November 17, 2014; CNN

Recently, an NPQ reader contributed an article on the slippery ethical slope of storytelling in fundraising, discussing the ugly pitfalls of usurping the stories of others. But what if the stories, compelling and tragic, are themselves completely made up? Where is the ethical line nonprofits should be wary of crossing when fundraising for a cause?

One private school in South Dakota is facing such an ethical dilemma after sending out millions of charity mailings using falsified stories to elicit donor reactions. St. Joseph’s Indian School, a boarding school focused on teaching students of Native American descent and affiliated with a Roman Catholic charity, launched a marketing campaign using heartbreaking stories of children to rake in nearly $100 million in contributions from 2013 to 2014.

According to officials at the school, timed charity mailings are sent about three or four times a year, sometimes connected with holidays. These mailings include stories of children being abused by their fathers, absent mothers, and violence-torn homes. The only catch is that these children don’t exist.

When people began asking about the children referenced in the letter, Kory Christianson, the director of development, replied that the letter detailed “a true story of the very real and challenging situations that far too many children face not only in the Native American community, but in families found in every sphere of society.”

Native Americans have responded negatively to the marketing campaign, believing that the letters reflect poorly on them. Leonard Pease, vice chairman of the Crow Creek Lakota Sioux Reservation said, about the fundraising campaign, “That’s how they get their money. To me, they make the Indians look bad.”

Christianson has said there was never any “intention to disparage in any way the Native American community.” However, many also likely take offense to the school’s cavalier attitude toward intentionally duping donors.

Unfortunately, this incident of “poverty porn” isn’t unique. Two years ago, NPQ wrote about certain UK charity ads that used particularly distressing imagery, upsetting children who wanted to help the cause but felt they could not. While the ads appear to have done their jobs in eliciting a reaction, could use of this imagery be considered exploitive, baiting the public? How do those who are meant to benefit from the ads feel about the imagery?

Exploitive or not, research shows “poverty porn” helps bring in donations. According to a 2012 study by the Center for Charitable Giving and Philanthropy, “Research confirms that the public are more likely to respond to advertisements that demean sufferers than those in which charitable beneficiaries are shown in a more positive light, with the same rights and capabilities as anyone else.”

CNN reports that the money collected through this campaign does not appear to be misused, although there is no evidence, aside from the outside appearance of the students and the facilities, which might suggest otherwise. According to the financial reports, the school’s net assets increased by more than $20 million in the past year from 2013 to 2014, spending nearly a million more in donor development and doubling their investment income.

However, if nothing else, the letters do appear to be bringing attention to the important issue of Native American poverty. During November, as the country commemorates Native American Heritage month, this may be the best time to bring attention to the poverty and suicide rates that trouble Native Americans. According to a report released this month by a Department of Justice task force on American Indian and Alaska Native Children exposed to violence, Native American children suffer disproportionately higher rates of abuse and neglect and often do not receive treatment leading to serious mental and physical health problems. These children suffer post-traumatic stress disorder “at the same rate as veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan and triple the rate of the general population.”

The report indicates that efforts to help these children must extend beyond the Justice Department and require all levels of government officials to get involved as well. NPQ asks you, the readers: Do the ends justify the means if the end is to give these children an education?—Shafaq Hasan