I think there are some limited situations where child sponsorship is really valid – it obviously gives a very direct connection from the sponsor to the ‘real world’ and for religious people provides a point of connection for prayer, etc.

However, I think that the overheads involved in child sponsorship can’t be justified. The money and work spent on getting all those letters and photos back and forth, the time the agencies have to put in dealing with sponsors visiting their child and getting the child to write letters. Not to mention what happens when a sponsor has to stop giving money after a long running relationship.

I think most child sponsor agencies have done a great job facing these issues and are working in an environment where child sponsorship is one of the most effective fundraising techniques. But for people who want to get the most value from their donated money, I think the better option is to just donate the money to the agency.

It was a different Christian organization, well run, but twice they had to end the programs where our (1st & 2nd) sponsored child was. They selected a 3rd child for us, but it was a tough time for us financially, and we decided to just stop at that point.

That is probably not a typical experience, but I did find it quite frustrating. We still support various ministries but haven’t tried the sponsorship route again. Nevertheless, I would still encourage others to try it.

This is an amazingly beautiful, sustained piece of description. It is much like a passage from Steinbeck, one of my favourite authors, whose descriptions are legendary. You must have been “inspired” in a higher sense, to write this magnificent text.

Love,
Dad

http://blogs.nyu.edu/fas/dri/aidwatch/2009/04/can_starbucks_buy_a_saving_afr.html

Interesting love reading you and Claire’s bloggs. Its still pretty hot here in SA, we are embracing the Autumn and hoping for a mild winter. Blessed to still wearing shorts and T’s. Your pictures are so heartwarming and interesting. You and Claire look pretty settled in now.

Love you…MWAH

Not directly addressing Joe, but I’d also hesitate to use this example as a reason to say the post itself was a bad idea.

Kevin Heller’s post was an insight into part of ICL process that we never get to see. Part of the power of blogging, that is slowly being accepted by people, is its ability to give us a view of things that we would normally never see (and often in real time!).

Now this case certainly demonstrates the need to be somewhat cautious in the use of blogging things that are usually not out in the open, but people who cast dispersions on the entire endeavour perhaps don’t quite understand how blogging is changing the way things work.