Would you send money for this? Mission trip fundraising

[SKL]

 And people fund some activities but not others, which is philosophically inconsistent if you ask me.

 

I would say it's a reflection of different people having different priorities and pet projects.  Also, frankly, a well-presented request is going to get more attention from me than a poorly-presented one.

 

I have certain types of things I support.  Part of it is *because* I pay to have my kids do certain things.  Depending on the activity, if it's an opportunity I want my kids to have, then I might feel it should be available to other kids who can't afford it.  Obviously I can't do that with every valuable experience I give my kids, but I can with selected ones.

 

I feel it makes more sense to give a meaningful amount to a limited number of causes vs. giving to every thing that sounds nice.  I realize this means some good causes will be left out.  If they are really good causes, they will find other donors or they will come up with a better way to get my attention next time.

 

[Scarlett]

I never give to mission fundraisers, but I don't know what all the rest has to do with it. She has every right to hold down a job, get married, choose not to go to college, choose which babysitting jobs she'll take...are you saying you're not donating to her thing because she didn't help you and you don't think she makes wise financial decisions? Because for me, saying no on principle would be enough. :)

I agree. I would just send nothing and not say anything an out it. You don't want to send money and you can't afford it. All the rest is just your mind making noise covering up the pertinent facts.

[poppy]

Yes, I do take issue with all activities that want financial support from other people. I don't sign my kid up for lessons, sports, activities, curriculum, clothing, food, travel of any kind that my husband and I cannot afford. If we can't afford all of the costs ourselves, it's not something we do. No exceptions.

 

I have no idea why people think it's OK to sign up for things they can't afford. Maybe it's the debt culture we live in that contributes to the mindset. And people fund some activities but not others, which is philosophically inconsistent if you ask me. Would people contribute to piano lessons? Buying violin strings? Martial arts school tuition and safety gear? What about a family vacation that has lots of educational value? How about my science curriculum for next year? If not, why do they contribute the mission trips, marching band, boyscouts, the football team and the tax donation for private school tuition we have here in AZ?

 

When someone comes to my door selling something other than Girl Scout cookies and they want me to buy something or donate, shouldn't it be just as socially acceptable for me to say, "Well, my middle daughter is competing in the Vegas Shoot international archery competition again this year, would you like to contribute to her travel expenses, equipment maintenance and her related medial expenses as she'll need to see a chiropractor before she goes?" I don't say that because it's not socially acceptable, but I think I should be able to because fair is fair after all. Why would it be rude for me to do the exact same thing they're doing?

 

I don't take issue with GoFundMe requests or other solicitations for big deals that no one could've prepared for or saw coming. If you need some expensive, medically necessary treatment that you can't possibly afford, by all means, ask. That's what charity is for. If you stopped being able to work and your kids have no chance of covering the total cost of something they already signed up for but they're working as much as they reasonably can, I'm happy to contribute the rest. If you live in PHX and need to borrow my snow gear for winter church camp because it doesn't make financial sense to buy snow gear that will be worn for 6 days, you're welcome to it. If you have no chance of being able to afford your kid's activity on your own even if you're in good health, if you're working and if no tragedy has befallen you, you shouldn't sign your kid up for it in the first place.

Teaching kids they need to do work towards achieving a goal is considered character building. A high school boy saying 'Can I take your leaves to fund football uniforms' isn't supposed to be charity. It is supposed to be a bargain for you , and an opportunity for him to learn that his recreation should be partly funded by his work, not just mommy and daddy's paycheck. And also to learn when you offer to do a job

, you WILL have people say no , which is entirely appropriate too.

[kirstenhill]

Yes, I do take issue with all activities that want financial support from other people. I don't sign my kid up for lessons, sports, activities, curriculum, clothing, food, travel of any kind that my husband and I cannot afford. If we can't afford all of the costs ourselves, it's not something we do. No exceptions.

 

I have no idea why people think it's OK to sign up for things they can't afford. Maybe it's the debt culture we live in that contributes to the mindset. And people fund some activities but not others, which is philosophically inconsistent if you ask me....

