Saint Teresa

[Bubbles]

Thinking back to being involved in reviewing NHS services (in the bad old days pre-retirement) there can be instances of caring even within a failing service - but where 'not fit for purpose' applies, as seems to be the case here, then there can be no excuses made.

I presume the RCC hierarchy see her as PR fodder for the faithful, hence this recent nonsense.

IMO  the NHS is a wonderful caring concept, long may it continue.

It may have faults, it may not be perfect, but it still helps those who have a need.

I'm happy my taxes help support such a thing 

[Nearly Sane]

IMO  the NHS is a wonderful caring concept, long may it continue.

It may have faults, it may not be perfect, but it still helps those who have a need.

I'm happy my taxes help support such a thing 

which completely ignored the point made in Gordon's post

[Bubbles]

I think it's been pointed out that they refuse to publish their accounts.   They are supposed to receive many millions in donations, but can't afford basic drugs?

All publically funded charities should have to publish their accounts IMO.

Along with their aims and goals, so people know what they are donating to

IMO that's only fair.

[Bubbles]

which completely ignored the point made in Gordon's post

Not really M T charity is not functioning in a British NHS mode

[Nearly Sane]

Not really M T charity is not functioning in a British NHS mode

which is irrelevant to the point about systemic failure. Charity cannot be judged when it does not support it's aims as OK simply for being charity.

[Gordon]

IMO  the NHS is a wonderful caring concept, long may it continue.

It may have faults, it may not be perfect, but it still helps those who have a need.

I'm happy my taxes help support such a thing 

So - you are happy to fund a failing service as opposed to rectifying the failings: that is how taxes are wasted.

[Bubbles]

which is irrelevant to the point about systemic failure. Charity cannot be judged when it does not support it's aims as OK simply for being charity.

I think this is a misunderstanding about aims

Charity has many purposes, some you might not agree with.

Some might consider it gave some people a chance to save themselves.

Saving people has more than one interpretation.

[Bubbles]

So - you are happy to fund a failing service as opposed to rectifying the failings: that is how taxes are wasted.

No I'm saying the original concept of the NHS  is wonderful.

I'm grateful for that.

[Nearly Sane]

I think this is a misunderstanding about aims

Charity has many purposes, some you might not agree with.

Some might consider it gave some people a chance to save themselves.

Saving people has more than one interpretation.

so what were the aims of MT's charity and how would you show it met them?

[Nearly Sane]

No I'm saying the original concept is wonderful.

I'm grateful for that.

and again ignoring if those aims are achieved.

[Bubbles]

so what were the aims of MT's charity and how would you show it met them?

At a guess, I'd say that her aims were to allow the very poorest of people, who no one else cared about ( think the Good Samaritan) to die with dignity and turn to Christ.

I think her actions embody a cross between Christ saying giving up everything for the kingdom of heaven, is giving up everything, and the poor will always be with us.

I don't see it that way, but can see they have a different set of values to me, in their eyes they are meeting it.

There is an argument that non of us values the life of a child over our own personal wealth. This includes me.

[Bubbles]

and again ignoring if those aims are achieved.

No, I'm just grateful for it.

It was a
Judgement in in my own diagnosis of cancer, that a life saving operation was even considered.

I am just aware that in another country like the states my diagnoses could have bankrupted my family.

[Nearly Sane]

At a guess, I'd say that her aims were to allow the very poorest of people, who no one else cared about ( think the Good Samaritan) to die with dignity and turn to Christ.

I think her actions embody a cross between Christ saying giving up everything for the kingdom of heaven, is giving up everything, and the poor will always be with us.

I don't see it that way, but can see they have a different set of values to me, in their eyes they are meeting it.

There is an argument that non of us values the life of a child over our own personal wealth. This includes me.

so you can neither describe the aims, or how it met them. And you seem to accept that even if the aims were something you disagreed with they would somehow be worth while.

[Gordon]

No I'm saying the original concept of the NHS  is wonderful.

I'm grateful for that.

Super - but why would we accept lesser very basic standards when it comes to overseas charities.

It may be that resources vary, but issues such as providing effective analgesia and sterilsation of instruments is very basic stuff (and the apparent need to re-use IV kits is itself an issue): fail on these issues and 'not fit for purpose' applies.   

[Nearly Sane]

No, I'm just grateful for it.

It was a
Judgement in in my own diagnosis of cancer.

I am just aware that in another country like the states my diagnoses could have bankrupted my family.

but if it fails the aims you seem to want to ignore that. Say you had died because it failed in the aims and that failure was systemic, does someone saying bp 'I loved cancer' really get around that?

