Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
04 August 2021 | Story Giselle Baillie

A project working towards the achievement of the Integrated Transformation Plan of the University of the Free State.


The names of buildings are not neutral ideas – even more so when they reflect, for example, the names or namesakes of people, places, or concepts on campus. Rather, they play a significant role in expressing and shaping what the institution values, who the space is for, and how communities engaging with the space are encouraged to think, feel, and behave. 

The Bloemfontein Campus of the University of the Free State (UFS) is undertaking two name review projects as part of its transformation processes. The first focuses on the review of the names and symbols of buildings utilised as student residences. Framed by the Integrated Transformation Plan (ITP) of the UFS and mandated by the Naming Committee of the UFS, the process entails that all residences evaluate whether their current building/house names reflect and align with the values of the constitution and the values of the UFS, and whether these names create a sense of inclusion and belonging for all within the UFS community. 

Furthermore, whether the symbols (songs, practices, and so forth) utilised within the junior residences are up to date regarding these objectives, and whether they demonstrate and create experiences for their communities that are aligned with these values. 

The second project focuses on the review of the name of a building currently occupied by the Faculty of Health Sciences, and which was utilised as a student hostel in previous years. 

Since early 2021, various partners from the UFS have been engaged in consultations and planning with their stakeholders and communities for these projects, which will unfold in the second semester. 

The objectives of these projects are to engage through education and dialogue processes in critical reflections on the role that the names and symbols associated with buildings on a university campus play in shaping and expressing institutional values and culture, and the associated sense of belonging that it creates for its diverse communities. Furthermore, to provide the opportunity for the UFS community to craft a new institutional culture through new names and renewed cultural practices, where necessary, based on constitutional as well as UFS values.

The UFS community is invited to participate in the projects as follows:

The Bloemfontein Campus Residence Name and Symbol Review Process

9-24 August: A Blackboard platform hosting educational materials on the project will be launched, with the UFS community encouraged to engage with this. 

9-16 August: Junior and day residences will host various dialogues within their houses, focusing on exploring their names and symbols. Senior residences with associated names or conceptual frames, as well as alumni, are encouraged to join these dialogues. Recordings of the dialogues will also be made available on the project’s Blackboard platform. 

16-19 August: A range of institutional dialogues will take place, focused on key reflections regarding the current names of residences. These dialogues will take place daily from 16:00 to 19:00 and will be convened and moderated by SRC representatives. 

Click below to access the different dialogue invitations and to find the virtual links to these dialogues.

16 August 2021

17 August 2021

18 August 2021

19 August 2021

20-24 August: The Bloemfontein Campus community, inclusive of students, staff, and alumni, are invited to participate by expressing their thinking regarding the current building names through an online review platform. Where participants feel that the current name/s are not aligned with constitutional and UFS values and the desired institutional culture of the UFS, they will be encouraged to promote a new name/s as per the guidelines that will be provided for naming. Residence students will also be afforded the opportunity to critically reflect on and review their residence symbols.


23 September: Findings from the review process will be communicated to the UFS community.  

December 2021: The decisions of Council on the review and possible new names will be communicated to the UFS community. 

The CR de Wet Building Name Review Project

2-17 August: A Blackboard platform hosting educational materials on the project be found at this link, with the UFS community encouraged to engage with this.

3-12 August: Students and staff of the Faculty of Health Sciences will engage in dialogues focused on reviewing the name of one of its buildings, the CR de Wet Building, which houses the staff offices, as well as lecture and practical venues of the School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences and the departments of Family Medicine, Occupational Therapy, Optometry, Biostatistics, Physiotherapy, and Nutrition and Dietetics.

10-11 August: The broader UFS community is invited to also engage in a dialogue focused on reviewing the name of the afore-mentioned building.

11 August: Alumni of the former CR de Wet hostel will engage in a dialogue focused on reviewing the name of the afore-mentioned building.

12-17 August: The Bloemfontein Campus community, inclusive of students, staff, and alumni, are invited to participate by expressing their thinking regarding the current building name through an online review platform. Where participants feel that the current name needs to be changed, they will be encouraged to promote a new name as per the guidelines that will be provided for naming.

23 September: Findings from the review process will be communicated to the UFS community.  

December 2021: The decision of Council on the review and possible new name – where the review necessitated change – will be communicated to the UFS community.  

 

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