I know this isn't universally true (mission trips seem to be a big exception, actually), but I feel like most culturally acceptable youth fundraising is for team/group activities rather than individual activities, and maybe that is the "sort of" consistency that applies.

 

Maybe the problem is with the funding model or organizational expectations. When I was in high school, the schools had cut funding for marching band, so an independent community organization formed to pick up the slack and run a summer marching band to represent our town in all the parades around the region. My parents initially gave permission for me to join (fee to join was something semi-reasonable for 25 years ago...$200 or something like that). But then it turned out that to cover the real expenses, each family was required to participate in many, many fundraisers. The cost to skip the fundraiser and just donate one family's portion of the expected fundraiser "receipts" was something much higher that my family couldn't afford at the time...maybe $500 or something like that. My mom didn't like the idea of either the fundraisers or the extra donation option, so I just didn't get to participate. I am guessing the organizers rightly guessed that if they charged the true cost and didn't fundraise, they wouldn't be able to find enough families in our town who could afford $700 or so to join. But they figured if they had enough car washes and sold enough candy bars, they could pull it off.

Edited April 5, 2016 by kirstenhill

[Bluegoat]

Yes, I do take issue with all activities that want financial support from other people.  I don't sign my kid up for lessons, sports, activities, curriculum, clothing, food, travel of any kind that my husband and I cannot afford.  If we can't afford all of the costs ourselves, it's not something we do.  No exceptions. 

 

I have no idea why people think it's OK to sign up for things they can't afford.  Maybe it's the debt culture we live in that contributes to the mindset. And people fund some activities but not others, which is philosophically inconsistent if you ask me.  Would people contribute to piano lessons?  Buying violin strings?  Martial arts school tuition and safety gear? What about a family vacation that has lots of educational value? How about my science curriculum  for next year? If not, why do they contribute the mission trips, marching band, boyscouts, the football team and the tax donation for private school tuition we have here in AZ?

 

When someone comes to my door selling something other than Girl Scout cookies and they want me to buy something or donate, shouldn't it be just as socially acceptable for me to say, "Well, my middle daughter is competing in the Vegas Shoot international archery competition again this year, would you like to contribute to her travel expenses, equipment maintenance and her related medial expenses as she'll need to see a chiropractor before she goes?" I don't say that because it's not socially acceptable, but I think I should be able to because fair is fair after all. Why would it be rude for me to do the exact same thing they're doing?

 

I don't take issue with GoFundMe requests or other solicitations for big deals that no one could've prepared for or saw coming.  If you need some expensive, medically necessary treatment that you can't possibly afford, by all means, ask.  That's what charity is for.  If you stopped being able to work and your kids have no chance of covering the total cost of something they already signed up for but they're working as much as they reasonably can, I'm happy to contribute the rest.  If you live in PHX and need to borrow my snow gear for winter church camp because it doesn't make financial sense to buy snow gear that will be worn for 6 days, you're welcome to it.  If you have no chance of being able to afford your kid's activity on your own even if you're in good health, if you're working and if no tragedy has befallen you, you shouldn't sign your kid up for it in the first place.

 

It seems to me there is a distinction here.  There are private groups that parents sign kids up for.  There are also in many places public ones, where no one pays, or that primarily serve vulnerable populations.  Those groups are important IMO and need to be funded - our parish church in the summer runs camping trips for inner city kids, and those are funded by donations.  Or, our city funds free skating and swimming and biking lessons for everyone through taxes.  I think that is great for the city and kids in so many ways.

 

But - it would seem really exploitative to have those kids going looking for donations.  Or even their parents in many cases. 

 

I do think though for a lot of people, they end up doing this stuff because it is expected.  I've looked to sign up my kids for things and discovered that they require participating in those kinds of fundraising.  It isn't that I'm not willing to pay the cost.

[marbel]

I actually never said that I dislike the family.

<snip>

 

Really?  Well, not in so many words, but I don't think you said one complimentary thing about this family in any of your posts.  It's all negative: they wouldn't help you when you needed help, they comment on your financial status, etc.  So it just seemed that you really don't like them at all.  Sorry for the misinterpretation. 

