Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
24 March 2020

#UFSupdate (18 March 2020): UFS IMPLEMENTS MEASURES TO MINIMISE RISK OF COVID-19 TO STAFF
STATEMENT BY PROF FRANCIS PETERSEN, RECTOR AND VICE-CHANCELLOR

The executive management of the University of the Free State (UFS) welcomes the announcement of Dr Blade Nzimande, Minister of Higher Education, Science and Technology on 17 March 2020 that all post-school training institutions will have an early recess, starting on 18 March 2020. The Minister’s directive that universities should minimise risk of COVID-19 to all its staff during this time is also welcomed.  

The announcement of Dr Nzimande is in line with the university’s decision on 16 March 2020 to suspend the academic programme as from 17 March 2020 and to resume it again on 14 April 2020.

It is important for us all to know that this is not business as usual, and that different  thinking is required. Responsible citizenship is one of the crucial elements the world has increasingly been experiencing for the past few weeks. This is why we must act out our responsibility towards one another by focusing on ways in which social distancing can be achieved – especially during this low-risk period that South Africa is still experiencing. This is one of the reasons that informed the university’s decision on 16 March 2020 week to suspend the academic programme and also for students to vacate the residences by 20 March 2020.

The health and well-being of our staff members are equally important. The university’s Employee Task Team that was established on 16 March 2020 analysed options for the continuation of university operations during the recess period. These options were submitted to the executive management, discussed with the Chairperson of the UFS Council and approved on 18 March 2020.

Staff members who have children at school and pre-school may work from home on 19 and 20 March 2020. For the period 23 March 2020 to 13 April 2020, the number of staff members present on all three campuses will be reduced to a minimum and staff members may be allowed to work from home where practically possible.

Arrangements have been made to accommodate those staff members who are performing services which cannot be done from home (such as cleaning, gardening, maintenance, sports, etc) in a flexible and reasonable way. Similar arrangements will be made with office-based support services staff, prioritising institutional needs and based on humane and personal circumstances. Academic staff have been requested to ensure that the online learning materials are finalised and made available for the online learning platform.

The decision for employees to work from home is based on the premise that all employees are deemed to be at work from 23 March 2020 to 13 April 2020. This requires staff members to be available and contactable by line managers at all times during the university’s normal working hours.

I am comfortable that these measures will alleviate the concerns from our staff regarding the spreading of COVID-19 and the risk to themselves without compromising university operations.

Prof F W Petersen
Rector and Vice-Chancellor
University of the Free State


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