Royals and Charity Work - Quality and Quantity

[sylla]

I always wince a little when people call it charity "work". Do any of the posters know if Royals do more than make an appearance? Something that could actually be called work? An argument is always made that they bring about "awareness". But, let's be honest, who amongst us has not heard of aids, poverty, brain tumors etc etc.?

Haakon and M-M were in toronto for an aids conference. The money that was spent on that trip (first-class flight, luxury accomodations, body guards...) could have kept an aids hospital or orphanage well-stocked with needed supplies for months!!! I think these causes and charity works are more to make the royals look good and compassionate than to actually fulfill a real need.

 

[Winnie]

sylla, I do certainly agree with you that many times all the travel expenses you sited should be spent on the charity. I also believe that "charity begins at home" and ones own country should be taken care of first. I also don't like the "charity work" phrase whereas a volunteer is kinder. I believe that anyone that volunteers either his time, money or prayers to his personal charity is doing good.

A person does not have to leave their own country to make a statement. Satellite hook ups, internet connections and large screens are used everyday in very important meetings all over the corporate world -- so much cheaper and immediate gratification.

Like all of us, the royals tend to overspend on things that they want to -- including travel -- when it actually isn't needed in the overall scheme of things.

 

[Lilla]

sylla, I do certainly agree with you that many times all the travel expenses you sited should be spent on the charity. I also believe that "charity begins at home" and ones own country should be taken care of first. I also don't like the "charity work" phrase whereas a volunteer is kinder. I believe that anyone that volunteers either his time, money or prayers to his personal charity is doing good.

A person does not have to leave their own country to make a statement. Satellite hook ups, internet connections and large screens are used everyday in very important meetings all over the corporate world -- so much cheaper and immediate gratification.

Like all of us, the royals tend to overspend on things that they want to -- including travel -- when it actually isn't needed in the overall scheme of things.

It would be very nice if all traveling-expences could go to charity instead. But sometimes making money takes spending money. If a royal person - or a celebrity for that sake - shall attract the people and firms who has got the big money and can afford to donate large sums, it has do be done with a cirtain stile.

When it comes to travelling to other countries I think this can do a lot of good. Prince Joachim is patron of CARE Denmark and has primarily managed to draw the attention to this organisation by visiting the people in need - in the countries where they live. The same goes for Countess Alexandra when she was a princess.

And me - well unfurturnatly I am not one of those people with the big money so I have to do my charity by the means available for the likes of me. I donate a sum monthly to SOS Kinderdorfen and to the red cross. Besides from that I donate sumes to homless people, cancerresearch and animal welfare - but not on a regular basis.

 

[norwegianne]

I think that no matter if they do it at home or abroad - too much, or too little - appearance or getting their hands dirty - the important thing is that they do something.

As Lilla mentioned, famous people (royals or non-royals) are good for drawing attention to causes. Some of the causes we might know about even if they didn't do it, others might be more obscure. For example, I had clearly heard about Aids prior to Mette-Marit's engagement of the subject, but I still find the stories from her trips abroad interesting, and a reminder that not everybody is as fortunate as myself. On the other hand I had never heard of Care Denmark before Prince Joachim went on his trip to Cambodia, but I've since then done some research on the organization, and I've become interested in it.

The Norwegian royals are also frequently the patrons of the charity telethons in Norway, which also is one way to get the attention.

Similarly, Märtha Louise's trip to Madagascar in May for Unicef, helped put focus on the illiteracy problem in that country.

In addition to appearing at events, you also have the Dutch royals, who partake in Make a Difference day, where they volunteer for a charity for a day. An interesting concept.

There's also various royal foundations, that hands out money to various charities. EG. The Norwegian couple's humanitarian fund have given money to charities and projects both in Norway and abroad.

During my teens, we used to have solidarity projects at school where we would work one day a year, instead of going to school, to make money for various charities. Unfortunately, I have to admit that since leaving school (and my parents' house) and starting a "career" as a student, I've become less good at donating sums for the global charities. Instead I've been volunteering in various capacities in my local area, where it might be needed.

 

[wyattmtthws]

I know exactly how everyone feels. And I agree with those comments, especially to de4855.

Charity work, perhaps, is one of the Royal responsibilities. Anyone, even a royalty, could be selfish enough but still have to do charity work because it is something that his/her people has to look up to with them...

But there is a difference between someone doing a responsibility and someone doing with sincerity. And I'm glad Mary and some royalty like her has been doing it, not only because it is a responsibility, but mainly because they are happy and satisfied doing it sincerely...for the love. de4855 has made her point well...very well said.

 

[marmi]

There seems to be so much made of the royals and the charity work they do, or lack of it according to some that feel they are not doing enough.

This is similar to the discussion of whether the royals do enough work at all. And I still feel that this is one of the facets of royalty that we will never be able to specifically 'quantify'. It does lead to some interesting discussions though

In addition to appearing at events, you also have the Dutch royals, who partake in Make a Difference day, where they volunteer for a charity for a day. An interesting concept.

...

During my teens, we used to have solidarity projects at school where we would work one day a year, instead of going to school, to make money for various charities...

I have always liked the "Make a difference day" because it provides a singular opportunity to bring attention a large number of varied charities or causes at the same time. I also like the rather idyllic thought that it is possible that a royal will be 'struck' by their cause of the day, and take it further...

My school ran a similar program, it also had other opportunities to give to charity: opportunities for senior students to sell poppies, daffodils for cancer to day etc; we also wore a uniform to school every day, but about 8 times a year we were able to wear 'mufti' to school, provided that we made a gold coin donation and 50% of this money was spent on a project for the students, and the rest went to charity.

 

[mamoon]

Royals have the unique opportunity to bring attention to charities. Princess Diana was a stellar example of this. Just her presence at an event generated huge interest and media attention.

While I doubt royals do the "nuts and bolts" work for their chosen charities, their contribution is very valuable. Those of us who work behind the scenes with charities are grateful for positive attention brought to them. Any thing to help those causes we're passionate about is a good thing.

Were I a royal, I would be thrilled with the chance to spend my days doing charity work. Spending my days doing something I loved, rather than having to make time for it, would be a joy.

 

[principessa]

Royals doing social charity

Which royals are engaged in charity for old people, for children, for unemployed people and so on?

 

[Lovely Lady]

which one matters the most? Quality or Quanity of Charities

Hello Everyone,

I just joined The Royal Forums yesterday. I stumbled across it earlier ago in the springtime this year, and was very intrigued by its wealth of historical information, it contains. Instantly I fell in love with it (I am a History Geek.) I finally decided to join and I am really glad I did!

I have noticed that one of the many things that royals do is charity work.
They are able to draw attention to a certain charity, inspiring others to support it like they themselves are doing.

Princess Anne is called a work horse for doing so many engagements a year. While she is well respected for it, how much of herself is she actually contributing to each charity she is a patron of? Is it good for a member of the royal family to contribute to so many charities Individually?

The late Diana Princess of Wales, after her divorce, only had maybe five or six charities she supported. Yet some say she actually made a greater impact on each of them, because there was only a select few, and she had more time to devote each Charity. Than before when she had a 100+ during her marriage.

My Question is... What matters the most quality or quantity?

Quantity, as in becoming a patron of a greater number of charities

or

Quality, as in being able to have a smaller amount of charities, to devote a greater amount of time, energy and, effort to each one.

I would love to hear what you think.

 

[roseroyal]

I think quality for sure. More personal that way. This is a big change of heart for I used to think quantity .
I would rather have a few William and Kate engagements where they really share their people skills , their qualities, and do whatever needs to be done to show those- even if it means going outside protocol- and really truly make a difference to the lives of the people they meet- then lots of " mere royal appearances" for my sake to admire the Duchess's new evening gown.
I guess Iv'e changed my mind about what matters.

 

[nascarlucy]

I would think that you could have a few charity that you devote yourself to and this would do more good than being involved in 20 charities and not having the time to contribute you're time to all of them. The quality is more important than the quantity.

 

[hernameispekka]

Hmm.. I would think for the average person quality obviously. A royal is a little different. Yes, they can make a difference on the small scale with the people, but what they bring that most can't is exposure so I think they have the need for a bit more quantity than the average person but still not so much so they just are fleeting and get muddled. So many that they can give a wide accknowledgement but so few that the names actually gets remembered.

 

[Queen Camilla]

It depends on the person. Princess Anne is a workhorse who liked to keep busy.

Diana didn't like to work.

Princess Anne starts her work day before 8am and it ends after midnight.

Diana threw temper tantrums if her staff scheduled her for anything before 11am, she rarely worked past 4pm.

Princess Anne knows her charities inside and out. She writes her own speeches.

Diana had her staff write her speeches.

Clearly Princess Anne is dedicated to her charities.

Diana only used her charities for photo ops.

 

[Queen Camilla]

Just because a person has only 5 charities does not make them more dedicated.

A person who visits and support their charities regularly is more dedicated than someone who only makes a grand entrance once or twice a year.

All of Princess Anne's charities speak highly of her.