 

[Chris in VA]

So I'm feeling a bit defensive about our type of mission trip, which I've detailed in a post upthread, being called "Slum Tourism."

I don't send my child to gawk at the poor and realize how lucky she is to "not be them." I send her to help, to realize that she can really make a difference in someone's life.

But yes, my dd comes back with a greater appreciation of what she has. Why is that bad?

 

And I could twist things around and say people who don't think trips to help others are a good thing just want to send money at the problems in the world and sit on their butts in their comfy homes and not get personally involved and do some hands-on help.

 

Isn't that offensive? We're always telling children and ourselves to "get involved," "reach out," etc.

 

 

 

 

[amy g.]

I think kids can get involved without traveling to another country or asking acquaintances for money.

 

My kids volunteer down the street at the therapeutic horse riding center. My oldest is approaching 450 volunteer hours.

 

I have already looked in our new city for where my middle daughter can volunteer after we move. Within walking distance from our new home, she can assist in the summer with art classes for kids who are home without supervision and she can serve meals to neighbors in need every Friday throughout the year. She can also volunteer in the church nursery every week so moms can get a tiny break.

 

I find ways for my kids to get involved that work for us. I have no problem with other families having their children getting involved in different ways.

 

The only reason this is an issue is because other people are asked to fund their involvement.

[Bluegoat]

So I'm feeling a bit defensive about our type of mission trip, which I've detailed in a post upthread, being called "Slum Tourism."

I don't send my child to gawk at the poor and realize how lucky she is to "not be them." I send her to help, to realize that she can really make a difference in someone's life.

But yes, my dd comes back with a greater appreciation of what she has. Why is that bad?

 

And I could twist things around and say people who don't think trips to help others are a good thing just want to send money at the problems in the world and sit on their butts in their comfy homes and not get personally involved and do some hands-on help.

 

Isn't that offensive? We're always telling children and ourselves to "get involved," "reach out," etc.

 

Most people though have suggested getting involved more locally, or where there is a clear skill that is required.  I don't think anyone has suggeted not doing anything.

 

I think the question of kids seeing the world, is actually a great thing, if it's well done.  But I think it is quite a seperate thing from mission work.  It isn't mainly about helping others, it is about expanding the child's (or adult's) horizons.  It can be done on a work visit, but it can also happen with just a tourist visit sometimes, or an exchange.

 

I think calling that mission work can be misleading for everyone.  It puts pressures in all the wrong places, it discourages the kids from seeing that they are actually the ones receiving in that situation, it tends to lead to fake work being done and real work in ones own community being neglected.  It can also lead, as we see here, to kind of a mistaken focus on money - it is being billed as giving to needy people far away, when it is in fact an inefficient (and sometimes worse) way to help financially.

[Chris in VA]

I think kids can get involved without traveling to another country or asking acquaintances for money.

 

My kids volunteer down the street at the therapeutic horse riding center. My oldest is approaching 450 volunteer hours.

 

I have already looked in our new city for where my middle daughter can volunteer after we move. Within walking distance from our new home, she can assist in the summer with art classes for kids who are home without supervision and she can serve meals to neighbors in need every Friday throughout the year. She can also volunteer in the church nursery every week so moms can get a tiny break.

 

I find ways for my kids to get involved that work for us. I have no problem with other families having their children getting involved in different ways

Well, I agree with the bolded, for sure, but some people are against any mission trips, even local or domestic-but-fairly-close, and even if funded without solicitation. That's what I'm talking about.

 

Most people though have suggested getting involved more locally, or where there is a clear skill that is required.  I don't think anyone has suggeted not doing anything.

 

I think the question of kids seeing the world, is actually a great thing, if it's well done.  But I think it is quite a seperate thing from mission work.  It isn't mainly about helping others, it is about expanding the child's (or adult's) horizons.  It can be done on a work visit, but it can also happen with just a tourist visit sometimes, or an exchange.

