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
25 November 2020 Photo Anja Aucamp
Prof Colin Chasi outside Centenary Complex (Anja Aucamp)
Prof Colin Chasi is the Director of the Unit for Institutional Change and Social Justice at the UFS.
The 2020 programme around the 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence will be novel in that it will be run online. “For each person to register and log into the various programmes is a small step. But each such step makes a big difference by saying that the lives of survivors matter and by underscoring that gender-based violence will not be tolerated at the UFS,” says Prof Colin Chasi, Director of the Unit for Institutional Change and Social Justice (UICSJ) at the UFS.

Women and girl children have experienced increased violence in the time of the COVID-19 lockdown, states the UN Secretary General's report, Shared Responsibility, Global Solidarity: Responding to the socio-economic impacts of COVID-19. In South Africa, there have been reports of a scourge of rape in the post-school education and training sector. At the UFS, these developments have challenged the Gender Equity and Anti-Discrimination Office (GEADO) to come up with innovative online interventions.

In 2019, the University of the Free State (UFS) established the Unit for Institutional Change and Social Justice (formerly known as the Institute for Reconciliation and Social Justice, founded in 2009). The GEADO was launched on 8 April 2019 and was incorporated into the unit to run a cross-functional Sexual Assault Response Team (SART) and to organise programmes that combat gender-based violence and other forms of gender injustice.

“We have been able to offer our services with minimal disruption throughout the year,” says Geraldine Lengau, a Bloemfontein Campus-based GEADO officer.

“Most exciting for us is that we have taken the lockdown as an opportunity to expand the scope of ways in which we engage with students and communities,” notes Chelepe Mocwana, a GEADO officer on the South Campus. “GEADO has offered a number of online webinars and seminars, and the university has made telephonic services available that support, for example, the mental health of survivors of sexual violence.”

“On the Qwaqwa Campus, where we still have some problems with consistent access to data networks, we were pleased to see that our webinars have been well-subscribed to by students and staff members,” reports Siya Magayana, who is the GEADO officer on this campus.

“Each such step makes a big difference by saying that the
lives of survivors matter and by underscoring that
gender-based violence will not be tolerated at the UFS.”
—Prof Colin Chasi, Director of the UICSJ.

Since 1991, activists around the world have annually coordinated activities around the 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence. The 16 days of activism begin on 25 November, the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, and run until 10 December, which is International Human Rights Day. The start and end dates signify that the fight to eliminate violence against women advances human rights for all.

Activities to mark the 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence will be advertised on various UFS communication platforms.

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