Am I the only grinch who looks at a number this big and wishes some of it was used to pay for children's medications that their parents can't afford or some other patient care? It's very noble to want to reduce pain and suffering but I care more about saving lives or improving quality of life long-term.
I doubt it, but we're talking about gamers here. They are being inspired to give because it fits in with their hobby and there's a giant progress bar that they can do their part to bump a little higher every year. This is not to say that their charitable impulses are so narrow in scope and that they don't care about medicine and the like -- and I would wager that many donate to multiple charities, some of which might even do what you say -- but rather that this is a particularly inspiring charity that caters to community tendencies.
Child's Play started quite small, and to be frank, $3M is still a relatively small sum of money, particularly when you consider the number of hospitals over which it is distributed. However, it is consistently growing, and it might make sense to widen its scope, at some point. I would personally organize it like an RPG, and you can dump points (Earth monies) into games, medicine, etc. It would be consistent with the leveling impulse which I think Child's Play is harnessing, as well as giving people the option to decide among games and medicine and whatever other goals might be presented. I think you would see a fair bit redirected toward medicine, as people who are given the choice are obviously going to recognize that it is an important goal as well, but it wouldn't drive away people attracted to Child's Play for what it is now.
Sure that would be nice, but the penny-arcade guys have worked very hard to create a charity organization of this size. I would guess that many of the people who donate to child's play wouldn't have donated that money elsewhere.
People often donate to charities they can relate to, and this is opportunity to do good that people who play games can understand. I would argue that it's certainly a more charitable use of the money than if the individual who donated were to simply buy a game for themselves.
Sometimes something as simple as a stuffed animal can ease the pain and suffering a lot more for a longer period than medication.
I'm not questioning the effectiveness of modern medicine by any means, and myself would rather donate for active treatments but a child with a teddy bear to hug/hold/squeeze will likely feel a tiny bit better than one with nothing when faced with pain, or loneliness for that matter.
Edit: I don't really have any evidence to back up my first statement other than a few anecdotes and personal experiences.
When Child's Play was much smaller, there was no question: Tens of thousands of dollars, hundreds of thousands, donated to give kids going through the difficult and confusing process of childhood hospitalization something fun and engaging to do, is a wonderful thing. But I wonder at what scale the social good of Child's Play starts to experience diminishing returns.
Maybe it's time for Penny Arcade to look into diversifying next year. The good will is thankfully not in short supply – making it go the furthest is now their greatest challenge.
I think as a Charity you have to focus on one specific concern. If you start down the route of diversifying how do you measure when to stop and how much to you split between the different ventures?
There are already many charities and government programs to do just that.
For example, in 2010 Seattle Children's Hospital took in $10.7 million in donations. That is one hospital in one city in one year, and it's more than what Child's Play has raised in total since 2003. I think it's fair to say that that aspect of charitable giving is pretty well covered and it's safe for Child's Play to keep its focus on making childrens' stays in the hospital more bearable.
I see it this way too. There's no way Child's Play is making people as happy, per dollar spent, as a good externally evaluated third world medical charity like the Against Malaria Foundation [1]. It's really good people are being so generous, but if their values are at all like mine they could be doing so much more with a charity taking a different approach.
[+] [-] mattmanser|14 years ago|reply
For a bit more context.
[+] [-] earnubs|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] peterwwillis|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] effigies|14 years ago|reply
Child's Play started quite small, and to be frank, $3M is still a relatively small sum of money, particularly when you consider the number of hospitals over which it is distributed. However, it is consistently growing, and it might make sense to widen its scope, at some point. I would personally organize it like an RPG, and you can dump points (Earth monies) into games, medicine, etc. It would be consistent with the leveling impulse which I think Child's Play is harnessing, as well as giving people the option to decide among games and medicine and whatever other goals might be presented. I think you would see a fair bit redirected toward medicine, as people who are given the choice are obviously going to recognize that it is an important goal as well, but it wouldn't drive away people attracted to Child's Play for what it is now.
[+] [-] dageshi|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Wilduck|14 years ago|reply
People often donate to charities they can relate to, and this is opportunity to do good that people who play games can understand. I would argue that it's certainly a more charitable use of the money than if the individual who donated were to simply buy a game for themselves.
[+] [-] shazamjad|14 years ago|reply
I'm not questioning the effectiveness of modern medicine by any means, and myself would rather donate for active treatments but a child with a teddy bear to hug/hold/squeeze will likely feel a tiny bit better than one with nothing when faced with pain, or loneliness for that matter.
Edit: I don't really have any evidence to back up my first statement other than a few anecdotes and personal experiences.
[+] [-] mortenjorck|14 years ago|reply
When Child's Play was much smaller, there was no question: Tens of thousands of dollars, hundreds of thousands, donated to give kids going through the difficult and confusing process of childhood hospitalization something fun and engaging to do, is a wonderful thing. But I wonder at what scale the social good of Child's Play starts to experience diminishing returns.
Maybe it's time for Penny Arcade to look into diversifying next year. The good will is thankfully not in short supply – making it go the furthest is now their greatest challenge.
[+] [-] bendoerr|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] InclinedPlane|14 years ago|reply
For example, in 2010 Seattle Children's Hospital took in $10.7 million in donations. That is one hospital in one city in one year, and it's more than what Child's Play has raised in total since 2003. I think it's fair to say that that aspect of charitable giving is pretty well covered and it's safe for Child's Play to keep its focus on making childrens' stays in the hospital more bearable.
[+] [-] cbr|14 years ago|reply
[1] http://givewell.org/international/top-charities/AMF