[Bubbles]

so you can neither describe the aims, or how it met them. And you seem to accept that even if the aims were something you disagreed with they would somehow be worth while.

No I just described the aims, you failed to understand them.

[Bubbles]

Super - but why would we accept lesser very basic standards when it comes to overseas charities.

It may be that resources vary, but issues such as providing effective analgesia and sterilsation of instruments is very basic stuff (and the apparent need to re-use IV kits is itself an issue): fail on these issues and 'not fit for purpose' applies.

We shouldn't

But charities abroad don't come with our assumptions. Especially religious ones.

That's up to us to sort.

[Bubbles]

so you can neither describe the aims, or how it met them. And you seem to accept that even if the aims were something you disagreed with they would somehow be worth while.

Not exactly.

I have no control other than the things I choose to donate too.

Plus those charities are operating under values that are not mine. ( as in cultural and societal norms )

It comes down to what you think is the greatest good.

[Nearly Sane]

No I just described the aims, you failed to understand them.

No, you as you stated 'guessed', hence your use of the words 'at a guess',  about  the aims and still couldn't show how what happened met your guess

[Bubbles]

No, you as you stated 'guessed', hence your use of the words 'at a guess',  about  the aims and still couldn't show how what happened met your guess

IMO my guess is more accurate than your condemnation of standards that don't meet your expectations.

The world doesn't meet your expectations.

[Nearly Sane]

IMO my guess is more accurate than your condemnation of standards that don't meet your expectations.

The world doesn't meet your expectations.

What does that mean? What are 'my expectations'? Are you off doing your guessing thing again? And then guessing that your guess might be right?

[Gordon]

We shouldn't

But charities abroad don't come with our assumptions. Especially religious ones.

That's up to us to sort.

Bearing mind the funding they've had, and taking into account the reports of visiting experts (such as Fox), what bits of inadequate analgesia and sterilisation of equipment equating to 'not fit for purpose' are you having a problem with?   

[ProfessorDavey]

No, the money went directly to Mother Teresa's mission and was used to fund it.  It is an expensive business to keep going and those who work there don't want to turn anyone away. 

Though the nuns and helpers/carers do not receive a salary, they still have to be housed and fed and be kept as healthy as possible otherwise they can't do the job.

I don't think that's true - I think their 'running costs' would be astonishingly low. Firstly because there are no salary cost - they are volunteers as you mention. But also their premises costs would be minuscule given where they set up - in poor parts of cities in developing countries. And finally their ethos is that the sister are expected to live in a level of poverty similar to the people they cater for. So the basic costs for housing and feeding etc would be tiny.

So here is an organisation with income in the tens of millions, next to no outgoing costs and yet they aren't spending on diagnostic costs, proper pain relief, antibiotics, even paper!!!! Not because they can't afford it, but because they choose not to.

So the great unanswered question is where does all the money go. So it is either being siphoned off elsewhere (possible) or merely hoarded. We don't know for sure as they keep their finances secret. But there are some reports (particularly form fund raising in the USA) that the latter is true. Indeed I've read accounts of people working for the organisation she reported expensive items donated (perhaps as legacy) which were simply stored - not sold to generate income for use.

All very, very odd.

[Sriram]

Many people just seem to have got into the habit of being skeptical and scornful. Compulsive disorder almost. 

St.Teresa has done remarkable things that none of us here  would even thing of doing. She is considered a saint because she showed love and care to people (lepers) who no one (even many doctors) would even touch. She literally picked them up from the streets and gave them some dignity and care.

You people are going on and no about injections and needles.  She gave them whatever care was available locally at that time. Five star treatment was never the option. Even today in India and many other poorer countries, over crowded hospitals in rural areas and even urban areas probably run with the same kind of very basic care.

[Bubbles]

Many people just seem to have got into the habit of being skeptical and scornful. Compulsive disorder almost. 

St.Teresa has done remarkable things that none of us here  would even thing of doing. She is considered a saint because she showed love and care to people (lepers) who no one (even many doctors) would even touch. She literally picked them up from the streets and gave them some dignity and care.

You people are going on and no about injections and needles.  She gave them whatever care was available locally at that time. Five star treatment was never the option. Even today in India and many other poorer countries, over crowded hospitals in rural areas and even urban areas probably run with the same kind of very basic care.

I think it's just she had so much money donated, Sriram.

People want to see where it was spent.

Sometimes I think ALL charities that get donations from the public should make their finances known even to be given the status of being a charity and to be allowed to advertise as such.

It would at least show people which ones were genuine.