Child sponsorship seems like the perfect way to help vulnerable children abroad – for just $30 a month, you get photos, letters, and the satisfaction of changing a child's life. But what if this model is causing unexpected problems?
In this thought-provoking episode, we dive deep into the $3.29 billion child sponsorship industry with Dr. Hunter Farrell, author of "Congregational Mission." Having operated our own sponsorship program for years, we explore why global child welfare experts are increasingly critical of this popular fundraising approach.
Dr. Farrell explains how sponsorship programs often create an "illusion of relationship" that can undermine family structures and elevate Western donors to an almost divine status. We discuss the uncomfortable realization that for all our good intentions, we may be perpetuating harmful power dynamics. As one Peruvian mother pointedly asked: "How would it feel to you if a foreigner was writing your 11-year-old daughter every month?"
The conversation isn't about condemning those who sponsor children – it's about recognizing sponsorship as a starting point that can evolve into more equitable partnerships. We explore three practical alternatives that address root causes rather than symptoms: supporting community-based programs, pairing international giving with local engagement, and persistently asking "why" about the underlying causes of vulnerability.
Whether you're currently sponsoring a child, considering it, or working in global development, this conversation challenges us to apply the golden rule to our international relationships and reimagine how we can truly support vulnerable children worldwide. Join us for this essential discussion about privilege, power, and the path toward more effective global partnerships.
________
Travel on International Mission, meet local leadership and work alongside them. Exchange knowledge, learn from one another and be open to personal transformation. Step into a 25 year long story of change for children in some of the poorest regions on Earth.
https://www.helpingchildrenworldwide.org/mission-trips.html
******
_____
A bible study for groups and individuals, One Twenty-Seven: The Widow and the Orphan by Dr Andrea Siegel explores the themes of the first chapter of James, and in particular, 1:27. In James, we learn of our duty to the vulnerable in the historical context of the author. Order here or digital download
Shout out to our newest sponsor: The Resilience Institute
Helpingchildrenworldwide.org
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:04):
Welcome to Optimistic Voices, a podcast of helping
children worldwide.
We help children worldwide bystrengthening and empowering
families and communities.
This podcast is for peopleinterested in deep conversations
with thought leaders in thefields of child welfare, global
(00:26):
health and internationalmissions.
Speaker 2 (00:30):
We're going to talk today about child sponsorship
programs and I want to open upthis episode by acknowledging
that HCW had a child sponsorshipprogram for many years.
It was a very successfulfundraising program for us.
We refer to it now as adedicated donor program and
we'll say more about that in theepisode.
(00:50):
But I want to frame the episodea little bit for you by sharing
with you that more than 9million children globally are
supported through internationalchild sponsorship programs to
tune of more than $3.29 millionannually.
In the spirit of fulldisclosure, I want to share that
recently I co-hosted our GlobalRising Tides conference.
(01:14):
That was about two or threeweeks ago now.
It was focused on a related butdifferent topic the transition
of orphanages to family caremodels.
During what was a free-flowingdiscussion not really even on
this topic one participantraised the topic of child
sponsorship.
He just threw it out there.
Hey, let's talk about childsponsorship.
Mind you, this is in a roomfull of thought leaders in child
(01:35):
protection and child welfarefrom all over the world.
There are about 35 people inthe room from about 20 different
organizations and the responsewas so overwhelmingly negative
that people were almost hissingand booing at the idea of child
sponsorship.
It was really striking and Iwant to say that I've noticed in
the last few years that withinwhat I would call the global
(01:56):
child welfare sector, the tideappears to be turning against
child sponsorship, but I alsowant to acknowledge that it's
still really popular among USChristians, who are looking for
a way to support orphans andvulnerable children, which is a
good thing to do.
It's something we want toencourage people to do.
I think part of the draw is thatit creates a sense of personal
(02:17):
relationship between the donorand the vulnerable child and it
gives the donors the sense ofbeing directly and intimately
connected to what their money isdoing.
I have to tell you, from thenonprofit perspective, it's a
highly effective fundraisingmodel that's used to running.
You know nonprofits, we're usedto running from events to major
(02:39):
gifts to, you know grants,opportunities and never knowing
when the next check is going tocome.
A sponsorship model is adedicated donor program.
I know that money's coming inevery month.
I know that money's coming inevery year from those donors
because that's how the programis set up and, as the program
(03:01):
director of a nonprofit, it'snice to know there's money I can
count on.
It's easier to plan for thingswhen I know that money's coming
in.
And yet in this room, at RisingTides, with 20 or so
organizations, most of them verysmall organizations we were
pretty united in ourcondemnation or our aversion, I
(03:22):
guess is probably a better wayto say that to the child
sponsorship model, and so I wantto dig into that today.
We have with us today Dr HunterFarrell.
He's the author ofCongregational Mission A
Practical Guide forCompanionship, cultural Humility
and Co-Development.
We'll be releasing an episodeon short-term mission later in
the year that we did with him.
(03:44):
We'll be releasing an episodeon short-term mission later in
the year that we did with him.
But there was a chapter in thatbook that focused on child
sponsorship models.
That really helped me as I washelping our team at HCW think
through the shift away fromchild sponsorship for ourselves
to something else.
So, hunter, welcome to theprogram.
Speaker 3 (04:03):
Thanks so much, Laura .
It's great to be with you.
Speaker 2 (04:05):
Thanks, I really appreciate having you here.
Do you want to talk a littlebit about what is the issue with
child sponsorship and why mightpeople be growing adverse to
that model?
Speaker 3 (04:17):
Yeah, thanks, laura.
I'm really glad to be here andparticularly to think about a
topic as big and as important toAmerican congregations,
american Christians today, aschild sponsorship programs.
Just a quick note you said youmentioned that nine million
children around the world aresupported through global child
(04:39):
sponsorship programs, and that'scorrect.
The figure, though, of how muchmoney US Christians send each
year is actually $3.29 billion.
It's a B and not an M, so it'sreally critically important.
In this conversation aroundchild sponsorship, one of the
(05:09):
challenges we have is that, veryquickly over it's been like
about a six to eight year spacealmost all of the scholars and
experts in whether it's forchild development experts or
mission scholars, people whostudy the work of mission almost
(05:34):
all of them have moved quicklyto the space where they strongly
oppose child sponsorshipprograms.
The challenge is that manycongregations and I always ask
in the congregation when I goand speak I say how many in this
congregation are sponsoring akid?
Well, if I say that at the startof the program, everybody
raises their hand I mean, it'susually about half the people in
(05:56):
the room, quite frankly willraise their hand, and I think
the scholars and the you knowexperts can, you know, can cast
shame on these people and makethem feel bad about doing what
they're doing, and thatgenerally, in my experience of
human relationships, causespeople to lift up defensive
barriers and back off and tuneout, not listen anymore, and
(06:17):
that's not a helpful space.
I wonder if we could see all ofthese child sponsorship programs
in a way that's similar to theway I understand short-term
mission trips yeah, they're notperfect, but are there ways that
they can be redeemed?
Are there ways that we can makethem better or learn from that
space, that connection, thatsense of connection with a child
(06:38):
in the Gambia or in Haiti Haitiand begin to think about the
root causes of that child'spredicament in new ways.
