Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
14 September 2021 | Story Dr Jan du Plessis and Dr Mampoi Jonas

Opinion article by Dr Jan du Plessis, Head of the Paediatric Oncology Unit, and Dr Mampoi Jonas, senior lecturer in the Paediatric Oncology, University of the Free State 


For many years childhood cancer has remained a taboo subject in our communities, mainly because too little was or is known about it. Many have known or come across an adult with cancer but for a child to be diagnosed with cancer is totally unheard of. No parent wants to hear the news that their ‘heartbeat in human form’ has fallen ill. One moment they are OK, the next, waves of emotions flood the parents. Mixed in all this are feelings of guilt, anxiety, uncertainty, constant wondering if they could have done anything differently. Most importantly the question, often unuttered remains “Is my child dying/ how much time do I have”.

Most young cancer patients live in developing countries

Childhood cancer is rare and involves only 1% of all cancers. It is reported that globally approximately 70% of all childhood cancer cases occur in low- and middle-income countries. If diagnosed early, approximately 70-80% of childhood cancers are curable in developed countries. Unfortunately, most children with cancer live in developing countries with limited resources and the cure rate does not reflect the same success. The low survival rates can be attributed to poor diagnosis coupled with too few specially trained doctors and nurses and the misbelief that child cancer is too difficult to cure. However, even in resource-poor environments at least 50% of childhood cancers can be cured.

Numerically, childhood cancer is not a significant cause of death in sub-Saharan African countries, which leaves childhood cancer less of a priority. In Africa, the most common paediatric health problems are malnutrition, infectious diseases such as HIV and tuberculosis. Whereas in Western countries, after accidents, cancer is the second leading cause of death in children and is a burden to the health system.

A study done by Stones et al in 2014 published the survival rates for children with cancer in South Africa at two different Units (Universitas and Tygerberg Hospitals) to be around 52%. The conclusion was that the children present late and with advanced-stage disease, which obviously affects their outcome. They also concluded that strategies to improve awareness of childhood cancer should be improved. Identifying early warning signs of childhood cancer is critical for parents and healthcare workers to ensure early diagnosis and improved cure rates. We often refer to these as red flag signs that should raise suspicion of the possibility of cancer as a diagnosis for the presenting patient.

Almost 85% of childhood cancers will present with the red flag signs, which could suggest the possibility of a childhood cancer, namely:
1. Pallor and purpura (bruising)
2. Bone and joint pain
3. Lymphadenopathy
4. Unexplained masses on any body part
5. Unexplained neurological signs
6. Changes in the orbit or eye
7. Persistent unexplained fever and weight loss

The most common cancer in children is leukaemia (blood cancer). Brain tumours are the most common non-haematological cancers, followed by nephroblastomas (kidney cancers) and neuroblastomas (sympathetic chain cells, the adrenal glands the most common site of origin).

We honour the children currently battling cancer and their families 

Once there is clinical suspicion of cancer, the child should be investigated or referred for the relevant investigations to be conducted to get to the right diagnosis. Treatment for childhood cancer includes chemotherapy, surgery or radiotherapy. These may be given separately or in combination depending on the diagnosis. Many models of care exist, but regardless of the outcome, children and families who receive compassionate, holistic care of symptomatology and address their non-physical needs are able to face their illness with dignity and energy.  

Childhood Cancer should not remain a taboo subject in South Africa and should be a topic of conversation more often so that people can be educated regarding the early warning signs and become more aware of its occurrence amongst children. Get the word out that a cure is possible. This month, which is known as Childhood Cancer Awareness Month, and throughout the year, we honour the children currently battling cancer, the families who love them, the clinicians and other caregivers treating them, the survivors of childhood cancer and the children who lost their lives to childhood cancer. 

Authors

Dr Jan Du Plessis for web 
Dr Jan du Plessis is the Head of the Paediatric  Oncology Unit in the Faculty of Health Sciences at
the University of the Free State (UFS).  


