I know this post will infuriate a few people who read it. In their minds, they'll think that I'm bullying a good organization. However, that's not my intention. I only think that there are ethics involved when you're trying to help other people. What I want is to simply make a few suggestions.

Truthfully, I've never been to the food bank, but judging from their website, I would never want to go. Essentially, I find its language, presentations, and functioning offensive, as though they're not considering a broad spectrum of human beings. That sounds incredibly undeserved, so let me explain.

All throughout the site, there are links entitled, “Need Food?” but there are more polite ways in which to portray this message. For instance, if you had a dinner guest, like a friend, a loved one, even the king of France, you would not invite him by asking: “Need Food?” If he or she was in a desperate situation, you would also not try helping by saying the same thing. Most likely, your dinner companion or friend would think you're being insensitive, as though you're patronizing him because of his situation. On the other hand, a link entitled, “Access Groceries” or something similar sounds more prudent. It's like asking your friend, “Would you care for something to eat?”

I understand that the reason for describing the service in this way is to make it readable and understandable for anyone who visits the site. However, I think this also assumes a lot about people who would potentially visit the food bank. When my family and I moved to Canada from Guatemala, we started from nothing. Nevertheless, both of my parents were educated in their home country, and they were and continue to be incredibly bright. However, if they had accessed food services with this kind of presentation, as people in their capacity, they would simply have been insulted. My point is that people who visit the site are not necessarily without intelligence or an education. They don't need to be spoken to as though they're simple people. They're perfectly capable of understanding so-called “big words.” “Access” in Spanish, for instance, would simply have been “accesar.” The same holds true for other people visiting the site. I have a suspicion that some of them are educated, capable, intelligent persons.

With that in mind, I think other words on the site like “Consider Giving,” “Food,” and “Money” need to be revised. It would be more polite to say “Consider Contributing,” “Groceries,” and “Funds.” In fact, even the name itself could be changed to “Groceries Calgary.”

I think it's also unethical to promote yourself or the city through people's despairing circumstances. Putting up advertisements for the good of the city and the greatness of the institution can make people feel as though they're being used. It's as if when I invite my friend over for dinner or help him because he's hungry, I put-up a website describing how I helped him. Not only would he be embarrassed, he would feel as though he's being used to promote me. There are more appropriate ways to talk about the strength of services in Calgary. Word of mouth is the most effective, but others include papers, journals, blogs, and so on. Whatever the case, they should always occur apart from the immediate situation a person is in.

From a little investigation, I also understand that to access the food bank, it's necessary to see a social or intake worker. I think that's also invasive. As I said above, it's simply an assumption that people who visit the food bank are uneducated, but more specifically, that they need help from a worker for employment or other things to escape their poverty. Some people might have a university education, a middle-class income, and other obligations, like a mortgage or children but they might still need to visit the food bank. In these cases, it's the cost of living and the structure of society that might leave them without money for groceries. For instance, if any one of these people had a judgment against them, and a judge under the Civil Enforcement Act left them with only 800 dollars per month, no amount of counseling for employment or education would save this person from having to visit the food bank. It's simply an assumption that people who visit need some kind of guidance. The causes of poverty are usually structural.

This leaves me wondering what would be a more effective and ethical manner in which to ensure no person in Calgary goes hungry. One of things I think would help is if rather than give people actual groceries, people were simply able to access gift cards for Safeway—online. Visiting the food bank is not a proud experience. If I were in that situation, I'd feel ashamed. But if people could simply log on to a website and have a card delivered to their home, no one would know about their situation, and they would actually have the freedom to buy things they think they need. The food bank does provide gift cards for people, but I think it would be better if they allocated food services completely by gift cards alone, especially without having to visit a social or intake worker. 1000 dollars a month per person would be adequate.

There are a few objections to that idea that I should briefly mention. One of them is that, as I said, people need social services if they can't afford groceries. But I think it's just an assumption that the cause of people's poverty can be remedied by vising a social or intake worker. Aside from that, it's simply unethical to place control on people if you want to help them, at least in this case. Just because I'm hungry, that doesn't mean other people have a right to start asking me if I work, where I work, or simply put, to justify myself so that I don't starve to death. The best kind of help is where people don't at all realize they're being helped.

The other is that if gift cards were available online, people would misuse them. Having people physically enter the food bank ensures that people don't use these services frivolously. However, it's simply an assumption that people who are poor or don't need food services just want a free ride. People have a conscience, and they know that if they're accessing food services, it's because they really need it. I think people need to have more faith in people's sense of morality.

Third, people might think that's it's more difficult to monitor food services online than it is in person. However, that's simply not true. The food bank could simply put up a website where they see who has accessed what from which address. In fact, they could also monitor IP addresses easily.

Overall, then, I think these would be substantial changes to helping people in an ethical manner. Again, my intention is not belittle an institution that is working. All I'm suggesting is that people, through the institution's practices and policies, be treated with more consideration.