So I welcome this conversationbecause I think it opens up an
opportunity for us, throughchild sponsorship programs, to
reimagine the ways that we'reengaged with God in making a
(07:02):
difference in kids' lives aroundthe world.
Speaker 2 (07:04):
Yeah, that's a really important point and I guess I
want to frame the reaction of mycolleagues in that space, as I
think they're perceiving thatthe child sponsorship model
itself is causing them some realproblems in how they're trying
to partner with Global Southpartners on the ground, how
those partners get supported andthe programs get supported and
(07:27):
things like that, and just howthose things are all
communicated back to donors andhow you connect donors in a real
way to real work on the groundand real impact in ways that the
child sponsorship model, asit's kind of been traditionally
framed, maybe gets in the way of.
Speaker 3 (07:48):
Yeah, yeah, and you're right.
So don't get me wrong.
There are significant, there'smassive problems with the whole
child sponsorship funding model,full stop, right.
(08:15):
So you have an inefficient useof funding.
They're spending a lot of moneyfor what I'd call concierge
services so that I, as a donor,feel better and feel more kindly
.
I mean there's just there's alot of money that has to be
dedicated to that work, whichyou know, is really just taking
care of my needs.
Well, that's not why I'm givingto help that child, that
(08:37):
particular Manuel in Honduras.
That's not why I'm giving tohelp him is to make me feel
better about myself.
So that's a problem.
Giving to help him is to makeme feel better about myself, so
that's a problem.
There's problems with thedocumented negative impacts on
unsponsored children.
So you've got.
You know, most of thesponsorship agencies have a
sibling rule.
They'll only allow a certainnumber of siblings in a family
(08:59):
to be sponsored.
Well, what about theunsponsored sibling, or the kid
across the street, or the kidsfrom the other neighborhood in
that town, when they see thebright new sneakers and
backpacks and homework help andnutritional supplements that
those kids are getting?
You know, a logical,theological question that comes
to all of us is well, why not me, why not my family, why not my
(09:22):
siblings?
And we don't really have ananswer.
That's why I so support andwant to laud the work that
several major child sponsorshipagencies have done to open up
their program from a direct formof child sponsorship to an
indirect form, that is, to helpthe whole community.
(09:43):
So I think that's reallyhelpful.
Let me just touch, though, onwhat I see is the biggest
problem in child sponsorshipprograms, and it's not often
commented on.
Mostly, we grab onto thosematerialistic pieces.
Empirically we can measure them, and so that comes to our mind.
But I think, in order to createthe illusion of a relationship,
(10:07):
the mission agencies engaged insort of creating this illusion
of a relationship betweensponsor and child.
And to strengthen that donortie, to encourage the sponsor to
give regularly, sponsorshipagencies are forced to minimize
the parent's role and maximizethe sponsor's role.
So they make us as if gods right, they make us almost divine.
(10:32):
They really play up.
Look what your gift is doing.
Look how powerful your gift.
You drop it in that plate, youknow, and you send it in your
check-in each month and lookwhat it does.
We are able to do so muchbecause of you.
And I think theologicallythere's some real problems with
(10:52):
that.
When we cease to look at thatcircle of care that God has
placed around that child and weonly see a direct line from you
know my pocketbook, mybenevolence, my smarts to help
that kid.
You know that poor kid outthere.
The kid becomes an object ofpity and the object of my
(11:16):
mission, as opposed to whatGod's already been doing in that
place to surround the childwith a circle of care the child
with a circle of care, right.
Speaker 2 (11:27):
Right, and I do think I've seen some, you know,
fairly hair raising thingsaround, the sense that that
sponsors sometimes get around mychild photograph on the fridge,
you know, I get the letter fromthe child and this sort of like
that.
It's almost like you know,disney Channel things where,
(11:47):
like the parent, you're awarethere's a parent but the
parent's always in thebackground, the parent's always
off in the sidelines, they'renever actually in the main
action of what's happening.
And I think child sponsorshipprograms and our own was sort of
guilty of this to have a way ofsort of perpetuating that and
creating that sense.
(12:08):
So that when we started totransition, one of the first
things we did was insist thatphotographs and letters came
from the family and included allthe members of the family
family and not just the child,because it made me uncomfortable
(12:29):
to ignore the fact that thischild has siblings and a
grandmother who lives with themand you know the parents and the
you know, and then the auntsthat also lives with them well
and Laura, the list would belong.
Speaker 3 (12:40):
There's so many, not just inefficiencies but almost
jaded framings that the childsponsorship agencies, you know
not, are forced to.
But you know use to be able toensure donor loyalty in the case
of people who are giving tosupport a child.
(13:01):
But I think there's an antidoteto that.
If the biggest problem is thatthe mission agencies create this
illusion of a relationship andposit us, as you know, a divine
answer to this kid's problems, Ithink there's a golden rule.
If we could just apply thegolden rule, you know, just
think back to Christ, theessence of Christ's teachings,
(13:22):
which was, you know, putyourself in that person's shoes.
What would it feel like if andI remember a conversation I had
with a Peruvian mom to the northof Lima, a major US child
sponsorship agency was workingthere and had been in this
community for a number of years,and I was interviewing these
mothers and asking them what wasgood about the program, why
(13:44):
were they appreciative and theylong list very appreciative
Nutritional support that theycouldn't have gotten.
It was helping their kids inschool.
Their kids' grades were gettingbetter.
There were so many good thingsabout it, full stop.
And then there was a pause andthere was a woman in the group
who kind of looked me over and Idon't know if she was trying to
assess if this gringo had whatit took to hear a negative word.
(14:07):
But I said well, I'm sorry,what are you thinking, senora?
And she said she goes.
Well, how would it feel to youif a foreigner was writing your
11-year-old daughter every month?
Your 11-year-old daughter everymonth?
And it just, I mean, it wassuch a powerful moment for me
because I had never, even thoughI was sponsoring a child at the
time, it had never occurred tome.
(14:28):
What hubris, what blindness amI operating with in this world
that I assume I have the rightto advise this 11-year-old girl
on her problems in life, thechallenges that she's facing?
My daughter was about that ageat the time and I was like heck.
No, are you crazy?
(14:49):
Don't you dare think in thoseterms.
You have nothing to say to mydaughter.
I don't even know you, and yetwe believe you know the mission.
Industries have lulled us intothinking that we, because we
have money in our pocket, thatwe're the answer to these kids'
needs, and that's false, and soI think the antidote is to
(15:11):
consistently ask that question.
Someone needs to stand up andsay, huh, how would this action,
this project, this drive, thiscampaign, this effort feel if we
were on the receiving end?
And I think, what a what apowerful question she gave me.
I think we need to apply thatpotentially dangerous situation
(15:38):
that the mission industry setsup is to think in terms of you
know, even you know Christ'sgolden rule.
You know that we might, youknow, love the other as much as
we love ourselves.
What would it feel like if wewere in their shoes?
So I think that's it gives me alittle more hope in this
situation.
And I thought to myself what,what is wrong with us?
(15:59):
Because I was sponsoring achild in Honduras at the time
and I said what is it?
I mean, what hubris, what ablind spot that I've never, ever
considered how my actions wouldimpact not only this mother but
all the folks who care for her.
And what advice am I giving her?
And what am I basing thatadvice on?
And just the fact that I've got30 bucks in my pocket each
(16:22):
month gives me the right to giveher advice for the deepest of
her challenges and hurts anddreams.
