raise money for a child to receive life-saving treatment.

I can understand them going on a holiday, I don't agree with it but I can understand it, really I can. But material possessions, ie renovating a house makes a mockery of the generosity and goodwill of the people who went to the effort to raise money for life-saving treatment for a child.

Of course no-one would call the parents on it given their loss, but that doesn't mean it can't be wrong.

Flip

1 2