Many individuals are of the opinion that charity organisations should help those who require some kind of aids, others argue that they should focus on their native place. This essay will argue in favour of helping needy individuals despite any nationality while discussing both the views in the following paragraphs.
First and foremost, a non-government organization should try to help individuals depending on their organization's capabilities and need of the people. Instead of restricting themselves in any national boundary, they should prioritize their aid work as per the situation. For example, in 2005 when there was an earthquake in Srilanka, many citizens lost their lives. Moreover, it had a huge impact on their economy and government along with the local non-government organizations were struggling to build the houses again. In those situations international charity organizations came forward to help them otherwise it would not have been possible for them to survive.
On the contrary, a growing number of bodies argue that charity organisations should take care of native citizens first. They believe that, amidst the widespread poverty, such organisations do not need to go out of their local areas to find needy and undernourished families. Although this logic sounds sensible but in a broader perspective, it will be illogical to work for the people without prioritizing them. For instance, if one country is struggling with some natural calamity such as flood then it may require international aid to save lives. In those circumstances, if non-government organisations ignore the concept of prioritization then it would not be a realistic or a practical solution as lives should always be given priority.
To conclude, although it seems logical to suggest that charity organisations should focus on their own nations as there must be many people waiting for their help, it becomes illogical and impractical to restrict any organizations at one place without prioritizing the urgency of the situation.
Many
individuals are of the opinion that
charity
organisations
should
help
those who require
some
kind of aids, others argue that they should focus on their native place. This essay will argue in
favour
of helping needy individuals despite any nationality while discussing both the views in the following paragraphs.
First
and foremost, a non-
government
organization
should try to
help
individuals depending on their
organization
's capabilities and need of the
people
.
Instead
of restricting themselves in any national boundary, they should prioritize their aid work as per the situation.
For example
, in 2005 when there was an earthquake in
Srilanka
,
many
citizens lost their
lives
.
Moreover
, it had a huge impact on their economy and
government
along with the local non-
government
organizations
were struggling to build the
houses
again. In those situations international
charity
organizations
came forward to
help
them
otherwise
it would not have been possible for them to survive.
On the contrary
, a growing number of bodies argue that
charity
organisations
should take care of native citizens
first
. They believe that, amidst the widespread poverty, such
organisations
do not need to go out of their local areas to find needy and undernourished families. Although this logic sounds sensible
but
in a broader perspective, it will be illogical to work for the
people
without prioritizing them.
For instance
, if one country is struggling with
some
natural calamity such as flood
then
it may require international aid to save
lives
. In those circumstances, if non-
government
organisations
ignore
the concept of prioritization then it would not be a realistic or a practical solution as
lives
should always be
given
priority.
To conclude
, although it seems logical to suggest that
charity
organisations
should focus on their
own
nations as there
must
be
many
people
waiting for their
help
, it becomes illogical and impractical to restrict any
organizations
at one place without prioritizing the urgency of the situation.