Cosmo Landesman

My failed attempts to be a good Samaritan

iStock 
issue 07 August 2021

I’ve been trying to be a good Samaritan for some time now and failing. But this week I discovered that even well-trained, experienced good Samaritans — who work for the Samaritans — can fail too. Reports have surfaced revealing the ‘abuse’ of vulnerable callers by a small number of the charity’s phone volunteers.

It’s a sad state of affairs when even the Samaritans are subject to scandal. They do excellent work and have always been the Eton of Britain’s volunteer sector. Two years ago, I tried to get in and failed, which was a bit of a shock. I’d assumed that my listening skills would make me the ideal volunteer. I was, however, politely informed that their waiting list was so long I’d have to wait before I could get on their waiting list. I’m still waiting.

All in all, being a good Samaritan in modern Britain is not as easy as you’d think. I always imagined that with a big heart, time and energy you could work for the charity of your choice. I soon discovered that unless you have a car, speak a foreign language, are good with computers, can teach immigrants English, speak fluent LGBT and are sensitive to racial bias and gender inequalities, you’re unqualified for a lot of high-calibre charity work. In fact, you’ll be lucky to get a gig in the back room of your local high-street charity shop.

My first attempt was with Age UK. I was good at my interview and shone at my group induction class — or so I believed until I got a letter of rejection. More rejection letters followed from more charities. The usual explanation was that there were too many applicants already, or that my set of skills — ‘listening, empathy and funny one-liners’ — were not suitable for them.

But during lockdown, charities needed more volunteers, particularly to act as ‘phone befrienders’.

GIF Image

Disagree with half of it, enjoy reading all of it

TRY 3 MONTHS FOR $5
Our magazine articles are for subscribers only. Start your 3-month trial today for just $5 and subscribe to more than one view

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in