Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
19 March 2021 | Story Dr Martin Mandew | Photo Kaleidoscope Studios (Sonia Small)
Dr Martin Mandew
Dr Martin Mandew believes that the devastating impact of the pandemic will be felt for quite some time.

A Human Rights view by Dr Martin Mandew, Campus Principal of the UFS Qwaqwa Campus


It is not easy to discern the silver in the lining of the pandemic cloud that we have been living under over the past twelve months. I hazard to say that for those at the bottom of the socio-economic heap, those whose daily life is nothing but a gut-wrenching struggle to scrape together a semblance of a meal, talk of silver linings is foreign to their experience. The pandemic has shown just how low leaders can sink when elected public officials steal and redirect food parcels – meant for the poor and destitute – for their own personal consumption, for those close to them through family ties, through friendship and through political affiliation, or sell it for personal financial gain. The intended relief measures, designed to be non-partisan, are used instead to promote the socio-political divisions that already exist in the community. The unspoken mantra seems to be: If you look like me, if you think like me, if you believe like me, if you speak like me, if your political beliefs are like mine, only then can you expect me to do the public good for you and for your benefit that I have been elected to do, even though I get paid for carrying out this very important task. Talk of unity is rich in such an environment.

Nation-building
The devastating impact of the pandemic will be felt for quite some time. In the next twelve months we must, despite the enormous challenges ahead, re-imagine and craft a future of unity, where personal, political, ethnic, racial, gender, economic, and other differences will not stunt and sabotage efforts of socio-economic renewal. This Human Rights Month is a stark reminder for us to go back to our foundations as a South African nation. It is a time to press the reset button in the agenda of nation-building. Nation-building is not achieved through a fiat, a ‘let-it-be-so’ declaration. While taking the necessary steps to rebuild a battered economy, nation-building also entails making the necessary investments in social support to alleviate the impact of the pandemic on the most vulnerable in society, while also ensuring that the white-collared hyenas are kept at bay. The right to health care, food, water, and social security is enshrined in the Constitution.  

The future
Nation-building also entails making bold investments in education, taking care that as budgets are re-organised, re-prioritised and reduced, the education sector is not made a casualty of austerity measures. We must not falter to build our nation on a solid foundation of education, ensuring that we make the right investments and the required interventions in this very critical sector. There are components in the sector that are weak and glaringly under-resourced, such as early childhood development, as well as post-school technical and artisanal training. We need to strengthen these as part of building a firm foundation for our fledgling nation. This is a very important asurance for the future of our nation. Only an educated nation is best equipped to confront the challenges that lie ahead, such as those that the COVID-19 pandemic has thrust upon us. The right to education is enshrined in the Constitution.

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