Wendy Vaz mentions the waste of the purchase of TOMS, and how people buy TOMs solely on the idea that they provide a pair of shoes to a child in a third world country but will later fail to get its maximum use and thus it becomes a waste. I would like to say I do agree on the point she has given and would like to elaborate on the issue that TOMs provides.
For children who would normally be walking on bare feet, they are creating an adaption to their surroundings and are becoming immuned to some of the diseases. By giving a child a pair of shoes we forget that they will eventually grow out of them and then what? They will be forced to walk on the ground barefoot, without the immunity they would’ve had obtained. Additionally, a quote mentioned in the book When Helping Hurts: How to Alleviate Poverty Without Hurting the Poor and Yourself:
“Avoid paternalism. Do not do things for people that they can do for themselves. Memorize this, recite it under your breath all day long, and wear it like a garland around your neck.”,
explains that by giving them shoes they are growing a new dependency to them they would have never needed, one they will not be able to forever supply which will, in the long run, create more damage than good. Conclusively , I love the idea that TOMs brings too the table, but it is not a long term answer to the issues that do occur in these third world countries and I do believe that the negative effects could really outweigh the positive ones.
“A Day without Dignity” (a video further explaining the negative effects)