 

I think calling that mission work can be misleading for everyone.  It puts pressures in all the wrong places, it discourages the kids from seeing that they are actually the ones receiving in that situation, it tends to lead to fake work being done and real work in ones own community being neglected.  It can also lead, as we see here, to kind of a mistaken focus on money - it is being billed as giving to needy people far away, when it is in fact an inefficient (and sometimes worse) way to help financially.

Yes, it's been suggested up thread that only money should be sent, and only locals should be used to do the work.

 

And I disagree that it isn't mission work to go and help someone. I don't agree it's always "fake work." Not at all. That's offensive to me.

 

I guess I am thin-skinned tonight.

[gardenmom5]

I didn't "skip over" anything.  The people sent the letter because they thought the OP would give.  Their motive or reason for thinking it doesn't really matter.  They wouldn't bother to send a letter if they didn't think there was a good chance of the person giving.

 

Not only does the OP oppose the mission trips in general, she dislikes the family.  I still can't figure out why she cares what they will think of her for ignoring the donation letter.  She thinks very poorly of them, so... what does it matter what they think of her? 

 

the people  frequently talk about their perception the OP's family has more money than they do (which is incredibly tacky) - and the *expect* them to donate.   not out of graciousness on the part of the OP - but because she is perceived as having more money than they do and their sense of entitlement leads them to believe they are deserving of her largesse.

[KarenC]

I don't give money for mission trips period, so it would be easy for me to say no.  I don't think you should feel obligated in any way to donate money for this trip.

[poppy]

Well, I agree with the bolded, for sure, but some people are against any mission trips, even local or domestic-but-fairly-close, and even if funded without solicitation. That's what I'm talking about.

 

Yes, it's been suggested up thread that only money should be sent, and only locals should be used to do the work.

 

And I disagree that it isn't mission work to go and help someone. I don't agree it's always "fake work." Not at all. That's offensive to me.

 

I guess I am thin-skinned tonight.

 

I think community service abroad is lovely. I  just think the letters are rude!

 

OK,  I think Christian-based travel agencies are a little icky.  I googled "Mission travel company" and the top three results were pictures of people of color. (Maybe more, I dunno, I clicked three and that was enough).  It's  kind of a weird thing.

http://www.fellowship.com/services/flights/missions.html

http://www.missiontravel.org/

http://www.ministrytravel.com/

 

I'm not trying to minimize anyone's experience. I think travel and service are very, very good for young people.  It's only the business around it that is a little distasteful, to me.

[momto10blessings]

If it doesn't feel right, listen to your gut. You're not obligated to give your money to her, no matter how much thought she put into her letter.

I am surprised she wrote the letter and didn't do a go fund me.

[TranquilMind]

This bothers me. Here goes. There is this other home school family. We do not go to the same church. Their youngest is older than my oldest. They only have the one child at home now and she is about to turn 18 yrs old. Apparently, this youngest child decided not to go to college. As a result, the parents stopped sending her to any of the outsourced classes, because she was not interested and she was not planning to go to college anyway. Also, she apparently wanted to get a job, so she works at a fast food place. I am unsure how much she works, but I suspect she might be working full-time as every time I speak to them, she is at work or on her way to work. Then they tell me she spends all her money on shopping and has no savings. Also, when she turned 18 yrs old this summer, she wants to marry her boyfriend and move out. 

 

Now I get a letter in the mail saying she wants to take a mission trip with her church high school program and is raising money. She enclosed an envelope so I could send her my donation. The letter was nicely written out. 

 

A few months ago, I had a baby and while in labor, my babysitter could not stay. I called and begged her to come over to babysit. I was having a cesarean so she would not have to babysit long, just a few hours. I pay $10/hour. Her mom said no. I don't know if she would have wanted to do it either. Her mom claimed she had school work, but from what I hear from her older sibling, she did not. Her mom just didn't want her to go. 

 

Now, she wants me to send a donation for her mission trip, when she is working at least part-time, possibly full-time, and spends all her money shopping for clothes. MY children have things they want to do this summer and I do not have them send letters to others to ask for money. And oddly, my idea of a fundraiser is to do something to earn the money. She could easily pay for this trip off the money she earns in her job. I feel like, for the same of being nice, like I have to send some money. But in reality, I feel taken advantage of. And frankly, I would not give my own children money when they had the chance to earn it. And I definitely would not give them money for a trip while they spend their own money on shopping. This is so embarrassing! WWYD?