 

[royal rob]

This is a interesting topic as at the moment my family is trying to raise money for the Murdoch Childrens research institute for research into a condition my grandson has. Any media coverage helps. So I think with royals I would have to say the more charities they could help the better. It's great when they get really involved with a cause but over all I would say quantity


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[roseroyal]

First off- let me say- I hope your grandson gets better. I really do. But I have to disagree with you.( And I used to be of the same opinion you are.) I know Royals can raise a lot of funds. In the case of your grandson vital funds of great importance. So I understand as best as I'm able where you're coming from.But what's more important- hugs, smiles, and support or $?
I'm sorry, but I think hugs, smiles and support are more important than $. Say the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge became Patrons of the Murdoch Children's Research Institute. Would you want patrons who really got to know the kids, and were personally involved, got to really know your grandson, doled out smiles and hugs, or just people who turned up at a gala to raise lots of $, but didn't really care about the kids? I did an earlier draft of this, and said this point so much more clearly- but can't remember what I said- but hopefully my point and opinion will come across
I want to touch back on my change of heart- that I had about this topic.
What changed my mind?

• Robert Hardy
• Daria
• The biggest reason I cannot say- I have to keep in my heart for now.

And the slow realization that this...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...anniversary-Naomi-House-Childrens-Hospice.htm
And this...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...ridge-comforts-grieving-families-Norfolk.html

And this-

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...ge-goes-solo-tea-party-childrens-hospice.html

And this-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...s-dress-mother-Carole-Middleton-borrowed.html
And this-
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...g-with-terminally-766210#.T2dk_NaxMoM.twitter

Let us not forget the Duke-
And this-
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/09/29/article-2043150-0E25E3E800000578-561_634x730.jpg
And this-
http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/FTA3...isits+Lincolnshire/HPE9nCjgyMa/Prince+William
http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/FTA3...Visits+Lincolnshire/VLpyhLei1ZP/Darren+Pearty
And this-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...children-meeting-families-hospice-Sydney.html
And this-

http://www.zimbio.com/photos/Prince+William/Child+Bereavement+UK+Receives+Royal+Visit/sXFw6EKOtBf
And this-


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...ng-gift_n_3915196.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular
Matter so much more in life than -
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...orous-gold-opulent-state-dinner-Malaysia.html


That?

 

[Osipi]

I can only speak for the royals I most follow which is the British and what I see and read about when it comes to doing charity work and having patronages and foundations.

It may sound odd but I do think its possible to have both quality and quantity. It is possible to be there for the hugs, the smiles and the support which in more cases than not, generates awareness, interest and the all important donations which keeps the organization up and running.

A friend of mine once told me that one of the most important words to remember when working with teams of people for a specific goal is the word "delegate".

When it comes to the British royals and what they do, we only have to look to what has been accomplished through The Prince's Trust and with The Royal Foundation of The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry to see a somewhat new trend going into the future. For example, in the area of conservation, we've seen United for Wildlife being formed which isn't solely an endeavor by Will, Kate or Harry but all three of them along with various other organizations working together towards a common goal. We've seen inroads made into awareness of several organizations focused on youth such as hospice, addiction and bullying. I've seen several of these organizations team up together for events and such. Instead of a royal penciling in a date to go and cut a ribbon or unveil a plaque, we are seeing royals getting not only involved themselves and getting down and dirty and doing the footwork but also getting organizations to work together and sometimes even as a global effort.

When looking for something small in a very large field, canvassing the area with a human chain accomplishes much more than one solitary person searching alone.

 

[Mirabel]

This is a interesting topic as at the moment my family is trying to raise money for the Murdoch Childrens research institute for research into a condition my grandson has. Any media coverage helps. So I think with royals I would have to say the more charities they could help the better. It's great when they get really involved with a cause but over all I would say quantity


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

I tend to agree.
There are other people who can do the day-to-day work; the royals get attention.
They involve others who will donate time and money expressly in order to attend the same events.

 

[roseroyal]

Ah yes, there are others, but do they have the same skills? No. For example, I think William and Kate's people skills are one in a million.

 

[Daria_S]

I think I will always choose quality over quantity. What makes William, and Catherine so appealing, is the fact that they're very hands-on, especially when it comes to children. I would rather see them do a few engagements that are very involved, rather than see them endlessly cutting ribbons, giving out a donation, or attending galas. They bring joy wherever they go, and it's so easy to see that they're truly sincere. They care about their charities, and want to be personally acquainted with those that benefit from them. We're this couple to have a huge slew of patronage system, the personal touch may not be possible. They have the right approach, and that's why it's a pleasure to see this duo in action.


