What? A charity is using people's donations to pay a star who already has enough money and fame? That's just not right, in fact it's morally repulsive. When stars get involved with charity work or good causes, they usually donate their time. Everyone wins. Their target charity gains more support and we think more highly of the star.
The revelation of the £3,000 (US $4,662) payment came after she posted a photograph of herself on the social networking site Instagram, in which she held a handwritten sign asking her followers to 'please follow Barnardo's'.
Barnardo's, which earned an income of about £242million ( US $653,300million) last year, say it does not usually pay celebrities to support their work with the most vulnerable children across the UK.
But the fact remains that the establishment is using funds raised for charity to pay a celebrity for advertising. If I could afford to help abused kids, I'd want assurance that the money goes straight to them. I don't want my donation to be used for staff payments or siphoned off for operating costs in a shop.
So many people don't give to charities for this reason—especially overseas aid, which often never reaches the people it was intended for. Better to give understanding, give food, give jobs, and give personal help. Our neighbor constantly sets the example by taking my husband to each of his hospital appointments and refusing to accept payment for parking fees or petrol. What a wonderful man.