Compassion Fatigue? The crisis of giving
Slick ad campaigns; well thought out marketing programs; images deliberately designed & placed to evoke an emotional response. Welcome to the world of professional fund raising.
There was a great episode of MASH where the character of BJ was being interviewed; he was asked if the experience of being a medico in Korea had changed him at all. He responded that on his first day there. he performed his first amputation before he had his first breakfast; now he could walk past a whole corridor of wounded & not even notice.
Problem; there are so many great causes; so many people that have real needs. But with so much need competing for our hard earned $, how do you decide what are the worthy causes that you will support.
Is it time for organisations to come up with a different way of doing this? Because if things keep going the way that they are, the charities that are well organised & know how to market themselves will get the dough, the less professional ones will miss out.
How do you decide what to give to? Have some of these charities gone too far with their professional marketing approach, or is it appropriate? Do you, like the character of BJ, suffer from compassion fatigue, and what are the consequences of that?
Your thoughts?
MM
May 23rd, 2007 at 9:48 am
We all have passions and mercy for different things, so I have decided to direct funds to the part of the world I am most passionat about, and try not to stress too much about what I’m not doing. The most important thing is that we do whatever we can, rather than being dwarfed by the magnitude of the problem. The well organised groups do recieve the most funding, also because they have the personnel and expertise to access philanthropic funds.
May 23rd, 2007 at 10:05 am
Impressive answer, all the more so because you spelled personnel correctly; I always get that one wrong. (I only got it right then coz I was looking at your spelling!!!!)
May 24th, 2007 at 9:51 am
I think it needs to be a ‘what captures your heart the most’ kinda decision as Inspirio said.
Charitable organisations are actually changing in a big way concerning the way they promote their cause. I don’t think the ‘in your face’ images are mobilising the world as effectivley as they once did. I think we are desensitised to a lot of it, and - exactly as this article adresses - there is simply SO many organisations for very worthy causes that we are at a loss for deciding who receives our support
You can see the rise of ‘hope’ style campaigns. They use small amount of texts and images, cutting straight to the point of their vision and use invigorating colours which catch the attention rather than using the ‘guilt’ card.
If you check out the Make Poverty History campaign:
http://www.makepovertyhistory.org
The title of the organisation states their aim, goal and vision in three words - ‘Make Poverty History’. You are instantly faced with options for physical action, the colour is white - a visual relative to purity etc. The campaign has erupted worldwide and mobilised the greatest amount of people power to combat poverty I have ever witnessed in my lifetime.
On the other hand is this style:
http://www.poverty.com
An incredibly worthy cause for a devastating problem, but I instantly feel hopeless in the face of the issue. The colours on the site are dark and grim, blue and grey, and there is a counter in the corner relating how many children have died from starvation while you are looking at the site.. There is quite a comparison between the two campaign styles.
I know that for me personally I feel called to help the former kind of organisations like MPH and also World Vision. I need to be presented with some hope that my little contribution will make a difference..
May 24th, 2007 at 6:17 pm
Good points all of you.
I also think that it’s what drives you that drives your dollar. I don’t like it though when celebrities jump onto the charitable band wagons just because they have been personally affected. Though I guess that is another form of what moves you moves you to give though.
I like to give to organisations that are giving the base necessities for those who don’t have it. Recently, I got a phone call to donate to the diabetes fund so that they can research a new drug that will mean the end to injections for diabetics. Don’t get me wrong, a very worthy cause, but more worthy than food in the mouth of a chid who hasn’t eaten in a month? I didn’t think so, and politely told the operator that I have my designated charities that I donate to.
I used to support WWF, again another really worthy cause, but a friend challenged me by asking if I was putting the welfare of animals ahead of the welfare of people and how would God see that.
I was recently at a Christian’s women’s event and the crowd of over 16,000 was asked to raise their hands if they sponsored a child. I was amazed to see that less than a 1/4 of the women there raised their hands. I thought it was like a mandate for Christians to sponsor a child.
May 24th, 2007 at 6:19 pm
By the way that was the “World Wildlife Fund” not the “World Wrestling Federation”.
Although, those wrestlers need help too. Poor little guys…….
May 28th, 2007 at 11:25 am
Would you give to a charity for the blind? - Diabetes can cause blindness
Or a charity to study the causes of SIDS? - Diabetes can cause death in the womb of a sufferer
What about kids dying from diabetes in developing countries cos they can’t afford the simple injections?
The point isn’t to get you to give to diabetes foundations.
I don’t think you should EVER give to a charity because you believe it to be more ‘worthy a cause’ than another. You’re attitude would be completely different if one of your children suddenly came up with the disease and spent the rest of their lives having daily injections…
“I like to give to organisations that are giving the base necessities for those who don’t have it.”
This is a great statement Sweets, just give some thought to the rest..
May 29th, 2007 at 1:16 am
They were actually asking me specifically to donate to the research of the new drug. Not to the diabetes foundation (I have a jelly babies pen btw)
“I don’t think you should EVER give to a charity because you believe it to be more ‘worthy a cause’ than another.”
