Toxic Charity (Book Review)

I just recently read this excellent book, and I thought it was so impactful to my thinking that I've decided to recommend it to nearly every person I know.  I bought it because I was searching for how to do a better job at giving to the poor.  I know Jesus says, "Give to all who ask" but I was deeply troubled by the fact that outright giving to some would be tantamount to enabling.  That said, I feel I got an answer through my reading of Toxic Charity, but I also got a lot more than I bargained for.  (My conclusion was pretty basic, give to all who ask, but be careful what you give).

Lupton's thesis states that charity, without building self-reliance into people, builds dependency that results in people (and their surrounding cultures) to gradually become worse off and poorer than they would have been without the aid.  Instead of freely giving all the time, there should be a gradual transition from dependency to development in people.

A Few Eye-Openers: 

1. Africa, after receiving over 1 TRILLION in foreign aid is poorer and less literate, with a stagnated life expectancy.  

2. Lupton shares a personal anecdote about an inner city dad basically being emasculated when "charity tree" givers show up with free presents at Christmas. Why?  Because it's shameful to him as a man that he can't provide for his family.

3. Local mosquito net companies in Africa going out of business because so many are given away by Westerners. 

4. A Nicaraguan pastor's irritation with missionaries that are "...turning [his] people into beggars." 

It's not all about the problems though.  Perhaps the best thing about the book is that the author, Lupton, who has over 40 years of experience working with the urban poor, doesn't just whine and complain about toxic charity-he also offers viable solutions so as to create life-giving charity on both a large and small scale.  

One WARNING I would give about reading this book: you've got to read the whole thing to understand Lupton's argument.  I kind of felt that he was pretty one-sided for 3/4ths of the book, but in the final quarter he balances out his argument to be very redemptive of the practices we currently have in many charitable organizations.