ActionAid faces the daunting task of transforming its child sponsorship scheme into one that truly reflects solidarity with global movements, rather than perpetuating paternalistic undertones. The charity's new co-chief executives, Taahra Ghazi and Hannah Bond, have pledged to "decolonise" the organisation's work by shifting the focus from sympathy towards partnership.
The current model, which allows donors to handpick children to support in poor countries, has been likened to "poverty porn" that perpetuates racist attitudes. Critics argue that it reinforces a transactional relationship between the donor and child, with the donor essentially choosing a brown or black child from a photograph, rather than genuinely engaging with the community.
Ghazi notes that the majority of ActionAid's supporters are white and relatively well-off individuals, which creates a power imbalance in the sponsorship model. "We're in the process of transformation until 2028," she said, outlining plans to transform systems, funding models, and procurement processes to better reflect community voices and realities.
The new approach aims to empower grassroots groups on the ground to have more control over how they spend funds. ActionAid is also launching a fund specifically for women's rights groups facing attacks globally, marking a significant shift towards solidarity and justice-driven fundraising.
However, not everyone shares this optimism. Independent researcher Themrise Khan argues that the entire concept of sponsoring children from Africa or Asia should be abandoned altogether, citing "white saviourism" as a major problem. She believes that better solutions lie in supporting nations' own social welfare systems, education, healthcare, and state provision rather than relying on charitable handouts.
As ActionAid embarks on this transformative journey, it remains to be seen whether the organisation will successfully shift its focus from sympathy towards solidarity, or if the old paternalistic model will continue to hold sway.
The current model, which allows donors to handpick children to support in poor countries, has been likened to "poverty porn" that perpetuates racist attitudes. Critics argue that it reinforces a transactional relationship between the donor and child, with the donor essentially choosing a brown or black child from a photograph, rather than genuinely engaging with the community.
Ghazi notes that the majority of ActionAid's supporters are white and relatively well-off individuals, which creates a power imbalance in the sponsorship model. "We're in the process of transformation until 2028," she said, outlining plans to transform systems, funding models, and procurement processes to better reflect community voices and realities.
The new approach aims to empower grassroots groups on the ground to have more control over how they spend funds. ActionAid is also launching a fund specifically for women's rights groups facing attacks globally, marking a significant shift towards solidarity and justice-driven fundraising.
However, not everyone shares this optimism. Independent researcher Themrise Khan argues that the entire concept of sponsoring children from Africa or Asia should be abandoned altogether, citing "white saviourism" as a major problem. She believes that better solutions lie in supporting nations' own social welfare systems, education, healthcare, and state provision rather than relying on charitable handouts.
As ActionAid embarks on this transformative journey, it remains to be seen whether the organisation will successfully shift its focus from sympathy towards solidarity, or if the old paternalistic model will continue to hold sway.
I think some ppl need 2 chill out & understand that charity isn't about handpicking a poor kid 4 sponsorship, it's about real people coming 2gether 2 make a diff 
The whole white saviourism thing is just a cop-out, if u r gonna criticise the model, be prepared 2 offer ur own solutions, not just say "abandon it" without any substance 
ActionAid's tryin 2 do things differently & I think they should get some credit 4 that 
. If we're gonna change the game, we need to listen more than we speak 
.
! I mean, who doesn't love a good partnership over sympathy, right? 
It's time for us as donors to step up our game and support communities in a more meaningful way, not just by handing out cash like it's candy 
. The new co-CEOs are on the right track with their "decolonisation" plan, and I'm all about empowering grassroots groups to take control of their own development 
.
. We can't just be sending aid without thinking about the systemic issues that created poverty in the first place 
I guess only time will tell if ActionAid's new plan will stick and make a real difference 
.
, and I get why they wanna shift the focus from sympathy to partnership. But at the same time, I'm curious to see if it'll be more than just a PR stunt 
. What if the community voices aren't really heard? What if it's all just a fancy new name for the old model 
. The whole 'choosing' a child to sponsor can come across as really condescending and like we're trying to save them from poverty 
. It's all about creating this power imbalance, where our money basically says "we care" instead of actually supporting the community that needs it 
. Will they find a way to make solidarity feel less like a con and more like a real partnership? 
I'm thinking, what's wrong with just sending some money to help out a kid in need? It feels like we're being too complicated about this sponsorship thing... 
Or is it just about trusting in those systems more or something? I'm not sure...
. Maybe ActionAid's new approach is exactly what it needs – a bit of shaking up to make things more inclusive and effective. We'll see how it plays out, but I'm keeping an eye on this one 
It's like, hello, we're not even making a real effort here! These new execs are trying to do the right thing, but it feels like they're still stuck in the same old mindset. I mean, "decolonizing" is all well and good, but what does that even look like in practice? Are they just going to give more money to the same old groups we've always supported? 
It's like, I'm so tired of charities trying to justify their existence. We need change, but it can't come at the expense of our own values and principles! 
That's some real solidarity right there. But let's not forget that the root of all this is our own privilege and lack of understanding 
It's time for us to listen to and learn from communities themselves, rather than just speaking over them. Fingers crossed that ActionAid can make some real progress! 
. But on the other hand, what's wrong with showing empathy and compassion? Can't we find ways to make it work that don't feel so... transactional? 
. It's like how my kid's school is trying to get more involved in our community, not just sending volunteers over here to "help" 
That sounds kinda harsh. And don't get me wrong, ActionAid needs to change its ways, but completely scrapping it might not be the solution... I think they're on the right track by trying to create a more community-led approach. But at the same time, I'm not convinced that this new "partnership" model will actually work... I mean, don't people still want to choose which child they support? 
It's all a bit confusing, isn't it? 
... we can't just swoop in and try to "help" without actually listening to the people who need help. It's time for us to take a step back and let communities lead the way. ActionAid is taking some good steps, but it's going to be a long time before I'm convinced they've truly decolonised their approach 
. By prioritizing community-led initiatives and supporting nations' own social welfare systems, we might be able to create more sustainable and equitable solutions 
, can't believe they're still using the classic "pick-a-child" model 
. I mean, come on, that's basically just perpetuating white saviourism 
.
.