I mean, it's just, it bogglesthe imagination.
So I think the gift of thisPeruvian mom on that day for me
was just to be able to say youknow, use the golden rule ask
always the question.
What would it feel like if wewere on the receiving end of
(16:44):
this project or campaign orintervention or whatever?
Because I think it'll soften abit, it'll cause us to pause and
it'll slow down.
Sometimes it's I mean, ourmission, project, development
ideas can be like a runawaytrain they just pick up steam
and nothing's going to stop them.
What if it causes us to pauseand we ask the question?
(17:06):
I think we need moreinformation.
Who could we ask?
Well, all of a sudden, that'sgoing to bring us into three
cups of tea, or 20 cups of tea,with some of these mothers whose
kids we're thinking about andwe're hoping to improve their
quality of life.
Well, let's start asking themothers, because they surely
know what works and what doesn'twork in their own community.
Speaker 2 (17:27):
Exactly.
I mean, we had a sponsor yearsago who kind of reached out to
us and said you know, I want thechild I sponsor to go to this
school instead of that school.
And we were like that's notreally a decision you get to
make.
That child has parents andthey've selected this school for
their child.
And it just baffled me that thesponsor would think they had
(17:50):
the right for $30 a month to youknow and some letters going
back and forth to have any sayyou know, in that decision, you
know in that, in that decisionand that that thing that you do,
the golden rule piece of youknow.
Ask yourself if, if you were inthat position, if the positions
were reversed, I found that sohelpful.
Even down to you know, if, ifmy allies were to travel to my
(18:13):
office here in Northern Virginiaon a two week mission and spend
, you know, all day, every day,looking over my shoulder and
telling me how to do my jobbetter, I might have some
feelings about that.
I might have some you know,questions about that, and so I
have found that little trickreally, really helpful that just
(18:36):
ask yourself, you know, as aparent, how would you feel if
some stranger from anothercountry was sending your, your
child letters?
yeah yeah, that's really reallygood.
Um, you posed a question in thebook that really stuck with me,
um, and and really made mequestion myself.
(18:56):
Um, so I sponsored a child foryears and years and years and
years.
Same child for 10 plus years,probably Same amount every month
.
Never thought to ask myself whyisn't it getting any better?
Why does this child still needthe same thing year over year
(19:16):
over year over year over year,year over year?
over year over year, if thisprogram is supposed to be
improving things, and the thingthat struck me about that was
not only had I never questionedmyself about it, but I never
(19:38):
even thought to yeah, yeah,you're not alone.
Speaker 3 (19:40):
You're not alone, laura.
Yeah, I do think and this isnot about you, because I'll say
it on myself right Iconsistently do this and with
all that I've learned in studiesand life experience and I spent
five years in the Congo and 10years in Peru and have worked
internationally for 30 yearsEven with that, my privilege
(20:02):
blinds me and unfortunately, Ican't see around the corner.
I've got to go up to the cornerand turn and look.
And so what I love aboutshort-term mission, what I love
about people reaching outthrough efforts like child
sponsorship programs, all ofthese ways allow us to walk up
to the corner.
(20:22):
And now we've got to take showthe discipline, the gumption of
turning and looking in a newdirection and opening our eyes
and saying what do we see?
Because I do, I fear that.
I mean, when you look at allthe Christians in the world line
us up from richest to poorestAmerican Christians, we're in
the church of the 1%.
(20:43):
We are.
We are among the mostprivileged and and you know
current political debates to theside.
We are among the most privilegedand secure economically secure
Christians that have ever livedUm, and that that carries with
it some real challenges in termsof the lenses that I have to
(21:06):
read the Gospels to understandwhat Scripture is saying, to
look at my life, to look at myengagement with the rest of the
world, how I'm treating thiswoman and her child.
Not even thinking, you know,not even questioning my own
right to write and give intimateadvice to her 11-year-old
daughter.
What the heck is going on here.
I do think we're in a sense,addicted to that privilege.
(21:36):
Church's engagement in thatmission, whether it be through
child sponsorship, throughorphanages, orphan care, through
institutional responses,through short-term mission trips
, through sending a group ofyoung people to the food kitchen
down the street to help feedsome folks who are living in
homelessness, Whatever thataction is, it gets us off the
(21:59):
script.
It causes us to stop for amoment.
We're leaving that comfort zonethat we're all so accustomed to
.
We know the script, we knowwhat I'm to say and do.
It's the typical classroominteraction.
Teachers know what they'resupposed to say, Students know
they're supposed to be passive,compliant and regurgitate for
the teacher at the end of theday, what the teacher wants to
(22:20):
hear.
I mean, that's the game we'replaying, right, but mission
changes that it allows for theabout face that is essential to
a turning to Jesus Christ.
It is as profoundly important asthe moment of conversion, and
so I think we need grassrootsleaders in the church, in every
(22:45):
congregation, who are willing toraise a question or share a
think piece with folks before acommittee meeting is getting
together or challenge acomfortable assumption in
non-threatening ways.
All these things that we can doenable us to look with new eyes
(23:06):
at this relationship that we'rein with the world.
So I again, I don't condemn thechild sponsorship programs,
because I think, if we see themas a stepping stone, Someone
needed that concierge care,Someone needed to imagine that
Manuel, you know they wereManuel's gift and they're
(23:27):
Manuel's salvation.
Well, that's bad theology.
We all can name that when wesay it that baldly.
But I think it's a first stepand I think God accepts us in
our first steps, our desperateefforts to take a step closer to
God.
And so I think it's now theresponsibility of mission
(23:49):
leaders, like many of whom arelistening to this conversation,
to take the next step and helppeople in their congregation
take the next step, so I thinkthat can be really valuable yeah
yeah, the next step.
Speaker 2 (24:02):
So I think that's, I think that can be really
valuable, yeah, yeah, yeah.
You said something a fewminutes earlier that I think
some in our audience might besurprised by and you talked
about.
I think you used the wordfictive, but you were talking
about the relationship the quoteunquote relationship that
exists between a donor and thechild they sponsor, and I think
you did use a word like fictionor fictive.
One of the challenges of makingthis transition is facing some
(24:25):
difficult realities around what,what it actually is, what, what
sponsors think about theirmoney is doing.
You know where they think it'sgoing.
I think some sponsors thinktheir, their $30 goes to that
child or to that child's family,and and that, that, that
relationship through letters,what, what is the reality of
(24:47):
that?
That might surprise some people.
Speaker 3 (24:50):
Yeah, so I use the term and it's a technical term
in anthropology fictiverelationship as opposed to a
blood relationship or a marriagerelationship.
I'm related to people becauseof blood or marriage right, and
that's the only way I'm relatedto people.
Adoption is in fact, a fictiverelationship, though it's deep
and it can be a lifelong thing,et cetera, but I'm not using it
(25:13):
so much in that sense.
I do think that the um childsponsorship agencies let's call
it an industry because it's it'sa big moneymaker, um, billions
of dollars, we got to name itwhat it is Um, those uh
industries are working hard tocreate, um, uh, a sense of
(25:36):
relationship where there is notone and at the start of the
relationship clearly there's notone.
They don't.
You know sponsor A doesn't knowchild A.
At the same time, those sponsoragencies work hard through this
rain of letters, throughresponses.
