Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
11 May 2022 | Story Anthony Mthembu | Photo Edmund de Wet
House Ardour
Students of House Ardour along with other dignitaries cut the ribbon as they launch their new name.

The Health Sciences residence on the Bloemfontein Campus of the University of the Free State (UFS), commonly referred to as SHU 8, has been renamed House Ardour. The official launch of the residence name took place on Saturday, 7 May 2022 in the Callie Human Centre on the Bloemfontein Campus. “This is really a historic moment for us in Residence Affairs, Student Affairs, and I think for the university at large,” expressed the Assistant Director of Student Life at the UFS, Pulane Malefane. The launch takes place after two years of planning and discussions about an appropriate name for the residence. As such, the launch was well attended by some of the students living in the newly renamed residence, along with other dignitaries such as Prof Colin Chasi, Director of the Unit for Institutional Change and Social Justice, Quintin Koetaan, Senior Director of Housing and Residence Affairs, Prof Mpho Jama, Associate Professor in the Office of the Dean: Faculty of Health Sciences, and Nthabiseng Mokhethi who serves as Ardour’s Residence Head, among others.

Embracing a New Name

The name Ardour means to love, and to do something with great passion and enthusiasm. Malefane says the name is symbolic of the fact that many of the students in this residence will go out into the world and delineate those very values through their servitude. There has been a deep yearning from the student body for the renaming of the Health Sciences residence for quite some time. As such, the launch and celebration of this name is acknowledging the residence as part of the UFS community. “Names are important, names can carry deep personal, cultural, and historical connections, it also gives us a sense of who we are, the communities we belong to, and our places in the world,” Malefane highlighted during her speech in the Callie Human Centre.

The Importance of the Residence

Although this co-ed residence is not restricted to students within the Faculty of Health Sciences, the residence is a response to some of the problems that students in the faculty have been facing. “During recess when all the other students have to go home, some of our students still need to remain on campus or even come back earlier. This has created the need to say that we cannot allow our students to move between residences when they have such an academic workload that requires them to be in a space in which they don’t have to worry about where they are going to stay,” indicated Prof Jama. As such, the residence is also an essential way of ensuring that students from the Faculty of Health Sciences focus on developing academically as well as socially in the university space, without worrying about accommodation. 

Subsequent to a few remarks from the dignitaries at the Callie Human Centre, some of the guests descended to Ardour for the cutting of the ribbon. The ribbon was cut by Emily Chikobvu who serves as Ardour’s Prime, along with Quintin Koetaan, and Nthabiseng Mokhethi. “Moving forward, we do not want to hear the name Shoe 8 – that name is in the past – from now on we shall be referred to as House Ardour,” stated Vusimuzi Gqalane, Senior Assistant in the Unit for Institutional Change and Social Justice.


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