I give a lot of money and never to "fund my trip" things. 

 

If God is telling YOU to go somewhere, He will provide.  If He wants me to be a form of provision, I will know this without you telling me (it has happened). 

 

 

[mom2scouts]

My church has been changing the way we do missions. We do support a number of full time missionaries, but we also want the rest of the congregation to have opportunities. We used to send teens to the Dominican Republic and it did seem like an expensive vacation. Now, our church is working with a group that has local people who know the needs of the community and, with some support, can find the resources to meet those needs. Instead of sending teens from our church to do the labor in faraway places, we can pay locals to do the work. The work gets done, the poor have productive jobs and gain skills, and the money is better spent. We do still send a number of doctors, nurses, and those fluent in the language to run short term clinics.

 

Our teens are being sent to a neighborhood 20 minutes down the highway to provide work for elderly and low income families and provide work for an established charity that serves the community. They are still able to serve others in a much more financially feasible way.

[TranquilMind]

I actually never said that I dislike the family. I said the girl already has the money to pay for her own trip but is asking me for money. That defies logic, but does not mean I don't like her. Plus, when I offered to pay her at a time when I was very needy (in labor) she said no- which tells me that she has plenty of money, or just no desire to work for it, whatever . That also does not mean I don't like the family. It is an observation. If someone is begging for money, they should be needy. Even though I do not like mission trips, if I really thought she could not afford this and my donation would make it break her chance to join her youth group on this trip, even if the trip were to Disney, I would probably give something. I could never imagine sending letters asking people to donate money to fund my childrens activities when I can clearly afford them myself.

The girl might not have declined the offer to babysit.  It might have been the mom declining, for reasons unknown to you.  Maybe the girl would have done it. 

I think that is irrelevant to this trip fundraising. 

 

I just don't like the premise of the whole "God wants me to do this thing and for you to pay for it" thing.  If God wants you to do it and wants me to pay for it, I'm going to know this before you ever ask. 

[TranquilMind]

Other than fund my own child's out of country mission trip, I've only felt led to directly contribute to one other child's trip.  I have, on occasion, purchased  goods from teens who are attemptig to raise money for their trips.

 

So I would not be contributing to this girl's, although it would have nothing to do with any of the other information.  I wouldn't feel guilty about it.  If the Lord wants her to make this trip, He will certainly make the way for her, and it won't be by guilting any donors into it.

This!

[TranquilMind]

I would not send money. However, if this kid came to my house and offered to mow my lawn to raise money, I'd gladly pay her and tip ridiculously. I love missions. I love kids getting involved. I think the fundraising (and I don't mean begging our having grandma pay) and working to get there are important aspects of the trip.

Right.  An offer to work is an entirely different thing.

 

I need a couple of large teens right now.  Wish some would show up!

[ChocolateReignRemix]

So I'm feeling a bit defensive about our type of mission trip, which I've detailed in a post upthread, being called "Slum Tourism."

I don't send my child to gawk at the poor and realize how lucky she is to "not be them." I send her to help, to realize that she can really make a difference in someone's life.

But yes, my dd comes back with a greater appreciation of what she has. Why is that bad?

 

And I could twist things around and say people who don't think trips to help others are a good thing just want to send money at the problems in the world and sit on their butts in their comfy homes and not get personally involved and do some hands-on help.

 

Isn't that offensive? We're always telling children and ourselves to "get involved," "reach out," etc.

It may not be what you think you are doing, but in reality, that is exactly what many of those types of groups are doing.

[sassenach]

I didn't read any responses. I know that generally many people on this board are anti-mission trip and anti fundraising (for missions trips). I am not. 

 

However, in the case of the OP, I would not send money and I would not feel even a little bit guilty about it.

[Bluegoat]

....

 

Yes, it's been suggested up thread that only money should be sent, and only locals should be used to do the work.

