LETTERS Striking poverty
Sir: I read Vicki Woods' article (`My African baby', 11 May) with a mixture of concern and empathy. Concern, because we depend on people like her. Empathy, because we try to understand what it feels like to be a sponsor. Some of us are. And it seemed to me that the real point was in the last paragraph. What, after all, is the point of such a small gesture in the face of an increasing tide of poverty and tragedy? Isn't the — as she puts it — sentimental pleasure of contact with the sponsored child rather out of place? I hope we at least try to understand these difficult questions. We need to, if we are to continue to ask over 100,000 people to sponsor children in this way.
The truth is, though, that it is worth- while and it does make a difference. It makes the difference between doing some- thing and doing nothing. We do under- stand that some sponsors would prefer not to receive correspondence from their spon- sored child. We know that for many others such links are very important, as are other communications like magazines. And we do try very hard to be responsive to a range of preferences. But what binds all our sponsors together is the most important bit — they are all in their different ways making possible something that is massive- ly worthwhile.
In saying this, we can see something that it's harder for an individual sponsor to see — the effect of what over 100,000 people like Vicki Woods' husband can have on reducing appalling poverty. It works be- cause long-term giving produces long-term results. So — and I'm sorry that this may sound sentimental — please feel good about what he's doing, Ms Woods. It's the end result that's important, and I'm sure Kennedy Mamai and his community would agree.
Andrew Hind
Acting Chief Executive, ActionAid, Hamlyn House, London N19
Previous page
