Is granting children's wishes cost-effective? A new study looks at Make-A-Wish.

Donating to the right charities can save lives.

  • Make-A-Wish stories are heartwarming, but are they worth the cost?
  • Effective donations to the right charities can save lives, even if they don't make for good reading.
  • A recent study into the value of wishes on health care costs gives good news for everybody.

Remember Batkid? That adorable little cancer patient who saved San Francis— I mean, Gotham, from the Riddler and Penguin? Who had a whole article about him in the San Francisco Chronicle written by Clark Kent? Who reminded us that the world isn't all that bad?

His story is one of the more notable wishes granted by the famous Make-A-Wish Foundation; which turns charity donations into fantastic experiences for children with serious illnesses.

However, the question of if it is a worthy charity has been asked by no less a person than the philosopher and champion of effective altruism Professor Peter Singer. In his 2013 Washington Post op-ed, published in response to the Batkid event, he argues that Make-A-Wish is nice, but that the money really doesn't accomplish much and that we would do better to donate the money to other charities.

Effective Altruism is the downer who gets things done

While it might seem that only the most miserly or calloused individual could object to what Make-A-Wish does, Singer brings up an important point: our charity dollars can also save countless lives. As a utilitarian philosopher, Singer has argued that we have an obligation to donate what we can to help others — and he puts his money where his mouth his. He's the founder of the nonprofit The Life You Can Save, which helps fight extreme poverty and its effects.

How we invest our donations is a vital question that costs lives when it is answered incorrectly. As he puts it in his Op-ed:

"The average cost of realizing the wish of a child with a life-threatening illness is $7,500. That sum, if donated to the Against Malaria Foundation and used to provide bed nets to families in malaria-prone regions, could save the lives of at least two or three children (and that's a conservative estimate). If donated to the Fistula Foundation, it could pay for surgeries for approximately 17 young mothers who, without that assistance, will be unable to prevent their bodily wastes from leaking through their vaginas and hence are likely to be outcasts for the rest of their lives. If donated to the Seva Foundation to treat trachoma and other common causes of blindness in developing countries, it could protect 100 children from losing their sight as they grow older."

The cost has gone up since Singer's article and is now $10,130. So, the question is even more pressing.

So, is Make A Wish worth the cost?

As it happens, a study diving into that very question was published in Pediatric Research in October of 2018. Four hundred and ninety-six patients who got their wishes granted were compared to 496 "control" patients who weren't involved with the program. The two groups had similar age and gender demographics and all the patients had similar diseases. The researchers followed the patients for two years and measured the "hospital utilization," in this case defined as "visits to primary, urgent, emergent care, and planned/unplanned inpatient hospitalizations," of every patient.

The results were surprisingly good. Patients who received wishes used fewer hospital services than those who did not. The savings as a result of this were determined to be higher than the cost of a wish, making the program cost-effective.

Now, the study isn't without issues. For starters, it isn't randomized. Secondly, it doesn't directly approach the question of hospital admissions but rather plays around with a binary variable of "has fewer admissions" and "does not have fewer admissions" and then works from there. Similarly, the study doesn't directly estimate if the total cost of wishes is more or less than the expected savings.

Speaking to Vox, Professor Andrew Gelman of Columbia University took issue with some of the researchers' methods and explained, "The practice of discretizing variables is common in medical statistics, and I think it's generally a bad idea."

Lastly, while it demonstrates that the events are good for more than just fun outings and feel-good news stories, this study does not answer the question posed by Peter Singer and others on if we should donate to Make-A-Wish before some other charity, though it does provide data for use in the discussion.

There you have it, wishes work. While the question of if the effectiveness of the wishes outweighs the value of donating to a charity that will directly save lives at a much lower cost remains to be settled, we can know that the heartwarming stories of ill children having a day of unrivaled fun aren't without medical benefit.

​There are two kinds of failure – but only one is honorable

Malcolm Gladwell teaches "Get over yourself and get to work" for Big Think Edge.

Big Think Edge
  • Learn to recognize failure and know the big difference between panicking and choking.
  • At Big Think Edge, Malcolm Gladwell teaches how to check your inner critic and get clear on what failure is.
  • Subscribe to Big Think Edge before we launch on March 30 to get 20% off monthly and annual memberships.
Keep reading Show less

Vikings unwittingly made their swords stronger by trying to imbue them with spirits

They didn't know it, but the rituals of Iron Age Scandinavians turned their iron into steel.

Shutterstock
Culture & Religion
  • Iron Age Scandinavians only had access to poor quality iron, which put them at a tactical disadvantage against their neighbors.
  • To strengthen their swords, smiths used the bones of their dead ancestors and animals, hoping to transfer the spirit into their blades.
  • They couldn't have known that in so doing, they actually were forging a rudimentary form of steel.
Keep reading Show less

Why the ocean you know and love won’t exist in 50 years

Can sensitive coral reefs survive another human generation?

Videos
  • Coral reefs may not be able to survive another human decade because of the environmental stress we have placed on them, says author David Wallace-Wells. He posits that without meaningful changes to policies, the trend of them dying out, even in light of recent advances, will continue.
  • The World Wildlife Fund says that 60 percent of all vertebrate mammals have died since just 1970. On top of this, recent studies suggest that insect populations may have fallen by as much as 75 percent over the last few decades.
  • If it were not for our oceans, the planet would probably be already several degrees warmer than it is today due to the emissions we've expelled into the atmosphere.
Keep reading Show less