 

And I disagree that it isn't mission work to go and help someone. I don't agree it's always "fake work." Not at all. That's offensive to me.

 

I guess I am thin-skinned tonight.

 

Always is a very extreme kind of word.  But for trips to developing nations with unskilled workers, I would say - almost always.  Almost always, in those places, there are many people in need of work, capable as any teen of offering unskilled labour.  Paying one person to do the work not only helps out that family, the money circulates through the whole community.  When you consider how many people could be employed to do all kinds of things with the money it costs to send one person on a plane, how those funds would circulate in the local community, it begins to seem like sending someone is more about the benefits for the person going, not the receiving community.

[bolt.]

"Unskilled labour" trips are the kind I have the least respect for.

 

But we do have to recognize that those who are going are genuinely well-intentioned, and they do expect to be working hard, and they do end up working hard (from their own perspective, compared to their usual lifestyle).

 

They imagine their work will benefit others because they haven't done sophisticated reflection on worldwide economics -- not because they are selfish.

Edited April 6, 2016 by bolt.

[gardenmom5]

If it doesn't feel right, listen to your gut. You're not obligated to give your money to her, no matter how much thought she put into her letter.

I am surprised she wrote the letter and didn't do a go fund me.

 

I'm glad you brought that up.   It's always a good reminder.

[poppy]

"Unskilled labour" trips are the kind I have the least respect for.

 

But we do have to recognize that those who are going are genuinely well-intentioned, and they do expect to be working hard, and they do end up working hard (from their own perspective, compared to their usual lifestyle).

 

They imagine their work will benefit others because they haven't done sophisticated reflection on worldwide economics -- not because they are selfish.

 

Oh, of course. It's good people who want to do good things. And I think these trips absolutely do benefit the kids who go on them! It's just the marketing of them, and how kids are taught to think about what they are doing, that is questionable at times.

[Mergath]

You certainly should not donate to something you oppose in principal.

 

That said, I would prefer to word the effect on the kids differently.  Well, I will talk about the effect on me the first time I spent 3 weeks in a developing country.  It taught me a different way of valuing what's important in life.  I saw happy faces all over the place, in what we are taught to call "poverty" in the US.  Where did the happiness come from?  Where indeed does happiness come from?  In the USA young people are conditioned to believe that you have to have as much as or more than your peers in order to be happy.  Turns out that's a huge lie that actually destroys lives.  We can tell our kids this, but when they see it for themselves, it's a whole different thing.

 

That said, I didn't travel on a mission trip; I was a tourist and we were driving from one awesome site to another.  But in between we had the pleasure of seeing and meeting everyday humans.

 

Yes, we saw some very very poor people too, people who were not happy because of painful hunger or medical conditions or homelessness (or all three).  That's important to see too.  We saw them because they are constantly begging or living on the streets in developing countries, not because we set out to engage in slum tourism.

 

My kids have been to a number of developing countries, but thus far I have not made a point to draw their attention to what poverty is in those countries.  We were there to see the beautiful and the commonplace, and also to visit some charities we support.  But they notice little by little.

 

I think there's a big difference between traveling to a country to experience the culture and learn about the people as an equal vs. marching in as the Great American Hero with paintbrushes and hammers in hand, ready to rescue the savages from leaky roofs and the horrors of a life without evangelical Christianity.

[Mergath]

So I'm feeling a bit defensive about our type of mission trip, which I've detailed in a post upthread, being called "Slum Tourism."

I don't send my child to gawk at the poor and realize how lucky she is to "not be them." I send her to help, to realize that she can really make a difference in someone's life.

But yes, my dd comes back with a greater appreciation of what she has. Why is that bad?

 

And I could twist things around and say people who don't think trips to help others are a good thing just want to send money at the problems in the world and sit on their butts in their comfy homes and not get personally involved and do some hands-on help.

 

Isn't that offensive? We're always telling children and ourselves to "get involved," "reach out," etc.

 

The whole point is that an unskilled teenager isn't going to "really make a difference in someone's life." Like the article linked in the other thread said, there's no developing country in the world that lacks for people who can paint a wall. And it's not like us, as Americans/Europeans, are so fantastically wonderful that someone's life is going to be enriched just by our presence. 