DrJonas for web
Dr Mampoi Jonas is a senior lecturer in the Paediatric Oncology, University of the Free State (UFS).

News Archive

CR Swart Memorial Lecture: Mr Cecil le Fleur
2006-08-08

Khoe and San call for government to speed up policy dialogue with indigenous communities  

 Mr Cecil le Fleur, leader of the National Khoe-San Consultative Conference and member of the executive management of the National Khoe-San Council, has called for a national policy on indigenous peoples to protect the human rights and special needs of indigenous people in South Africa.

 Mr Le Fleur delivered the 38th CR Swart Memorial Lecture on the Khoe and San at the University of the Free State (UFS).  He commended the UFS for its serious approach to the Khoe and San and for initiating initiatives such as a research project on the Griqua in which various aspects linked to language, -culture, -history, - leadership, their role in the South African community (past and present) and the conservation of their historical cultural heritages will be covered.   

 “The policy dialogue with indigenous communities initiated by government in 1999 and supported by the International Labour Organisation (ILO), has been exceedingly slow, owing to political and bureaucratic problems,” said Mr Le Fleur.

 According to Mr Le Fleur the slow pace is also impacting negatively on the United Nations’ efforts to expand the international standards and mechanisms for human rights so as to include the special needs of indigenous peoples.

 “The successful adoption of a South African policy would probably have a major impact on the human rights culture of Africa and, more specifically, on the UN system,” he said.

 “South Africa has a powerful moral authority internationally and is willing to use this authority in multilateral forums. At this stage, however, South Africa’s Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) may not take an official position on UN instruments and declarations pertaining to indigenous issues, until the Cabinet has resolved its own domestic policy position,” he said. 

 According to Mr le Fleur it therefore came as a great surprise when the DFA brought out a positive vote in the UN for the adoption of the "Draft Declaration on the Rights of indigenous Peoples" in June this year, even before the completion of the policy process. 

 Policy consolidation in South Africa is the primary key to creating a new policy climate in Africa in order to protect the rights of indigenous peoples.  “The existing constitution of the Republic of South Africa is one of the most liberal on the continent, and embraces the concept of redress of past discrimination.  It already includes a clause (Section 6) making provision for the protection of language rights for Khoe and San peoples - the fist peoples of southern Africa,” he said. 

 “If South Africa can effectively integrate this ‘third generation’ of collective rights within an existing democratic constitution, this will send a clear message to Africa and the world that indigenous rights are a necessary component of human and civil rights in modern democracies,” he said.

 Mr Le Fleur proposed an institutional framework based on set principles that would satisfy the needs and aspirations of the Griqua and other first indigenous peoples in South Africa.  “The proposed framework was based on the notion of vulnerability as a result of colonialism and apartheid, which stripped us of our indigenous identity, cultural identity and pride as people.  This injustice can hardly be addressed within the existing mechanisms provided by the current text of the Constitution,” he said.

 Mr Le Fleur also proposed that the principles of unique first-nation status, as recognised in international law, should be applied in the construction of the framework of the constitutional accommodation for the Khoe and San. 

 Mr Le Fleur further proposed that the Khoe and San’s indigenous status in constitutional terms must be separate from the constitutional acknowledgement of their status as a cultural community, as envisaged in sections 185 and 186 of the Constitution of 1996.

 According to Mr Le Fleur, the suggested mechanism should make provision for structures such as:

  •  A statutory representative council for First Indigenous Peoples of South Africa at a national level;
  • a separate Joint Standing Committee on Indigenous and Traditional Affairs, in both the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces on which the Khoe and San can be represented;
  • a representative structure for the Khoe and San in the legislature of each relevant province; and
  • ex officio membership in the relevant structures of local government.

Media release
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Media Representative
Tel:   (051) 401-2584
Cell:  083 645 2454
E-mail:  loaderl.stg@mail.uovs.ac.za 
24 August 2006


- Full lecture
- Photo gallery
 

 

 

 

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