Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
19 March 2021 | Story Mosa Moerane
Mosa Moerane
Mosa Moerane from the UFS Liaison, Advocacy and Awareness Officer at CUADS

by Mosa Moerane, Liaison, Advocacy and Awareness Officer at CUADS

Annually, the month of March marks Human Rights Month in South Africa. This month also commemorates the Sharpeville massacre that took place on 21 March 1960, where police opened fire on a group of protesters who sought the banning of the repressive pass laws of that era. Sixty-nine people were killed. We honour their sacrifice by, firstly, observing Human Rights Month and, secondly, persistently seeking to ensure that we dismantle systems that uphold and maintain the status quo so that nobody has to protest in order to have their voices and needs heard and addressed. We acknowledge that we are still some distance from this ideal.

It is against this background that the article seeks to invite some thinking around disability rights and disability justice within higher education. According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), people with disabilities make up 15% of the world population. Disability transcends gender, class, race, and origin. However, society appears to be constructed to negate this fact.

South Africa is party to international laws and agreements such as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) of 2006, which South Africa ratified in 2007. This means that the country accepts all the legal obligations imposed by this instrument. The CRPD seeks to promote, protect, and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights by persons with disabilities. According to the CRPD, persons with disabilities include those who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual, or sensory impairments, which, in interaction with various barriers, may obstruct their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis. This is a clear recognition that persons with disabilities are equal and valuable members of society and should be recognised in all aspects of life. There is no single definition of disability that has achieved international consensus, since the concept of disability is evolving. The concept evolved from the initial charity or welfare approach that viewed persons with disabilities as objects of pity who required help, to the medical approach that sought to treat the disability in isolation, to the current social and human rights approach.

Universal Access in Higher Education
Universal access addresses, among others, structural barriers such as accessibility to facilities and infrastructure, the lack of support services or technology, the lack of availability of information in accessible formats, and the lack of reasonable accommodation in schools and workplaces. To this end, it is imperative that we align ourselves with the values of universal accessibility and universal design. Universal access is when the focus of attention is shifted from the individual with the disability to the environment in which they live. In this instance, universal access demands that the environment and society be more adaptable and flexible. The universal access approach conceptualises a disability as an experience where the environment in which a person functions or interacts is inaccessible, and may include social, attitudinal, learning, administrative, and physical barriers for a student. Therefore, while universal access does benefit people with disabilities, other demographics of people enjoy the advantages brought about by this approach.

Let us use two examples to illustrate this: Firstly, ramps are indeed useful for wheelchair users and people who use canes/crutches to gain entry to buildings. However, it is also useful for students and professionals who may regularly cart around large volumes of documents, files, and/or books – hello Accounting students! The second example is one highlighted by the current COVID-19 pandemic: creating opportunities for multiple methods of submitting assessments. In responding to the pressures and threat that COVID-19 posed for the academic year, it quickly became obvious that the stringent methods of assessment that we were accustomed to would simply not suffice, as students grappled with varying degrees of access to equipment and infrastructure in order to make these submissions. Therefore, more academic staff embraced and opened opportunities for submissions through alternative platforms that require significantly less data and is therefore less expensive. While this was helpful to students who faced unprecedented pressure due to lack of access to university computer labs, it also expanded the opportunities for more diverse student-teacher engagement beyond the often-inaccessible methods previously available.

Universally Accessible Communication
With the advent of COVID-19, various institutions have embarked on aggressive communication campaigns to ensure that they convey their messages as clearly and to as wide an audience as possible. However, unfortunately these were not always successful, as they often failed to prioritise people with disabilities by not ensuring that the methods of communication were accessible to all. For example, in order to simplify the message of COVID-19 transmission, a lot of organisations developed animation videos. However, these videos would either have audio not accompanied by closed captions/subtitles, which resulted in deaf, hard-of-hearing, and deafened members of our communities not being able to access the message. Alternatively, the video would only have subtitles, thereby excluding blind and partially sighted people.

This finally brings us to the crux of this article: to encourage all of us to treat universal access as the primary approach of communication in order to avoid the exclusion of significant sections of society. This approach further ensures that the constitutionally mandated right of access to information is upheld for all people. Access to information is vital to ensure maximum participation and opportunities for success, particularly for those who have previously been denied their human rights – such as persons with disabilities, through ostracism, exclusion, and discrimination.

In keeping with the UFS Language Policy, our university communication is conveyed in English. However, statistically speaking, the majority of the university staff and students indicate English as their second and sometimes even third language. To this end, a universally accessible strategy would improve the quality of communication and encourage wider engagement if it employed multiple methods of conveyance, for example, audio, closed captions, and screen-reading software, and (where material is printed for distribution) different formats should be available, such as electronic text, Braille or enlarged font. The reason for this is that we all have different styles of learning and understanding; creating opportunities to cater for this variety serves to accomplish – instead of deterring – the ideal that the Integrated Transformation Plan (ITP) articulates as “a transformed university which strives for social justice in everything it does.”

To this end, the Centre for Universal Access and Disability Support (CUADS) at the University of the Free State has developed the Universal Access Checklist in an effort to equip and support the university community, as it continuously strives to create and cultivate a demonstrably inclusive culture. The Universal Access Checklist is a useful resource for planning a variety of in-person and virtual events and situations. It seeks to express, in a simple manner, the basic elements to achieve accessibility in our various endeavours – whether in the planning of events, communicating vital information, or creating resources. The Universal Access Checklist can therefore be used in a variety of situations. CUADS is also available to provide training and support on this document to faculties, divisions, and departments seeking it. Requests and enquiries can be sent to MoeraneMM@ufs.ac.za

CUADS contact information
Email: cuads@ufs.ac.za
Bloemfontein Campus: MirandaMH@ufs.ac.za / +27 51 401 3713
Qwaqwa Campus: ThuloTB@ufs.ac.za / +27 58 718 5189
South Campus: MotaungEG@ufs.ac.za / +27 51 505 1355
Facebook: Centre for Universal Access and Disability Support (CUADS)

CUADS offers academic support to students and staff with disabilities through services such as:

Disability Support Programme, which entails the provision of specialist and a holistic coordinated approach in student support, while also availing information for data collection and reporting purposes.  The aim of the programme is to create enabling environments that empower students with disabilities to participate equally.  
• Accessible Transport Programme, which includes the provision of accessible transport to students with disabilities between the Bloemfontein and South Campuses.
• Liaison, Awareness and Advocacy Programme for the development of awareness and advocacy for persons with disabilities across all three campuses. Partnerships here are the Centre for Teaching and Learning, Student Life, and Communities.
• Staff with Disabilities Programme to advance optimal support for staff members with disabilities, together with Human Resources.
• Staff Development and Training Programme in partnership with Human Resources, to develop an institutional knowledge-based culture of mindfulness regarding the diverse student population of the UFS.
• Accessibility Programme to ensure access to all buildings and facilities for all users according to the principles of Universal Access and Universal Design, together with University Grounds and Estates.
• Accessible Study Material Production Programme for the provision of academic support through the coordination and production of accessible learning material and lectures with academic departments and lecturers.
• Communication Access Programme for the provision of academic support through the facilitation and coordination of communication access together with Interpreter Services.
• Alternative Assessment Programme by facilitating and coordinating alternative assessment options together with the Examination Division and Student Development and Counselling.
• Student Academic Support Programme to move away from all academic support services to persons with disabilities predominantly being the responsibility of CUADS in collaboration with the Centre for Teaching and Learning – WriteSite, A_Step Programme.

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