 

If you want your kids to learn from another culture, send them as equals to experience things graciously and humbly. Don't send them with the idea that they're going to convert them and rescue them (at least a little) from their poverty.

 

As for why the whole greater appreciation thing is bad, it's because it turns real, living people into a morality lesson for wealthy kids. Like I posted earlier, how would you feel if a billionaire's kid showed up at your door to look at how you live so that he could have a greater appreciation of how lucky he is to be a billionaire? Even the poorest people in the world have pride. Using them to help our kids cultivate a sense of gratitude for their internet and Playstations and snack foods is just sh***ing on that pride.

[Carol in Cal.]

The whole point is that an unskilled teenager isn't going to "really make a difference in someone's life." 

Actually, there are ways to use the unskilled to do good, helpful, unlikely to get done any other way type work.  Remember the Habitat for Humanity techniques that I cited earlier in this thread.  I think it's better to bring skilled labor in, but that's not the only thing that 'works'.  

[Bluegoat]

I am interested in the idea of becoming thankful for being wealthy or not poor.  Maybe it is getting OT but I am not sure that is what I think is the main take-away of seeing people live differently - I wonder how common that response is, or if it is just a not so great way to express something else. 

 

One of the things I've heard a number of times from people and congregation members from poorer countries - including people who came as refugees, which is saying something I think - is that they feel our wealth is in many ways a liability for us.  I am very grateful not to be in a position that I have to flee my country and be a refugee, and that I am not starving, or living in a war zone.  But not so much that I live in what is in some ways a very decadent society.

[Bluegoat]

Actually, there are ways to use the unskilled to do good, helpful, unlikely to get done any other way type work.  Remember the Habitat for Humanity techniques that I cited earlier in this thread.  I think it's better to bring skilled labor in, but that's not the only thing that 'works'.  

 

That's in a developed world setting though.  It doesn't really make sense in most cases to import that kind of labour at great cost to a place where there are already lots of people.

[SKL]

Honestly, if my kids came back thinking how lucky they are that they have a "better life," I would be disappointed.  That should not be the point at all.

 

I am the person who has brought up on other threads that young people should spend time in developing countries so they can have a better perspective of what poverty really is.  But I didn't mean they should be glad they have a lot more in a material sense.  (Though, it's nice to have "enough" and acknowledging that is a good thing.)  I mean they should realize how little importance "more stuff" really has in terms of happiness and living a good life.

 

I can't remember her exact quote, but Mother Teresa pointed out that the greatest poverty in this world is spiritual poverty, and that's also the hardest kind to fix.  We can throw money at hunger (and we should donate), but it's harder to help people who are never content despite having "enough" of all the material things.  This is the growth I would like my kids to experience.  I would like them to come back with a little bit of the light I saw shining in those people's faces.  Whether that happens on a mission trip or an exchange trip or a tour, I don't care.

[Carol in Cal.]

I am interested in the idea of becoming thankful for being wealthy or not poor.  Maybe it is getting OT but I am not sure that is what I think is the main take-away of seeing people live differently - I wonder how common that response is, or if it is just a not so great way to express something else. 

 

One of the things I've heard a number of times from people and congregation members from poorer countries - including people who came as refugees, which is saying something I think - is that they feel our wealth is in many ways a liability for us.  I am very grateful not to be in a position that I have to flee my country and be a refugee, and that I am not starving, or living in a war zone.  But not so much that I live in what is in some ways a very decadent society.

This is a very thoughtful post.

 

The first paragraph reminds me of something I observed when chaperoning a group of girls from a very affluent neighborhood visiting possible sites for their volunteer work in high school. We visited a fantastic elementary school with all the advantages you can imagine, but a very economically depressed, gang-ridden surrounding neighborhood and 100% kids for whom English was their second language.  In the course of the tour, the principal asked one student why she hoped the girls would volunteer to do homework help.  The student said that she was in 5th grade, and she knew she had to learn to read more proficiently in order to do well in middle school the next year.  The principal asked what her reading level was, and she said, '2.1'.  (That means that she was reading at the level of a beginning second grader.)