I challenge you on this statement. Where do you draw the line with your giving then? You can’t give to every charity that knocks on your door or phones you up. How do you decide? Is it more noble to give to a charity just cos it captures your heart? That’s the way I donated when I gave to the wildlife fund but that wasn’t where my money was best spent………
May 30th, 2007 at 12:38 pm
“I don’t think you should EVER give to a charity because you believe it to be more ‘worthy a cause’ than another.”
This isn’t right Audrey, Only an idiot would give to a charity that he/she believed to be unworthy of the gift… ‘I hear you take the funds given to you and spend half of it on boat cruises and alcohol, here, have a million dollars!’.
There’s nothing wrong with Sweetums’ statement that is in other words ‘I use my head when deciding where I contribute charitably, I want to give where I know the money will be used wisely.’
It’s an interesting discussion and I’ve been mulling it over for a few days. See, i’m just thinking about how money can be best used. I don’t know if giving to charities whenever you can afford it is the most wise decision. This type of reasoning that says give whenever and as frequently as possible doesn’t sit right with me.
If you put away a certain amount of money each day and let it gain interest, then some day you will be able to give a lot more. The only down side to this is there’s no guarantee that you will give something away. If you were really struggling and you had a whole lot of money earning interest and you needed to spend it, you may justify using it for other purposes.
This directly relates to tithing, isn’t it better to save 10 percent and let it grow, rather than just giving away 10 percent to be spent?
June 1st, 2007 at 2:26 pm
I don’t think so GB. God asks us to give 10 percent of our ‘first fruits’ and then we learn to live on the leftovers. If we just put it aside it’s not actually achieving the same thing. The point was never the amount of giving (hence the little old widow and her coin) the point is the lesson learnt and the heart behind it. Our focus must be that we trust God with our possesions and thank him for our provisions.
June 1st, 2007 at 5:48 pm
Your most welcome not to think so, but why?
I don’t think you’ve provided good reasons as to why tithing into an interest gaining account is not a god honoring thing to do.
I believe the principle of tithing was given first to farmers and there’s no such thing as investing food..
Perhaps the principle of tithing encompasses more than you are allowing?
If we just put it aside it’s not actually achieving the same thing
This is backwards, If we just spend it it’s not actually achieving the same thing.
June 4th, 2007 at 11:57 am
Actually GB the first mention of Tithing was Abram with the wealth acquired from battle. Not farmers. And he was so overjoyed with his blessing and saw in Melshidek that he was a godly man so he felt compelled to give. I think that is what I am saying. I feel like as soon as I recieve money in my hand then 10 percent of it goes again in an immediate response.
What I meant by putting it aside was allocating it to tithe but it still sitting there. I don’t think then if hard times hit you wouldn’t feel like ‘dipping’ into it.
And the other point I would like to make is that the church uses it’s tithes to help people “TODAY”. If we all put our money into an investment account for “one day” then what do you say to those in need “TODAY”?
June 4th, 2007 at 12:14 pm
I would to lean towards the notion that God’s economy is not our economy & I’m not sure that God needs us to save for His use of our earthly resources to be effective in his hands & under his power. Our tithe is an act of obedience more than anything, a sign that we acknowledge that all we have belongs to God & he allows us to use 90%. Imaginetelling the bank with whom you have your mortgage, “Look, I know that this money is yours, but I reckon I can give you more if you let me invest in something” The money is theirs, you have signed a contract agreeing that it is theirs, it is up to them to use what is theirs in whatever manner they deem appropriate.
MM
June 4th, 2007 at 6:11 pm
Valid points, But..
I feel like as soon as I recieve money in my hand then 10 percent of it goes again in an immediate response.
The investment strategy is no different.
And the other point I would like to make is that the church uses it’s tithes to help people “TODAY”. If we all put our money into an investment account for “one day” then what do you say to those in need “TODAY”?
The worlds being kicking on for some time now.. If this method of tithing was the ‘correct method’ then churches could easily cater for the delay in it’s.. instant gratification.
I would to lean towards the notion that God’s economy is not our economy & I’m not sure that God needs us to save for His use of our earthly resources to be effective in his hands & under his power.
Hmmm I don’t know about this mic. Let’s take the example of the widow, was her lone coin actually more valuable than the other gifts. I don’t believe so. I believe that story was saying that someones personal trust in God is far more valuable than money. Not that a little money is more valuable than a lot of money - that’s ridiculous.
Money is worth how much money is worth, the more money the more valuable.
Our tithe is an act of obedience more than anything, a sign that we acknowledge that all we have belongs to God & he allows us to use 90%.
I’m not suggesting anything different.
Your last point is very true,
June 11th, 2007 at 8:04 pm
“The worlds being kicking on for some time now.. If this method of tithing was the ‘correct method’ then churches could easily cater for the delay in it’s.. instant gratification.”
Hey GB could you expand on this. Not sure what you were getting at.