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community mobile app

 

[Princess Pris]

Quantity >>>>>>>>>>>>> Quality

William and Kate spent 2-3 hours? at the NBA game and raised $1 million for Wildlife. It would take me decades to be able to raise what they did in one night.

Royals main skill/talent/ability whatever you want to call it, is the attention that they bring. It would be completely inefficient and a waste for royals to spend 40 hours a week working with one charity doing a job that anyone can do when in that same time they can do what very few can, raise money and attention for many different charities.

 

[Iluvbertie]

William and Kate spend about an hour at a charity event every two to three months - so hardly hands on or that concerned. One of the comments that I heard a lot while I was in London was exactly that - that they aren't really interested in any charity or issue and that they don't spend all that long on their visits either. It was the one constant theme from both supporters and opponents alike - how little they do for their charities in terms of number of visits and actual time spent there when they do decide to visit.


Anne spends that much two to three times a week so is able to do both the hands-on visits and the quantity without compromising either.


Sadly most of Anne's visits don't get the coverage - and nor does anyone outside of William and Kate - which suggests that having a royal as a patron isn't all that important in raising the profile of the charity as there isn't the press/media coverage at all.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

It are unknown royals who deliver quality. Princess Mabel of Orange-Nassau who co-founded War Child, who worked for the European Council for Peace on the Balkans (with Simon Wiesenthal, Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, Margaret Thatcher, etc.), who was director of the Brussels office of the Open Society Institute, who was co-founder and director of The Elders (former Nobel Laureates and Elder Statesmen like Nelson Mandela, Jimmy Carter, Desmond Tutu, Kofi Annan, etc.), now co-founder and Chair of Girls, Not Brides (an UN global partnership to fight enforced marriages of minor children). For two decades, already before her entrance in a royal family, she has fought for her ideals with enormous zest and clever use of her immense network.

 

[Daria_S]

William and Kate spend about an hour at a charity event every two to three months - so hardly hands on or that concerned. One of the comments that I heard a lot while I was in London was exactly that - that they aren't really interested in any charity or issue and that they don't spend all that long on their visits either. It was the one constant theme from both supporters and opponents alike - how little they do for their charities in terms of number of visits and actual time spent there when they do decide to visit.


Anne spends that much two to three times a week so is able to do both the hands-on visits and the quantity without compromising either.


Sadly most of Anne's visits don't get the coverage - and nor does anyone outside of William and Kate - which suggests that having a royal as a patron isn't all that important in raising the profile of the charity as there isn't the press/media coverage at all.

What about all the visits they make in private, without the press? Does that count for anything, or are we giving credit to the deeds that are reported? I remember reading in one one of the discussion threads in their section that both, William, and Catherine have made private visits to their charities, and it was reported on after the fact, to avoid unnecessary pre coverage. To me, that says a lot. Let's also remember that they have kept in touch with several families they've met, wrote letters to express their condolences after a child they've visited passed on, or needed encouragement because of medical procedure that were taxing. They appear to appreciate the letters and pictures sent to them by schoolchildren to congratulate them on the births of their children. To me, these things say a lot more about their characters, and how much they want to make a difference.



Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community mobile app

 

[Iluvbertie]

If they wanted to 'make a difference' they would work for their charities instead of the two or three visits a year. The visits behind the scenes are hardly 'raising the profile' if they occur at all as if they aren't reported then they aren't doing anything for the profile. Most of the letters I have seen have been typed with a signature. Diana also wrote letters - but only have a lot of urging from her staff - she had to be made to work and her son and daughter-in-law are following their lead. Notice how often they do a few engagements AFTER there is a negative story in the press - that is noticed by a lot of people - that the engagements are done to counter negative PR.

 

[Skippyboo]

Can't it be argued that if a royal attends a event for one of their charities and it isn't covered by anyone that doesn't raise the charity profile either? But the people there appreciated that the Royal came.

William sent the family of the nurse who committed suicide when Kate was sick with George, a hand written letter from Anglesey dated Jan 1 2013 . The family told the press about it and there was a picture of the letter.

I just googled image searched letter from Prince William, then Princess Anne, then Prince Philip. The images from the last 15 years when computers are a common thing are basically the same- majority of it is typed with ink name and signature. There are letters from William, Anne and Philip in the same format. With modern computers, it much easier to save correspondence electronically then in a file cabinet of paper.

