In the interest of disclosure, I will state for the record that I am not fond of any large scale charity. I understand that it takes paying people to ensure the job gets done, but donations are more than money; they are time. Large scale charities often pay people to run the charity, when those donations are being given, not for the personal gain of any one individual, but to pay for research and assistance.
In the case of the Susan G. Komen Foundation, donations are also allegedly given in order that the charity may sure other charities. This first came to my attention when watching the Colbert Report in a rare moment. Although this is not a program we often view, the humor with which Colbert points out flaws is greatly appreciated, as was the piece he did on the Komen Foundation.
In spite of his support of the Race for The Cure”, Colbert pointed out that over one million dollars of donations had been spent to sure other charities for using the phrase “for the Cure” in their fund-raising efforts. It is reports of this nature that gives credibility to the tongue-in-cheek attitude of Colbert’s reporting.
I found this information immediately inflammatory. I cannot help but wonder who, within the Foundation, decided that was a good use of money. This only confirms my opinion that large charities are more about the contributions that allow the charity to stay in business, than the contributions they make to society.
I understand it takes a lot of money, and likely a large institution to do the research that leads to break throughs. It does not take a large organization to deliver assistance.
Only days ago I sat in the examination room of a specialist awaiting diagnosis; breast cancer or not? Although the the prospects are good, more testing needs to be done, due to family history. No, while I sat in that office, I did not think about this conflict of spending, but it wasn’t long after leaving that it was back at the top on my mind.
I do believe in giving. I believe that we each need to care for one another, and sometimes that requires some kind of organization. Larger organizations have the ability to accomplish more. Until now, I had considered the Susan G. Komen Foundation one of the best places to donate, for those who felt the need to do so to a large organization instead of directly aiding others. Now I am disappointed and weakened in spirit; how should this be addressed?
When one charity sues another, they do so out of selfishness. These lawsuits say that the only thing worth curing is breast cancer, and whereas I doubt that most people involved feel that way, the fact that the foundation has not publicly explained themselves is either the actions of cowards, or of those who are aware of their guilt.
Until the foundation publicly apologizes and drops the ridiculous and insulting lawsuits, I will be asking people to cease all donations to the foundation. It is unfortunate that Susan’s name has, instead of being a source of light and strength, been shamed. I strongly urge those who in charge to address this problem quickly and restore honor to a name that has been misused to denigrate all other charities. “For the Cure” should never have been allowed to be trademarked, and for donations to be misused to take away donations intended to assist with other distressing diseases is nothing less than shameful.
I know several people with breast cancer, and I am likely to know more as time marches on. I am quite certain that they have benefited from the other activities of the Susan G. Komen Foundation. Even so, I will not participate in any program, either through time or money, until this is addressed, and I will discourage others from doing so as well. Instead, I will give to the individuals as I patiently wait for the pride for poor Susan to be restored.