 

ETA:  There was a dignity about this student, though--she was not allowed or encouraged to feel embarrassed or pathetic.  Just, here I am, here's where I'm at, here's why I want help to improve faster than the classroom will accomplish.

 

I heard some of the high schoolers talking about this on the way back.  They were absolutely devastated with sympathy, almost horrified.  They had been in very competitive schools and expensive enrichment programs their whole lives, and honestly had never imagined that anyone could be in 5th grade and not be at grade level.  They knew how hard a time those kids would have in middle school, outside of the neighborhood, competeing with kids who were pretty consistently above grade level.  It moved them to want to volunteer there for sure--they are on a MISSION on behalf of these kids.

 

In that case, exposure effected what amounted to a conversion experience, and those high schoolers were changed by their insight.  Interestingly they did not look down on the 5th graders--they just had their eyes opened.  And that was a very good thing.

Edited April 6, 2016 by Carol in Cal.

[Carol in Cal.]

That's in a developed world setting though.  It doesn't really make sense in most cases to import that kind of labour at great cost to a place where there are already lots of people.

...unless it has more than just that purpose.

[Carol in Cal.]

Honestly, if my kids came back thinking how lucky they are that they have a "better life," I would be disappointed.  That should not be the point at all.

 

From what I have seen, the best result is an appreciation of how rich a culture can be that is rich in relationships and community and striving together, as well as a determination to use the riches of an affluent culture more effectively and thoughtfully and in a way that benefits those who don't have those specific opportunities.

 

My cousin who was in the Peace Corps in Africa really missed the cameraderie that was assumed there.  Many Peace Corp and foreign missionaries come back to the US and are absolutely overwhelmed by the number of choices in supermarkets, and not in a good way. 

[Bluegoat]

...unless it has more than just that purpose.

 

Sure, but is that mission work?

[Eliz]

Our church only sends teens domestically on mission or service trips.  We're low income ourselves so it's been funny a couple of times when my girls have returned home after working with stories of the reactions of more affluent teens.  I hope through service my daughters become broken-hearted over people suffering regardless of where those people live and committed to serving Jesus by making a difference.  I've seen them grow spiritually through the trips.

 

I also have to agree that the marketing by some of these companies makes me uncomfortable.  Mission trips shouldn't be vacations nor should they be insensitive to those being helped. 

[Carol in Cal.]

Sure, but is that mission work?

Could be, unless you think the only thing that counts as mission work is physical.  I don't, though.

[Bluegoat]

Could be, unless you think the only thing that counts as mission work is physical.  I don't, though.

 

Nor do I.  But I do think it means, at least in normal use, ministering to other people.  It seems to me that is the opposite of what is going on in these trips - the kids are the ones being ministered to.  I suppose you could say they are the ones being missionized.

[Daria]

I think that Mission Trips are the Christian equivalent of "Student Service Learning", which is, IMO, of far more benefit to the students than the community.

[heartlikealion]

The problem is not always the product, but the price tag. I've seen some beautiful gift wrap, but when I can buy it much cheaper in the store it's hard to warrant it. Chocolate covered almonds from World's Finest Chocolate? Well, I probably won't find those at my local store and there's not much financial commitment there so take my money.

[Daria]

My son's school's sports teams sell mulch as their big fundraiser. It's the first time in this area I've seen a product where I think people are actually getting their money's worth on something they'd buy anyway. My understanding is that the price is the same as the local garden center plus it's delivered!

[Lady Florida.]

I wouldn't send a penny, and I wouldn't feel bad about it at all. It sounds like she can afford her own vacation (and yes, unskilled teens going on mission trips are essentially going on vacation) but she wants to see how many people she can sucker into paying for it.

 

Don't be a sucker.

 

+1

 

These are feel good about yourself trips for the teens. I wouldn't feel bad about tossing the letter in the trash and ignoring the request.

[QueenCat]

Ignore it........... or offer her a job for a few hours (and don't give her the money until the job is complete).