You know a teacher will writeand say well you're, you know
(25:59):
the student did better in scoresand congratulations.
Or sometimes some of theagencies not all will have other
voices that actually writeletters, or they'll quote them
in the sponsor letters to thankthem for what they're doing,
either for the individual childor in the conglomerate, for the
group.
And I just think this is a verydangerous thing, because this is
(26:21):
playing with the essence ofwhat it means to be human.
My relationship with a personI'm constantly assessing, and
I'm looking through the lensesof my experience to see who that
person is and how they'reresponding to my every movement
and word, and all of that.
The agencies come in, though,and they twist that and they say
(26:43):
you are everything.
Look what you're doing.
This kid is so appreciative.
You are the cat's meow, you areGod's salvation to this child.
You should be proud.
Thank you, do it again nextmonth.
And that, I think, is a very,very dangerous message, because
it's creating, out of nothing, asense of relationship, and that
causes me to say, oh well, Ithink is a very, very dangerous
message, because it's creating,out of nothing, a sense of
relationship, and that causes meto say, oh well, I've helped.
(27:04):
Oh, I understand.
Oh, honduras, I know all aboutHonduras.
I sponsored a kid there for 10years, right?
Oh, really, really Well, that'sgreat, but I think your hubris,
hunter, is blinding you to thecomplex reality that Hondurans
face every day.
I don't think you know anythingabout it.
So, yeah, again, not to throwthe book.
(27:26):
I'm not condemning anyone.
I think it is a beautiful firststep and if folks are
sponsoring children, god blessthem.
Second step after hearing thispodcast, after working with you
all and your organization, whichyou know, hats off to you.
It's not easy to be the bearerof some challenging news.
(27:46):
We have to face our addictionto this sense of privilege and
benevolence and turn a cornerand say OK, Manuel, now I'm
ready for you and your family,your community, to walk with me
so that I get a clearer read onwhat's really going on in
Honduras.
Speaker 2 (28:02):
Yeah, yeah, all right , I'm going to ask you two
questions in the interest oftime.
So the first one is OK, nowwhat?
So?
Now I've sponsored a child,I've listened to this podcast
episode and I still really wantto support a vulnerable child
somewhere in the world.
What should I be looking forinstead?
What would be a better way forme to engage?
Speaker 3 (28:25):
Oh yeah.
Well, I got three quick andeasy answers.
The first is find otherprograms, maybe with the same
agency.
Like, if I'm sponsoring a childthrough World Vision, shift
gears and support the work thatthey're doing in water
development, you know, and itjust then all your money goes to
(28:45):
these community based actions.
So I think finding anotherprogram that addresses the root
causes of the community's needsand not just rely so as not to
rely on that top downdevelopment style, I think
that's a first choice.
So choose a program thatdoesn't spend so much on making
(29:08):
you feel appreciated.
That's the first.
The second would be pair yoursupport to a child overseas with
a child in your own community,a disadvantaged child in your
own community that people haveunderstood for a long time.
They love those globalcommunities because they always
say thank you, they always smile, they never criticize us,
(29:31):
they're always appreciative.
But folks in our own community,when we help folks across the
tracks on the other side of thetracks, they're not as
appreciative and that's atougher relationship.
Well, of course it is.
We have some history together,right, and we've done that
better or more poorly indifferent moments of that
relationship.
A series of relationships withkids in your own community.
(29:57):
It helps to give you eyes forhow you can come alongside that
circle of care among thesurrounding disadvantaged kids
in your community.
Suddenly, you're going to bewanting to spend some time,
you're going to want to have acup of coffee with that group of
moms so you can hear them andwhat is their solutions.
You want to talk to theteachers and the doctors and
(30:18):
nurses, the dads who care somuch about these kids.
So I think it just kind ofmakes our conversation more
honest.
We can idealize and exoticizeglobal communities and the kids
in them and if we pair it withsomeone in our own town, it's
going to change.
We're going to say, okay, butwait, I shouldn't expect that of
the foreign kid either.
(30:39):
Right, I know I can't say thatto a kid in my town, then I
shouldn't be able to say that toa foreign kid.
So I think that it just makesour conversation more honest.
So you know, finding adifferent program, I think, that
doesn't spend so much onconcierge services is important.
To pair your support for a childoverseas with a child in your
(30:59):
own community is the second.
And the third is this let'snever stop asking the question.
Our five-year-old children andgrandchildren ask us, which is
why they keep asking thatquestion.
So okay, so these people arehungry, got that?
And that's why we're sendingthis team to go and cook for
them for a month or two weeks or10 days or whatever.
Great, great.
(31:20):
And then, but why?
Speaker 1 (31:22):
Why is it that they're hungry?
Speaker 3 (31:23):
I mean, I'm not hungry in my community, why are
kids in other communities and inthat community hungry?
Suddenly it puts you andthere's great resources for this
out there, from HeiferInternational to other groups
that can help walk folks throughlet's play the why game, other
groups that can help walk folksthrough, let's play the why game
.
And what would happen if weplayed that why game together
with our companions in mission?
Suddenly we're going to beseeing both our worlds in very
(31:46):
different lenses.
And so I'm aware of somecommunities that have worked on
violence in Honduras and gunviolence in their Michigan
community together because,playing the why game, suddenly
they're asking very differentquestions and those quit that
those new lenses are given tothem by the power of that
relationship yeah, that's reallypowerful, really, really
(32:09):
powerful.
Speaker 2 (32:10):
my friend, jared Shetland, at a Kesa place, this
game, that's a version of thewhy game he calls it, but what's
the cause of that?
So these people are hungry, butwhat's the cause of that?
Yeah, so these people arehungry, but what's the cause of
that?
Well, it's hard for people toget jobs, but what's the cause
of that?
And it's this game of sort oflike trying to see how far down
you can dig to find a root causethat you can start to address
(32:34):
instead of trying to just solvethe symptoms on the surface.
So, hunter, it's been great tohave you on this episode.
Really, really love your book.
Highly recommend FreeingCongregational Mission to
everyone listening, get it,check it out, dog ear it and
highlight it the way that I'vedone my copy.
One last question, hunter, andthat is what keeps you
(32:57):
optimistic about childsponsorship and those kinds of
programs and sort of where we'reat in this moment.
Speaker 3 (33:04):
Yeah.
So at one level, I'mappreciative of the increasing
number of questions and criticalquestions that are coming at
the child sponsorship programs.
I think that's a good thing,but a lot of people get bogged
down.
Child sponsorship programs Ithink that's a good thing, but a
lot of people get bogged down.
They see, you know it's such.
I mean, it's three and aquarter billion dollars, for
goodness sake.
This is a lot of money and it'sa lot of people deeply invested
(33:27):
and it ain't going away anytimesoon, right?
I think for me, the cause ofhope is that we're not alone,
that there are thousands ofthoughtful, grassroots leaders
asking these same kinds ofquestions.
I mean, Laura, you startedasking them early on and we are
seeing a significant shift inthis tide.
I do think that now is a timefor the I call them disciplined
(33:53):
efforts on all of our part tocomplete this change.
So we have each other and Ithink just to know that there's
I mean, this is happening incongregations all across the
country I'm not the only oneasking these, you know crazy eye
questions.
At the same time, I think weneed to name and just understand
(34:15):
that God is with us, becausethe God who expresses the very
image of God as a disadvantagedchild whose family is forced to
flee violence and immigrate toanother country.
I mean, this is a God whounderstands and is seeking to
bless, you know, kids all overthe world, in our communities
(34:36):
and across the tracks from usand around the world.
So I find a deep sense of hopethat God is moving churches to
engage in mission in morefaithful and effective ways, and
I want to be a part of thatmovement.
Speaker 2 (34:52):
Me too.
Thanks for your time, Hunter.
Thanks for being with us.
It's been a pleasure.
Speaker 3 (34:58):
My pleasure.
Thanks so much for theinvitation.
Speaker 4 (35:05):
Thanks for listening.
If you enjoyed this episode,please subscribe, share it with
others, post about it on socialmedia or leave a rating and
review.
To catch all the latest from us, you can find us at Helping
Children Worldwide on Instagram,linkedin, twitter and Facebook
Hashtag Optimistic VoicesPodcast.
Welcome to Optimistic Voices, a podcast of helping
children worldwide.
We help children worldwide bystrengthening and empowering
families and communities.
This podcast is for peopleinterested in deep conversations
with thought leaders in thefields of child welfare, global
(00:26):
health and internationalmissions.
Speaker 2 (00:30):
We're going to talk today about child sponsorship
programs and I want to open upthis episode by acknowledging
that HCW had a child sponsorshipprogram for many years.
It was a very successfulfundraising program for us.
We refer to it now as adedicated donor program and
we'll say more about that in theepisode.
(00:50):
But I want to frame the episodea little bit for you by sharing
with you that more than 9million children globally are
supported through internationalchild sponsorship programs to
tune of more than $3.29 millionannually.
In the spirit of fulldisclosure, I want to share that
recently I co-hosted our GlobalRising Tides conference.
(01:14):
That was about two or threeweeks ago now.
It was focused on a related butdifferent topic the transition
of orphanages to family caremodels.
During what was a free-flowingdiscussion not really even on
this topic one participantraised the topic of child
sponsorship.
He just threw it out there.
Hey, let's talk about childsponsorship.
Mind you, this is in a roomfull of thought leaders in child
(01:35):
protection and child welfarefrom all over the world.
There are about 35 people inthe room from about 20 different
organizations and the responsewas so overwhelmingly negative
that people were almost hissingand booing at the idea of child
sponsorship.
It was really striking and Iwant to say that I've noticed in
the last few years that withinwhat I would call the global
(01:56):
child welfare sector, the tideappears to be turning against
child sponsorship, but I alsowant to acknowledge that it's
still really popular among USChristians, who are looking for
a way to support orphans andvulnerable children, which is a
good thing to do.
It's something we want toencourage people to do.
I think part of the draw is thatit creates a sense of personal
(02:17):
relationship between the donorand the vulnerable child and it
gives the donors the sense ofbeing directly and intimately
connected to what their money isdoing.
I have to tell you, from thenonprofit perspective, it's a
highly effective fundraisingmodel that's used to running.
You know nonprofits, we're usedto running from events to major
(02:39):
gifts to, you know grants,opportunities and never knowing
when the next check is going tocome.
A sponsorship model is adedicated donor program.
I know that money's coming inevery month.
I know that money's coming inevery year from those donors
because that's how the programis set up and, as the program
(03:01):
director of a nonprofit, it'snice to know there's money I can
count on.
It's easier to plan for thingswhen I know that money's coming
in.
And yet in this room, at RisingTides, with 20 or so
organizations, most of them verysmall organizations we were
pretty united in ourcondemnation or our aversion, I
(03:22):
guess is probably a better wayto say that to the child
sponsorship model, and so I wantto dig into that today.
We have with us today Dr HunterFarrell.
He's the author ofCongregational Mission A
Practical Guide forCompanionship, cultural Humility
and Co-Development.
We'll be releasing an episodeon short-term mission later in
the year that we did with him.
(03:44):
We'll be releasing an episodeon short-term mission later in
the year that we did with him.
But there was a chapter in thatbook that focused on child
sponsorship models.
That really helped me as I washelping our team at HCW think
through the shift away fromchild sponsorship for ourselves
to something else.
So, hunter, welcome to theprogram.
Speaker 3 (04:03):
Thanks so much, Laura .
It's great to be with you.
Speaker 2 (04:05):
Thanks, I really appreciate having you here.
Do you want to talk a littlebit about what is the issue with
child sponsorship and why mightpeople be growing adverse to
that model?
Speaker 3 (04:17):
Yeah, thanks, laura.
I'm really glad to be here andparticularly to think about a
topic as big and as important toAmerican congregations,
american Christians today, aschild sponsorship programs.
Just a quick note you said youmentioned that nine million
children around the world aresupported through global child
(04:39):
sponsorship programs, and that'scorrect.
The figure, though, of how muchmoney US Christians send each
year is actually $3.29 billion.
It's a B and not an M, so it'sreally critically important.
In this conversation aroundchild sponsorship, one of the
(05:09):
challenges we have is that, veryquickly over it's been like
about a six to eight year spacealmost all of the scholars and
experts in whether it's forchild development experts or
mission scholars, people whostudy the work of mission almost
(05:34):
all of them have moved quicklyto the space where they strongly
oppose child sponsorshipprograms.
The challenge is that manycongregations and I always ask
in the congregation when I goand speak I say how many in this
congregation are sponsoring akid?
Well, if I say that at the startof the program, everybody
raises their hand I mean, it'susually about half the people in
(05:56):
the room, quite frankly willraise their hand, and I think
the scholars and the you knowexperts can, you know, can cast
shame on these people and makethem feel bad about doing what
they're doing, and thatgenerally, in my experience of
human relationships, causespeople to lift up defensive
barriers and back off and tuneout, not listen anymore, and
(06:17):
that's not a helpful space.
I wonder if we could see all ofthese child sponsorship programs
in a way that's similar to theway I understand short-term
mission trips yeah, they're notperfect, but are there ways that
they can be redeemed?
Are there ways that we can makethem better or learn from that
space, that connection, thatsense of connection with a child
(06:38):
in the Gambia or in Haiti Haitiand begin to think about the
root causes of that child'spredicament in new ways.
So I welcome this conversationbecause I think it opens up an
opportunity for us, throughchild sponsorship programs, to
reimagine the ways that we'reengaged with God in making a
(07:02):
difference in kids' lives aroundthe world.
Speaker 2 (07:04):
Yeah, that's a really important point and I guess I
want to frame the reaction of mycolleagues in that space, as I
think they're perceiving thatthe child sponsorship model
itself is causing them some realproblems in how they're trying
to partner with Global Southpartners on the ground, how
those partners get supported andthe programs get supported and
(07:27):
things like that, and just howthose things are all
communicated back to donors andhow you connect donors in a real
way to real work on the groundand real impact in ways that the
child sponsorship model, asit's kind of been traditionally
framed, maybe gets in the way of.
Speaker 3 (07:48):
Yeah, yeah, and you're right.
So don't get me wrong.
There are significant, there'smassive problems with the whole
child sponsorship funding model,full stop, right.
(08:15):
So you have an inefficient useof funding.
They're spending a lot of moneyfor what I'd call concierge
services so that I, as a donor,feel better and feel more kindly
.
I mean there's just there's alot of money that has to be
dedicated to that work, whichyou know, is really just taking
care of my needs.
Well, that's not why I'm givingto help that child, that
(08:37):
particular Manuel in Honduras.
That's not why I'm giving tohelp him is to make me feel
better about myself.
So that's a problem.
Giving to help him is to makeme feel better about myself, so
that's a problem.
There's problems with thedocumented negative impacts on
unsponsored children.
So you've got.
You know, most of thesponsorship agencies have a
sibling rule.
They'll only allow a certainnumber of siblings in a family
(08:59):
to be sponsored.
Well, what about theunsponsored sibling, or the kid
across the street, or the kidsfrom the other neighborhood in
that town, when they see thebright new sneakers and
backpacks and homework help andnutritional supplements that
those kids are getting?
You know, a logical,theological question that comes
to all of us is well, why not me, why not my family, why not my
(09:22):
siblings?
And we don't really have ananswer.
That's why I so support andwant to laud the work that
several major child sponsorshipagencies have done to open up
their program from a direct formof child sponsorship to an
indirect form, that is, to helpthe whole community.
(09:43):
So I think that's reallyhelpful.
Let me just touch, though, onwhat I see is the biggest
problem in child sponsorshipprograms, and it's not often
commented on.
Mostly, we grab onto thosematerialistic pieces.
Empirically we can measure them, and so that comes to our mind.
But I think, in order to createthe illusion of a relationship,
(10:07):
the mission agencies engaged insort of creating this illusion
of a relationship betweensponsor and child.
And to strengthen that donortie, to encourage the sponsor to
give regularly, sponsorshipagencies are forced to minimize
the parent's role and maximizethe sponsor's role.
So they make us as if gods right, they make us almost divine.
(10:32):
They really play up.
Look what your gift is doing.
Look how powerful your gift.
You drop it in that plate, youknow, and you send it in your
check-in each month and lookwhat it does.
We are able to do so muchbecause of you.
And I think theologicallythere's some real problems with
(10:52):
that.
When we cease to look at thatcircle of care that God has
placed around that child and weonly see a direct line from you
know my pocketbook, mybenevolence, my smarts to help
that kid.
You know that poor kid outthere.
The kid becomes an object ofpity and the object of my
(11:16):
mission, as opposed to whatGod's already been doing in that
place to surround the childwith a circle of care the child
with a circle of care, right.
Speaker 2 (11:27):
Right, and I do think I've seen some, you know,
fairly hair raising thingsaround, the sense that that
sponsors sometimes get around mychild photograph on the fridge,
you know, I get the letter fromthe child and this sort of like
that.
It's almost like you know,disney Channel things where,
(11:47):
like the parent, you're awarethere's a parent but the
parent's always in thebackground, the parent's always
off in the sidelines, they'renever actually in the main
action of what's happening.
And I think child sponsorshipprograms and our own was sort of
guilty of this to have a way ofsort of perpetuating that and
creating that sense.
(12:08):
So that when we started totransition, one of the first
things we did was insist thatphotographs and letters came
from the family and included allthe members of the family
family and not just the child,because it made me uncomfortable
(12:29):
to ignore the fact that thischild has siblings and a
grandmother who lives with themand you know the parents and the
you know, and then the auntsthat also lives with them well
and Laura, the list would belong.
Speaker 3 (12:40):
There's so many, not just inefficiencies but almost
jaded framings that the childsponsorship agencies, you know
not, are forced to.
But you know use to be able toensure donor loyalty in the case
of people who are giving tosupport a child.
(13:01):
But I think there's an antidoteto that.
If the biggest problem is thatthe mission agencies create this
illusion of a relationship andposit us, as you know, a divine
answer to this kid's problems, Ithink there's a golden rule.
If we could just apply thegolden rule, you know, just
think back to Christ, theessence of Christ's teachings,
(13:22):
which was, you know, putyourself in that person's shoes.
What would it feel like if andI remember a conversation I had
with a Peruvian mom to the northof Lima, a major US child
sponsorship agency was workingthere and had been in this
community for a number of years,and I was interviewing these
mothers and asking them what wasgood about the program, why
(13:44):
were they appreciative and theylong list very appreciative
Nutritional support that theycouldn't have gotten.
It was helping their kids inschool.
Their kids' grades were gettingbetter.
There were so many good thingsabout it, full stop.
And then there was a pause andthere was a woman in the group
who kind of looked me over and Idon't know if she was trying to
assess if this gringo had whatit took to hear a negative word.
(14:07):
But I said well, I'm sorry,what are you thinking, senora?
And she said she goes.
Well, how would it feel to youif a foreigner was writing your
11-year-old daughter every month?
Your 11-year-old daughter everymonth?
And it just, I mean, it wassuch a powerful moment for me
because I had never, even thoughI was sponsoring a child at the
time, it had never occurred tome.
(14:28):
What hubris, what blindness amI operating with in this world
that I assume I have the rightto advise this 11-year-old girl
on her problems in life, thechallenges that she's facing?
My daughter was about that ageat the time and I was like heck.
No, are you crazy?
(14:49):
Don't you dare think in thoseterms.
You have nothing to say to mydaughter.
I don't even know you, and yetwe believe you know the mission.
Industries have lulled us intothinking that we, because we
have money in our pocket, thatwe're the answer to these kids'
needs, and that's false, and soI think the antidote is to
(15:11):
consistently ask that question.
Someone needs to stand up andsay, huh, how would this action,
this project, this drive, thiscampaign, this effort feel if we
were on the receiving end?
And I think, what a what apowerful question she gave me.
I think we need to apply thatpotentially dangerous situation
(15:38):
that the mission industry setsup is to think in terms of you
know, even you know Christ'sgolden rule.
You know that we might, youknow, love the other as much as
we love ourselves.
What would it feel like if wewere in their shoes?
So I think that's it gives me alittle more hope in this
situation.
And I thought to myself what,what is wrong with us?
(15:59):
Because I was sponsoring achild in Honduras at the time
and I said what is it?
I mean, what hubris, what ablind spot that I've never, ever
considered how my actions wouldimpact not only this mother but
all the folks who care for her.
And what advice am I giving her?
And what am I basing thatadvice on?
And just the fact that I've got30 bucks in my pocket each
(16:22):
month gives me the right to giveher advice for the deepest of
her challenges and hurts anddreams.
I mean, it's just, it bogglesthe imagination.
So I think the gift of thisPeruvian mom on that day for me
was just to be able to say youknow, use the golden rule ask
always the question.
What would it feel like if wewere on the receiving end of
(16:44):
this project or campaign orintervention or whatever?
Because I think it'll soften abit, it'll cause us to pause and
it'll slow down.
Sometimes it's I mean, ourmission, project, development
ideas can be like a runawaytrain they just pick up steam
and nothing's going to stop them.
What if it causes us to pauseand we ask the question?
(17:06):
I think we need moreinformation.
Who could we ask?
Well, all of a sudden, that'sgoing to bring us into three
cups of tea, or 20 cups of tea,with some of these mothers whose
kids we're thinking about andwe're hoping to improve their
quality of life.
Well, let's start asking themothers, because they surely
know what works and what doesn'twork in their own community.
Speaker 2 (17:27):
Exactly.
