Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
22 September 2021 | Story Prof Francis Petersen | Photo Sonia Small (Kaleidoscope Studios)
Prof Francis Petersen is Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the University of the Free State.

Opinion article by Prof Francis Petersen, Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the University of the Free State.


South Africa is in trouble. No matter what your political or ethical persuasion – this much is abundantly clear. And if some of the opinions expressed lately by prominent economists are anything to go by, many are losing faith in whether we can still turn around a downward economic trajectory. 

 

But before we make up our minds either way, it is important to first face a truth that lies at the core of it all:  It is impossible to build a thriving economy on the back of a divided society. This makes societal reform a logical departure point for any economic relief efforts.  

And here the higher education sector has a definite and vital role to play.

On the battlefield of unexpected calamities, the South African economy can be compared to a soldier who has taken too many hits.  First, the devastating impact on so many sectors of our society caused by COVID-19 lockdowns and restrictions; followed by the question over misspent or missing pandemic support funds; and then the final agonising blow – the looting and destruction in Gauteng and KwaZulu-Natal in July, leaving a gaping hole of around 50 billion rand in damages

Equally heart-breaking and disconcerting as the physical damages and loss of life, is the damage caused to our nation’s psyche, with racist and classist fault lines reappearing, fuelled by the divisive rhetoric of unscrupulous leaders.
Looming ominously over this crowded battlefield, are the murky clouds of corruption at the highest level and of the most disturbing kind, which have been systematically and painfully laid bare by the Zondo Commission over the past three years.

We truly find ourselves at a very low point as a nation. Financially, morally, and mentally.

And, like all other sectors of society, higher education needs to ask itself what it can do – if anything – to help fix what is broken. 

Changing role of universities

Universities used to have a rather narrow focus on education and the creation of new knowledge. This role has, however, evolved considerably over the past decade or two. Their function nowadays is very much a societal one, where the focus on using skills and knowledge to make a real difference in the societies they serve and draw their students from – the engaged university.  

Let’s be clear: Higher education cannot solve poverty and inequality. That is the domain of government, which needs to ensure that appropriate policies are in place that will constructively stimulate investment and assistance from the private sector and industry.

The higher education sector needs to focus on its strengths. And that is to do research; to offer advice and come up with possible solutions; to educate and to provide skills that will help uplift individuals, families, and communities.

In short: universities need to deliver graduates who will ultimately build a better society, and through engaged scholarship change the lives of people. 

What has become abundantly clear, though, is that education alone is not enough. The corruption implications and moral dilemmas that many of our highly qualified politicians and leaders are embroiled in, prove that more is needed than just academic aptitude. 

The purpose of universities should therefore not only be to deliver good workers or thinkers. Universities need to deliver good citizens. Citizens that possess unshakeable values and ethics, enabling them to become good leaders.

During a recent 2021 University of the Free State Thought-Leader webinar titled Is South Africa falling apart – where to from here? panellists stated that the role of universities is to create a culture of active citizenry, to play a part in the holistic transformation of society, to ensure the sharing of research and discoveries, and to ensure inclusive academic excellence. These are no small feats and something higher education institutions should strive for.  

Creating a new generation of leaders

While young people spend time on university campuses, it is vital that – along with academic knowledge – universities educate them about the norms and values that form the bedrock of a healthy, thriving society. Not only teaching these values of social justice, respect, tolerance, and care – but also demonstrating how they find practical application.   
Universities should be microcosms of an ideal society, where respect for human rights and diversity, equality, and care underpin all our policies, communication, and interactions.

Universities should consistently use discourse platforms to promote these values and to speak out against things that threaten them, such as corruption, injustice, and prejudice in any form.

But once again, it goes further than that. Not only do we need to teach and encourage our students to speak out. We need to educate them on how to speak out. 

Unfortunately, so many of the student protest actions on our university campuses often fall short in this aspect, as valid concerns and demands are regularly overshadowed by disrespectful rhetoric, accompanied by unwarranted destruction of property and endangering lives. 

Recently, the University of the Free State had the opportunity to host a book launch by Helen Zille, the Federal Council Chairperson of the DA. Among the guests was EFF leader Julius Malema.

Afterwards, some Political Science students remarked how surprised they were to witness the very civil interaction between Zille and Malema – in the light of their very public political spats and differences.

And here lies an important lesson for our young South Africans: that there is a level of maturity that needs to be displayed if we want to take our country forward together. 

We can differ from someone – and passionately express our differences – but retain an atmosphere of tolerance and mutual respect. Our young leaders of tomorrow need to understand that, in the absence of such an atmosphere, reasonable negotiations become impossible, and they run the real risk of thwarting the very cause they are fighting for. 

Interconnectedness of our society

As much as higher education has a clearly defined role, it can only fulfil this role effectively if it is part of a well-functioning, larger system. |

As higher education, government, private sector, and industry, we are interconnected and unable to function properly in isolation.

Universities can, for example, teach young people the value of entrepreneurship and equip them with the necessary skills to contribute to the economy. But without an enabling environment created by government, policies, and commitment, as well as buy-in and support from industry, it all falls apart.

As much as I cannot thrive if my neighbour is suffering, we cannot rebuild our economy if we don’t acknowledge our interdependence and find new, innovative ways to collaborate to move ahead together.  

The age-old principles of ubuntu need to find a renewed, modern application in South Africa today. 

Involving our youth

Whatever form economic rescue efforts take, it must involve the young people of our country. Making decisions that will profoundly influence our youth without involving them in the process, is downright irresponsible. 

We simply cannot afford to alienate our leaders of tomorrow and then expect them to be ready to take over the baton and not repeat the mistakes of their predecessors.

At the University of the Free State, our student participation in university governance structures was at an all-time high of 70% last year. We see this as an important accomplishment – we hope to build on and expand this even further. In most of my dealings with our young leaders of tomorrow, I certainly get the impression that they are keen to make a positive contribution to our country. But they yearn for guidance, encouragement, and opportunities.  

‘Nothing about us without us’, is a slogan used widely in various contexts nowadays, with its roots tracing back to South African disability advocates in the 1980s. It is equally applicable to young people in our current South African predicament.

Our youth needs to be turned from apathy to active involvement. Without them, no economic ‘rescue efforts’ will have long-term sustainability. 

After all: it is their future that is at stake.

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