Dec 19, 2004 08:19
More and more in the last few years, I've been seeing efforts to encourage people to give charitable donations on behalf of other people, in lieu of giving that person a gift. The idea seems to be that Christmas, in particular, has become excessively commercialized, and that thinking of those in need is more in keeping with the true spirit of the holiday.
I don't have any real quibble with the idea that Christmas has become excessively commercialized, but I'm not at all convinced the solution to the problem is to substitute charitable donations for gifts. Naturally, I have nothing against charitable donations, but it seems to me that there's something very personal about making a charitable donation -- that it's not really something you can do for someone else. As a result, a charitable donation isn't a gift for the other person (unless that person has specifically requested donations to a particular charity). It seems to me more honest to stop giving gifts if you think the holiday is excessively commercialized, and then, if you so desire, to donate the money you would otherwise have spent to charity.
One piece of rhetoric I saw on the subject went something like this:
Your child might be disappointed not to receive a toy, but once you explain that you've made a donation in their name so that another child will be able to eat for a whole year, they'll agree that was the better choice.
I think it's a great idea to encourage children to think of the less fortunate and make charitable donations -- but wouldn't it be better to help them figure out a charity they'd like to donate some of their own money to? Perhaps to encourage them to donate some portion of any money they received as a holiday gift to charity?