I mean, we had a sponsor yearsago who kind of reached out to
us and said you know, I want thechild I sponsor to go to this
school instead of that school.
And we were like that's notreally a decision you get to
make.
That child has parents andthey've selected this school for
their child.
And it just baffled me that thesponsor would think they had
(17:50):
the right for $30 a month to youknow and some letters going
back and forth to have any sayyou know, in that decision, you
know in that, in that decisionand that that thing that you do,
the golden rule piece of youknow.
Ask yourself if, if you were inthat position, if the positions
were reversed, I found that sohelpful.
Even down to you know, if, ifmy allies were to travel to my
(18:13):
office here in Northern Virginiaon a two week mission and spend
, you know, all day, every day,looking over my shoulder and
telling me how to do my jobbetter, I might have some
feelings about that.
I might have some you know,questions about that, and so I
have found that little trickreally, really helpful that just
(18:36):
ask yourself, you know, as aparent, how would you feel if
some stranger from anothercountry was sending your, your
child letters?
yeah yeah, that's really reallygood.
Um, you posed a question in thebook that really stuck with me,
um, and and really made mequestion myself.
(18:56):
Um, so I sponsored a child foryears and years and years and
years.
Same child for 10 plus years,probably Same amount every month
.
Never thought to ask myself whyisn't it getting any better?
Why does this child still needthe same thing year over year
(19:16):
over year over year over year,year over year?
over year over year, if thisprogram is supposed to be
improving things, and the thingthat struck me about that was
not only had I never questionedmyself about it, but I never
(19:38):
even thought to yeah, yeah,you're not alone.
Speaker 3 (19:40):
You're not alone, laura.
Yeah, I do think and this isnot about you, because I'll say
it on myself right Iconsistently do this and with
all that I've learned in studiesand life experience and I spent
five years in the Congo and 10years in Peru and have worked
internationally for 30 yearsEven with that, my privilege
(20:02):
blinds me and unfortunately, Ican't see around the corner.
I've got to go up to the cornerand turn and look.
And so what I love aboutshort-term mission, what I love
about people reaching outthrough efforts like child
sponsorship programs, all ofthese ways allow us to walk up
to the corner.
(20:22):
And now we've got to take showthe discipline, the gumption of
turning and looking in a newdirection and opening our eyes
and saying what do we see?
Because I do, I fear that.
I mean, when you look at allthe Christians in the world line
us up from richest to poorestAmerican Christians, we're in
the church of the 1%.
(20:43):
We are.
We are among the mostprivileged and and you know
current political debates to theside.
We are among the most privilegedand secure economically secure
Christians that have ever livedUm, and that that carries with
it some real challenges in termsof the lenses that I have to
(21:06):
read the Gospels to understandwhat Scripture is saying, to
look at my life, to look at myengagement with the rest of the
world, how I'm treating thiswoman and her child.
Not even thinking, you know,not even questioning my own
right to write and give intimateadvice to her 11-year-old
daughter.
What the heck is going on here.
I do think we're in a sense,addicted to that privilege.
(21:36):
Church's engagement in thatmission, whether it be through
child sponsorship, throughorphanages, orphan care, through
institutional responses,through short-term mission trips
, through sending a group ofyoung people to the food kitchen
down the street to help feedsome folks who are living in
homelessness, Whatever thataction is, it gets us off the
(21:59):
script.
It causes us to stop for amoment.
We're leaving that comfort zonethat we're all so accustomed to
.
We know the script, we knowwhat I'm to say and do.
It's the typical classroominteraction.
Teachers know what they'resupposed to say, Students know
they're supposed to be passive,compliant and regurgitate for
the teacher at the end of theday, what the teacher wants to
(22:20):
hear.
I mean, that's the game we'replaying, right, but mission
changes that it allows for theabout face that is essential to
a turning to Jesus Christ.
It is as profoundly important asthe moment of conversion, and
so I think we need grassrootsleaders in the church, in every
(22:45):
congregation, who are willing toraise a question or share a
think piece with folks before acommittee meeting is getting
together or challenge acomfortable assumption in
non-threatening ways.
All these things that we can doenable us to look with new eyes
(23:06):
at this relationship that we'rein with the world.
So I again, I don't condemn thechild sponsorship programs,
because I think, if we see themas a stepping stone, Someone
needed that concierge care,Someone needed to imagine that
Manuel, you know they wereManuel's gift and they're
(23:27):
Manuel's salvation.
Well, that's bad theology.
We all can name that when wesay it that baldly.
But I think it's a first stepand I think God accepts us in
our first steps, our desperateefforts to take a step closer to
God.
And so I think it's now theresponsibility of mission
(23:49):
leaders, like many of whom arelistening to this conversation,
to take the next step and helppeople in their congregation
take the next step, so I thinkthat can be really valuable yeah
yeah, the next step.
Speaker 2 (24:02):
So I think that's, I think that can be really
valuable, yeah, yeah, yeah.
You said something a fewminutes earlier that I think
some in our audience might besurprised by and you talked
about.
I think you used the wordfictive, but you were talking
about the relationship the quoteunquote relationship that
exists between a donor and thechild they sponsor, and I think
you did use a word like fictionor fictive.
One of the challenges of makingthis transition is facing some
(24:25):
difficult realities around what,what it actually is, what, what
sponsors think about theirmoney is doing.
You know where they think it'sgoing.
I think some sponsors thinktheir, their $30 goes to that
child or to that child's family,and and that, that, that
relationship through letters,what, what is the reality of
(24:47):
that?
That might surprise some people.
Speaker 3 (24:50):
Yeah, so I use the term and it's a technical term
in anthropology fictiverelationship as opposed to a
blood relationship or a marriagerelationship.
I'm related to people becauseof blood or marriage right, and
that's the only way I'm relatedto people.
Adoption is in fact, a fictiverelationship, though it's deep
and it can be a lifelong thing,et cetera, but I'm not using it
(25:13):
so much in that sense.
I do think that the um childsponsorship agencies let's call
it an industry because it's it'sa big moneymaker, um, billions
of dollars, we got to name itwhat it is Um, those uh
industries are working hard tocreate, um, uh, a sense of
(25:36):
relationship where there is notone and at the start of the
relationship clearly there's notone.
They don't.
You know sponsor A doesn't knowchild A.
At the same time, those sponsoragencies work hard through this
rain of letters, throughresponses.
You know a teacher will writeand say well you're, you know
(25:59):
the student did better in scoresand congratulations.
Or sometimes some of theagencies not all will have other
voices that actually writeletters, or they'll quote them
in the sponsor letters to thankthem for what they're doing,
either for the individual childor in the conglomerate, for the
group.
And I just think this is a verydangerous thing, because this is
(26:21):
playing with the essence ofwhat it means to be human.
My relationship with a personI'm constantly assessing, and
I'm looking through the lensesof my experience to see who that
person is and how they'reresponding to my every movement
and word, and all of that.
The agencies come in, though,and they twist that and they say
(26:43):
you are everything.
Look what you're doing.
This kid is so appreciative.
You are the cat's meow, you areGod's salvation to this child.
You should be proud.
Thank you, do it again nextmonth.
And that, I think, is a very,very dangerous message, because
it's creating, out of nothing, asense of relationship, and that
causes me to say, oh well, Ithink is a very, very dangerous
message, because it's creating,out of nothing, a sense of
relationship, and that causes meto say, oh well, I've helped.
