Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Categories
UFS News Media Release Research
Years
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Months
January February March April May June July August September October November December
Previous Archive
10 September 2019 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Leonie Bolleurs
student dialogue
Dialogues presented by the Office for International Affairs provide a safe space for people to voice their opinions, to learn, and to engage. Here are, from the left: Montsi Ramonaheng, third-year BSc student majoring in Biochemistry and Genetics; Lebohang Lesenyeno, third-year LLB student; Motsaathebe Serekoane, Lecturer in Anthropology; and Bulelwa Moikwatlhai from the Office for International Affairs.
Will the creation of one African country solve the problem of xenophobia? 

This was the question raised at a recent dialogue session on the University of the Free State Bloemfontein Campus.

Most attendees believed the concept of ‘one Africa’ implied that only one language and one dominant culture would be needed – resulting in the spirit of multiculturalism ceasing to exist. When one speaks of a united Africa, it means that the continent recognises the diversity of its cultures and embraces these diversities. It was concluded that one Africa was not a solution to ending xenophobia.

Awareness of xenophobia from a human rights perspective

The Office for International Affairs hosted the two-dialogue series aimed at addressing an array of social issues such as xenophobia, cultural appropriation, and xenocentrism. They wanted to demonstrate the influence these issues have – not only on the mindsets of individuals, but also on how it can contribute towards the development of an unjust society devoid of embracing difference.

The first session was titled: Burn the Phobia, with the theme: ‘We are all foreigners somewhere’. The aim of this dialogue was to create awareness of xenophobia from a human rights perspective. 

Recently, a second dialogue session was presented, with the theme ‘Appropriation vs Xenocentrism’. According to Bulelwa Moikwatlhai, Officer in the Office for International Affairs, the purpose of this session was to encourage people to appreciate their own cultures and to respect other peoples’ cultures.

“We wanted to critically discuss cultural appropriation versus xenocentrism in an attempt to find a human response that is inclusive in nature,” says Moikwatlhai.

Direct outflow of UFS Integrated Transformation Plan

The lecture was presented by Motsaathebe Serekoane, Lecturer in the Department of Anthropology at the UFS, who urged attendees to always keep it authentic. He also stated that, as boundaries between the North and the South collapsed and knowledge flowed in and out, knowledge from the South was not taken seriously. 

“We lost ourselves within what happened in the North. We want to be appropriate and we want what they have, because it is more beautiful than what we have. We need to find something in Africa that will define us as African,” he says. 

These dialogues are a build-up to the International Cultural Diversity Festival that will take place at the Thakaneng Bridge on 13 September 2019 from 12:00 to 14:00.

The dialogue is a direct outflow of the university’s Integrated Transformation Plan. “We strive to cultivate a culture where everyone feels welcome and comfortable. We want to create common ground for international and South African students to get together and to collaboratively discuss issues from both parties in order to find innovative solutions to student challenges,” indicates Moikwatlhai.

Much of what is learnt in these sessions is used for reflection in order to improve the overall student experience. According to Miokwatlhai, it is essential to ensure that all processes related to students are structured to be socially just and inclusive. 

“As an institution of higher learning, we need to continuously create such platforms so that we have rich engagements about pertinent issues that affect the UFS community, and find human solutions to overcome barriers,” she concludes.

News Archive

Stem cell research and human cloning: legal and ethical focal points
2004-07-29

   

(Summary of the inaugural lecture of Prof Hennie Oosthuizen, from the Department of Criminal and Medical Law at the Faculty of Law of the University of the Free State.)

 

In the light of stem cell research, research on embryo’s and human cloning it will be fatal for legal advisors and researchers in South Africa to ignore the benefits that new bio-medical development, through research, contain for this country.

Legal advisors across the world have various views on stem cell research and human cloning. In the USA there is no legislation that regulates stem cell research but a number of States adopted legislation that approves stem cell research. The British Parlement gave permission for research on embryonic stem cells, but determined that it must be monitored closely and the European Union is of the opinion that it will open a door for race purification and commercial exploitation of human beings.

In South Africa the Bill on National Health makes provision for therapeutical and non therapeutical research. It also makes provision for therapeutical embryonical stem cell research on fetuses, which is not older than 14 days, as well as for therapeutical cloning under certain circumstances subject to the approval of the Minister. The Bill prohibits reproductive cloning.

Research on human embrio’s is a very controversial issue, here and in the rest of the world.

Researchers believe that the use of stem cell therapy could help to side-step the rejection of newly transplanted organs and tissue and if a bank for stem cell could be built, the shortage of organs for transplants would become something of the past. Stem cells could also be used for healing of Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and spinal injuries.

Sources from which stem cells are obtained could also lead to further ethical issues. Stem cells are harvested from mature human cells and embryonic stem cells. Another source to be utilised is to take egg cells from the ovaries of aborted fetuses. This will be morally unacceptable for those against abortions. Linking a financial incentive to that could become more of a controversial issue because the woman’s decision to abort could be influenced. The ideal would be to rather use human fetus tissue from spontaneous abortions or extra-uterine pregnancies than induced abortions.

The potential to obtain stem cells from the blood of the umbilical cord, bone-marrow and fetus tissue and for these cells to arrange themselves is known for quite some time. Blood from the umbilical cord contains many stem cells, which is the origin of the body’s immune and blood system. It is beneficial to bank the blood of a newborn baby’s umbilical cord. Through stem cell transplants the baby or another family member’s life could be saved from future illnesses such as anemia, leukemia and metabolic storing disabilities as well as certain generic immuno disabilities.

The possibility to withdraw stem cells from human embrio’s and to grow them is more useable because it has more treatment possibilities.

With the birth of Dolly the sheep, communities strongly expressed their concern about the possibility that a new cloning technique such as the replacement of the core of a cell will be used in human reproduction. Embryonic splitting and core replacement are two well known techniques that are associated with the cloning process.

I differentiate between reproductive cloning – to create a cloned human embryo with the aim to bring about a pregnancy of a child that is identical to another individual – and therapeutically cloning – to create a cloned human embryo for research purposes and for healing human illnesses.

Worldwide people are debating whether to proceed with therapeutical cloning. There are people for and against it. The biggest ethical objection against therapeutical cloning is the termination of the development of a potential human being.

Children born from cloning will differ from each other. Factors such as the uterus environment and the environment in which the child is growing up will play a role. Cloning create unique children that will grow up to be unique individuals, just like me and you that will develop into a person, just like you and me. If we understand this scientific fact, most arguments against human cloning will disappear.

Infertility can be treated through in vitro conception. This process does not work for everyone. For some cloning is a revolutionary treatment method because it is the only method that does not require patients to produce sperm and egg cells. The same arguments that were used against in vitro conception in the past are now being used against cloning. It is years later and in vitro cloning is generally applied and accepted by society. I am of the opinion that the same will happen with regard to human cloning.

There is an argument that cloning must be prohibited because it is unsafe. Distorted ideas in this regard were proven wrong. Are these distorted ideas justified to question the safety of cloning and the cloning process you may ask. The answer, according to me, is a definite no. Human cloning does have many advantages. That includes assistance with infertility, prevention of Down Syndrome and recovery from leukemia.

 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept