Photographer:
Carf @flickr.com
Do you ever feel confident that you’re making some difference in the world? I’ve always believed that sponsoring a child is a great way to do this. Now I’m not so sure.
Two years ago I attended a mind-opening work shop, as part of my school’s social concern program. Imagine my surprise when the speaker advised us against child sponsorship. This seemed like an iffy case to make in the name of social welfare! For a moment I thought I had stepped into the wrong place. A gathering for people who don’t give a damn, maybe.
I was wrong, the speaker did care. He made some valid points, leaving me with a lot to think about.
Don’t sponsor this child:
Sponsored children are often cut off from their communities, he told us. This can happen when an educated youth, searching for work, is encouraged to leave home. According to a 2003 UN Global Youth Report, many educated workers in Sub-Saharan Africa end up moving to other countries to find work. This is because sponsored children can become ‘too educated’ for their villages, which depend on manual labor. This does nothing to end the cycle of poverty.
Then there’s the fact that not all needy children get sponsored. At least 41 000 children and elderly throughout Latin America, Asia, Africa and the Caribbean await sponsorship, according to CFCA. Consider how difficult it must be for those left behind. It’s not hard to imagine the resentment they would feel at seeing the lucky ones with letters, schooling and medicine. A sponsored child can become isolated from their community, when faced with the reality that not everyone can be saved.
Donating to charities which focus on communities, instead of individuals seems a lot kinder. Oxfam is one organisation which believes this approach is better for the long-term. This way, social rifts are avoided and no child has to look on with envy.
There’s also the issue of some charities sneakily pushing their religious or cultural views. Children being encouraged to send cards to their sponsor families at Christmas is an example of this. This might lead to children feeling they need to follow a certain faith, if they want to remain sponsored.
Another danger of sponsorship is that it can create dependency. The child may rely on their sponsor too much, and not challenge themselves to strive for better. They might also grow up feeling anxious and inadequate about their future resting in the hands of a stranger.
We need to tackle the core problems of poverty if we want to end it. The wider reasons (war, corrupt governments, HIV and unfair trade) need to be understood. Sponsorship doesn’t explain these issues. It’s not uncommon for charities to edit letters from children if politics are mentioned. Why are voices silenced when they reveal the reasons behind poverty? It seems useless to help a child grow, but ignore what forced them into desperation in the first place.
Now there’s a stubborn thought nibbling at my mind, making me feel guilty about what I have written.
Isn’t sponsoring a child better than doing nothing?
Isn’t one child surviving more important than another child feeling equal?
This is where I feel torn.
Please sponsor this child:
You can't deny that sponsoring a child gives them a better chance of life. It means that at least 2.4 million children (the amount sponsored by World Vision) don’t have to starve, or go without basic needs like shelter and medication. They can be filled with hope, because a stranger cares for and supports them.
Many organisations are also sensitive to cultural issues. Secular charities exist, and not all religious ones force their views anyway. Through information packs, sponsors get to see how a relatively small amount of money makes a huge difference to the child. One sponsor sums it up: "The rewards far exceed the contributions I send”.
Some charities (like World Vision) also make sure the whole village benefits from the money donated. This might mean supplying clean water, building a health clinic or providing teens and adults with some vocational training.
According to CARE, hunger kills six million children (under the age of five) each year. It’s impossible that sponsorship can save them all. But does that mean we shouldn’t help who we can?
It’s like the starfish poem – in which an old man tells a young man that his efforts to save stranded starfish make no difference, because there are too many. “The young man listened politely. Then bent down, picked up another starfish and threw it into the ocean, past the breaking waves and said – “It made a difference for that one." Maybe that’s what matters the most.
How do I know this?
Binu, T.S. 2003, ‘The Ugly Side of Child Sponsorship’, Vijay Times, 7 June, http://www.hvk.org/articles/0603/169.html
CARE, 2007, Hunger Facts: Statistics on Hunger, CARE, http://www.care.org/campaigns/world-hunger/facts.asp
Ekklesia, 2006, How to sponsor a child in the developing world, Ekklesia, http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/content/
news_syndication/childsponsorship.shtml
IDEA, 2006, Sponsoring a Child (Junior Topic), IDEA, http://www.idebate.org/debatabase/
topic_details.php?topicID=472
Reality of Aid Africa, 2004, Youth and Development Aid, Reality of Aid Africa, http://www.realityofaid.org/africa/
downloads/RoA_Africa_2004_Chapter05.pdf
The Shawnee News-Star, 2005, ‘St Benedict parishioners asked to sponsor children, aging persons in foreign countries’, The Shawnee News-Star, March, http://www.news-star.com/stories/030505/rel_22.shtml
World Vision, 2007, I’m not yet a sponsor but have questions about Child Sponsorship, World Vision Inc., http://www.worldvision.org/worldvision/
webfaq.nsf/stable/sponsorship_faqs?Open&lid=226&lpos=top_drp_SponsorshipFAQ