(27:04):
Oh, I understand.
Oh, honduras, I know all aboutHonduras.
I sponsored a kid there for 10years, right?
Oh, really, really Well, that'sgreat, but I think your hubris,
hunter, is blinding you to thecomplex reality that Hondurans
face every day.
I don't think you know anythingabout it.
So, yeah, again, not to throwthe book.
(27:26):
I'm not condemning anyone.
I think it is a beautiful firststep and if folks are
sponsoring children, god blessthem.
Second step after hearing thispodcast, after working with you
all and your organization, whichyou know, hats off to you.
It's not easy to be the bearerof some challenging news.
(27:46):
We have to face our addictionto this sense of privilege and
benevolence and turn a cornerand say OK, Manuel, now I'm
ready for you and your family,your community, to walk with me
so that I get a clearer read onwhat's really going on in
Honduras.
Speaker 2 (28:02):
Yeah, yeah, all right , I'm going to ask you two
questions in the interest oftime.
So the first one is OK, nowwhat?
So?
Now I've sponsored a child,I've listened to this podcast
episode and I still really wantto support a vulnerable child
somewhere in the world.
What should I be looking forinstead?
What would be a better way forme to engage?
Speaker 3 (28:25):
Oh yeah.
Well, I got three quick andeasy answers.
The first is find otherprograms, maybe with the same
agency.
Like, if I'm sponsoring a childthrough World Vision, shift
gears and support the work thatthey're doing in water
development, you know, and itjust then all your money goes to
(28:45):
these community based actions.
So I think finding anotherprogram that addresses the root
causes of the community's needsand not just rely so as not to
rely on that top downdevelopment style, I think
that's a first choice.
So choose a program thatdoesn't spend so much on making
(29:08):
you feel appreciated.
That's the first.
The second would be pair yoursupport to a child overseas with
a child in your own community,a disadvantaged child in your
own community that people haveunderstood for a long time.
They love those globalcommunities because they always
say thank you, they always smile, they never criticize us,
(29:31):
they're always appreciative.
But folks in our own community,when we help folks across the
tracks on the other side of thetracks, they're not as
appreciative and that's atougher relationship.
Well, of course it is.
We have some history together,right, and we've done that
better or more poorly indifferent moments of that
relationship.
A series of relationships withkids in your own community.
(29:57):
It helps to give you eyes forhow you can come alongside that
circle of care among thesurrounding disadvantaged kids
in your community.
Suddenly, you're going to bewanting to spend some time,
you're going to want to have acup of coffee with that group of
moms so you can hear them andwhat is their solutions.
You want to talk to theteachers and the doctors and
(30:18):
nurses, the dads who care somuch about these kids.
So I think it just kind ofmakes our conversation more
honest.
We can idealize and exoticizeglobal communities and the kids
in them and if we pair it withsomeone in our own town, it's
going to change.
We're going to say, okay, butwait, I shouldn't expect that of
the foreign kid either.
(30:39):
Right, I know I can't say thatto a kid in my town, then I
shouldn't be able to say that toa foreign kid.
So I think that it just makesour conversation more honest.
So you know, finding adifferent program, I think, that
doesn't spend so much onconcierge services is important.
To pair your support for a childoverseas with a child in your
(30:59):
own community is the second.
And the third is this let'snever stop asking the question.
Our five-year-old children andgrandchildren ask us, which is
why they keep asking thatquestion.
So okay, so these people arehungry, got that?
And that's why we're sendingthis team to go and cook for
them for a month or two weeks or10 days or whatever.
Great, great.
(31:20):
And then, but why?
Speaker 1 (31:22):
Why is it that they're hungry?
Speaker 3 (31:23):
I mean, I'm not hungry in my community, why are
kids in other communities and inthat community hungry?
Suddenly it puts you andthere's great resources for this
out there, from HeiferInternational to other groups
that can help walk folks throughlet's play the why game, other
groups that can help walk folksthrough, let's play the why game
.
And what would happen if weplayed that why game together
with our companions in mission?
Suddenly we're going to beseeing both our worlds in very
(31:46):
different lenses.
And so I'm aware of somecommunities that have worked on
violence in Honduras and gunviolence in their Michigan
community together because,playing the why game, suddenly
they're asking very differentquestions and those quit that
those new lenses are given tothem by the power of that
relationship yeah, that's reallypowerful, really, really
(32:09):
powerful.
Speaker 2 (32:10):
my friend, jared Shetland, at a Kesa place, this
game, that's a version of thewhy game he calls it, but what's
the cause of that?
So these people are hungry, butwhat's the cause of that?
Yeah, so these people arehungry, but what's the cause of
that?
Well, it's hard for people toget jobs, but what's the cause
of that?
And it's this game of sort oflike trying to see how far down
you can dig to find a root causethat you can start to address
(32:34):
instead of trying to just solvethe symptoms on the surface.
So, hunter, it's been great tohave you on this episode.
Really, really love your book.
Highly recommend FreeingCongregational Mission to
everyone listening, get it,check it out, dog ear it and
highlight it the way that I'vedone my copy.
One last question, hunter, andthat is what keeps you
(32:57):
optimistic about childsponsorship and those kinds of
programs and sort of where we'reat in this moment.
Speaker 3 (33:04):
Yeah.
So at one level, I'mappreciative of the increasing
number of questions and criticalquestions that are coming at
the child sponsorship programs.
I think that's a good thing,but a lot of people get bogged
down.
Child sponsorship programs Ithink that's a good thing, but a
lot of people get bogged down.
They see, you know it's such.
I mean, it's three and aquarter billion dollars, for
goodness sake.
This is a lot of money and it'sa lot of people deeply invested
(33:27):
and it ain't going away anytimesoon, right?
I think for me, the cause ofhope is that we're not alone,
that there are thousands ofthoughtful, grassroots leaders
asking these same kinds ofquestions.
I mean, Laura, you startedasking them early on and we are
seeing a significant shift inthis tide.
I do think that now is a timefor the I call them disciplined
(33:53):
efforts on all of our part tocomplete this change.
So we have each other and Ithink just to know that there's
I mean, this is happening incongregations all across the
country I'm not the only oneasking these, you know crazy eye
questions.
At the same time, I think weneed to name and just understand
(34:15):
that God is with us, becausethe God who expresses the very
image of God as a disadvantagedchild whose family is forced to
flee violence and immigrate toanother country.
I mean, this is a God whounderstands and is seeking to
bless, you know, kids all overthe world, in our communities
(34:36):
and across the tracks from usand around the world.
So I find a deep sense of hopethat God is moving churches to
engage in mission in morefaithful and effective ways, and
I want to be a part of thatmovement.
Speaker 2 (34:52):
Me too.
Thanks for your time, Hunter.
Thanks for being with us.
It's been a pleasure.
Speaker 3 (34:58):
My pleasure.
Thanks so much for theinvitation.
Speaker 4 (35:05):
Thanks for listening.
If you enjoyed this episode,please subscribe, share it with
others, post about it on socialmedia or leave a rating and
review.
To catch all the latest from us, you can find us at Helping
Children Worldwide on Instagram,linkedin, twitter and Facebook
Hashtag Optimistic VoicesPodcast.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.