The charity work done by all the royals are good things. Even private visits. We seen William make several private visits to Centrepoint. The homeless teenager may feel more comfortable talking to William about his or her situation without a horde of cameras there. The same with the family of a dying child in an EACH hospice with Kate. The charity didn't get the coverage immediately from the visit but the people they talked to probably felt more comfortable.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Honeybees]

The Duchess of Kent secretly done charity work week in and week out for years. Well done her. Other royals raise the profile of charities and trust me we need it and yes week in and week out I do voluntary work for charities. Anything that keeps a charity in the public eye and consciousness is excellent in my humble opinion.

 

[Daria_S]

Ah yes, there are others, but do they have the same skills? No. For example, I think William and Kate's people skills are one in a million.

I'm just seeing this now, but I absolutely agree; William, and Catherine have people skills I could only dream of. I don't care what anyone says, watching them with children is heart-warming, and never fails to put a smile to my face, and makes me want to be a better teacher, because let me tell you, to have a child basically throw him/herself at you, because you made his/her life is the best gift ever. Better than public approval, I would imagine too.

Can't it be argued that if a royal attends a event for one of their charities and it isn't covered by anyone that doesn't raise the charity profile either? But the people there appreciated that the Royal came.

William sent the family of the nurse who committed suicide when Kate was sick with George, a hand written letter from Anglesey dated Jan 1 2013 . The family told the press about it and there was a picture of the letter.

I just googled image searched letter from Prince William, then Princess Anne, then Prince Philip. The images from the last 15 years when computers are a common thing are basically the same- majority of it is typed with ink name and signature. There are letters from William, Anne and Philip in the same format. With modern computers, it much easier to save correspondence electronically then in a file cabinet of paper.

The charity work done by all the royals are good things. Even private visits. We seen William make several private visits to Centrepoint. The homeless teenager may feel more comfortable talking to William about his or her situation with a horde of cameras there. The same with the family of a dying child in an EACH hospice with Kate. The charity didn't get the coverage immediately from the visit but the people they talked to probably felt more comfortable.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

You're right, it's all about raising awareness, so TV cameras/newspaper crews are not necessary for that. I've seen pictures of the letters too, and the way they do it makes sense, not to mention that not everyone can read other people's handwriting. I have a visual impairment, and reading other people's cursive is a bear, because it looks too cluttered. I much prefer a letter that I could read, rather than one I could just look at, and wonder, what in Heaven's name did the person tell me. I'd imagine very few people that get help from Centrepoint, and EAACH would appreciate too much attention from the press. The stories these people share are more often than not extremely personal. It's a lot easier to talk to a person when it's just you and the other party, rather you, the person you're speaking with, AND a TV camera. It also allows for more freedom to show emotion, without thinking 'oh, will that be on camera, and will I get an earful from my PR people for shedding a tear, or losing composure?'. Who needs that? It only interferes with what's important, and that is helping people, and I'm a firm believer in their desire to do just that.

The Duchess of Kent secretly done charity work week in and week out for years. Well done her. Other royals raise the profile of charities and trust me we need it and yes week in and week out I do voluntary work for charities. Anything that keeps a charity in the public eye and consciousness is excellent in my humble opinion.

I didn't know this about the Duchess of Kent. Like I said, I prefer to hear about the private visits, because they were done without the usual hullaballoo that surrounds any event that the Cambridges attend, because I'm sure more gets done then. Not everything has to be public. Not everyone is eager to see their faces on front page of the newspaper just to get approval from members of the public that will complain about everything.

 

[Iluvbertie]

IF the point of a royal patron is to 'raise the profile' of the organization then there needs to be media coverage - otherwise there is no 'raising of the profile.'


If the point is to comfort people - that is a different scenario.


I have never heard a claim that Anne or Philip personally wrote to anyone the way we hear with William and Kate but as has been pointed out - they simply sign their names to pre-printed letters and who knows who writes those letters?

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

The ultimate charity of course is when a royal completely leves his/her own role and joins volunteers to highlight the importance of a charity, to improve awareness, for an example the annual NL Does! day:

The Queen of the Netherlands washing dogs in an asylum

The Queen of the Netherlands painting on a Childrens' Farm

The King of the Netherlands digging a hole in a local park

Princess Laurentien, Countess Eloïse and Count Claus-Casimir clean in a mediaeval tower

Imagine Queen Elizabeth II washing dogs or Prince Charles painting in a playroom, then you can imagine how important the effect of this participation is for awareness about volunteer work. These examples prove that "showing some commitment", even it is only for a couple of hours, works wonders for such a charity. After seeing the Queen of the Netherlands washing dogs, in all asylums the telephones and e-mail boxes are overworking with all the messages to join in volunteer work.