Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
08 December 2021 | Story Michelle Nothling | Photo Supplied
Lentsu Nchabeleng
Dr Ntheno Nchabeleng was appointed as the Deputy Director in the Gender and Anti-Discrimination Office within the Unit for Institutional Change and Social Justice.

A total of 10 006 rape cases were reported between April and June 2021. This is according to the latest SA crime statistics for the first quarter of 2021/2022. From a sample of 5 439 of these rape cases, 3 766 of incidents took place in the victim’s home or that of the rapist. A shadow pandemic of gender-based violence against our women and children is raging in South Africa.

It is within this global and local context that the Gender and Anti-Discrimination Office (GEADO) at the university is making inroads into supporting survivors of gender-based violence (GBV) and changing gender stereotypes.

GEADO in focus

GEADO is situated within the Unit for Institutional Change and Social Justice on the Bloemfontein Campus. It is mandated to deal with incidents of unfair discrimination and GBV as it relates to the UFS community, and to conduct advocacy and training in these areas. Deputy Director of GEADO, Dr Ntheno Nchabeleng, explains that “through high-impact practices and interventions, the Office works to systematically reduce case attrition to ensure that all reports and cases follow procedurally just processes”.

GEADO has been established at all the UFS campuses with well-trained and fully equipped Senior Gender Officers leading each. Geraldine Langau—supported by research assistant Delisile Mngadi—is managing the office at the Bloemfontein Campus, Chelepe Mocwana the Qwaqwa Campus, and Sivuyisiwe Magayana oversees the South Campus office.

Addressing gender-based violence

Prevention and response to GBV are at the core of GEADO’s work. With our country wracked by sexual violence and femicide, “it has become a nightmare to be a woman in South Africa”, Dr Nchabeleng says.

Its preventative efforts focus on the underlying causes of GBV to transform patriarchal notions, misogynistic norms, power imbalances, and toxic gender stereotypes. Fostering collaboration with various strategic partners to strengthen its impact, GEADO recently started working with Amnesty International Sub-Saharan Africa and Amnesty International Latin America to spread awareness on various forms of violence experienced by vulnerable populations. GEADO has also partnered with other local stakeholders in an effort to eradicate GBV through programming that includes awareness campaigns, online mobilisation, training, and webinars.

Becoming part of the solution

“Become change agents,” Dr Nchabeleng urges. One way to start shifting attitudes and mindsets is to change the way we speak. Examples would be to refrain from sexist and discriminatory language and phrases that undermine and degrade our women. Gendered name-calling generally depicts women and girls as inferior and less than fully human. Another area of concern is the way young people — especially young men — engage in disparaging conversations about women on social media platforms. This behaviour needs to cease. As a society, we also need to stop victim blaming, stop normalising rape culture, and stop entertaining sexual violence jokes,” Dr Nchabeleng says.

These changes start with each of us.

Incidents of GBV and discrimination can be reported to GEADO at:
Bloemfontein Campus: +27 51 401 3982
South Campus: +27 51 401 7544
Qwaqwa Campus: +27 58 718 5431

Sexual Assault Response Team (SART):
www.ufs.ac.za/sart 
Toll-free number +27 80 020 4682

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