The Challenge of Toxic Charity

Wednesday, November 6th, 2013
Presenter: Denise Spencer, President and CEO of The Community Foundation of the Low Country

Denise’s presentation:
   •    Summarized Robert Lupton’s book Toxic Charity: How Churches and Chari5es Hurt Those They Help (and How to Reverse It).
   •    Described some of her experiences and observations as a career executive and a volunteer in the non- profit world.
    •    Fielded questions and challenges from the audience about how to help the poor instead of damaging them.

“With what I have considered a life8me of compassionate service, ...I found myself wincing as if Robert Lupton ... had smacked me upside the head” by assertions in the book, she said. As a 40-year veteran of charitable giving and serving, Lupton forces readers to confront some of his reluctant conclusions:
 
   •    Society has tried unsuccessfully to reduce poverty.

• We continue to employ the equivalent of “arsenic and old methods.”
• “Our free food and clothing distribution encourages ever- growing handout lines, diminishing the dignity and motivation of the poor, while increasing their dependency.”
• We evaluate our success not on measurable outcomes but “by the rewards we receive through service rather than the benefits received by the served.”
  
• Low-income families often feel crummy instead of joyous when they receive gifts. 
• Short-term mission trips to impoverished neighborhoods in this country and others produce life-lasting change and in some cases may deprive local people of work. Lupton offered some alternatives to what he called one-way giving:
• An “Oath for Compassionate Service” to trigger new ways of thinking.
• Commitments to use the assets of poor people – their strengths, knowledge, leadership ability, talents, and even a few dollars – to help them help themselves.
• Use of more time and more energy on charitable endeavors to develop better information and relationships.

The book, she said, does not demand that we reduce our support or giving for the impoverished. It demands what we do the work more creatively and more effectively.

Neil Funnell moderated the discussion. Out of it came many thoughts:
 Government programs for the poor continue to be essential, but they need to be run better, need to show “horizons” to avoid dependency.

• It is hard to find examples of charitable giving where the impact is accountable and measurable and that provides incentives.
• How do other developed countries handle aid for the poor?
• Some working poor need a little help for a while in order to become self- supporting; in such cases, they should not feel ashamed of their temporary needs.
• It is hard work to change the way society tries to help the poor, and it may cost more to do it well enough to make lasting changes in people’s lives.

Denise pointed out that while we in the room typically are giving rather than receiving from charity, we all have benefited from the donations of others, whether for libraries or ball fields or scholarships. Actually, many of most communities’ cultural, recreational, educational and environmental resources are the result of philanthropy. “It is important to remember that we all are the beneficiaries in various ways from the gifts of others,” she said.