Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

#YouthMonth: Opinion: A day, a month, a lifetime

29 June 2023 | Story Dr Ina Gouws | Photo Supplied

Opinion article by Dr Ina Gouws, Programme for Governance and Political Transformation,

University of the Free State

We find ourselves on the other side of another Youth Day in South Africa. I acknowledge the importance of this anniversary, although I recognise that it is not for me to fully comprehend the profound significance of commemorating the events of 16 June 1976. I therefore refrain from presuming to address the depth of pain, both enduring and otherwise, that this commemoration signifies.

Let me then stay with the broader significance of Youth Month in my deliberations.

Cabinet approved the theme for Youth Month 2023 to be: “Accelerating youth economic emancipation for a sustainable future”. In 2022 the theme was: “Promoting sustainable livelihood and resilience of young people for a better tomorrow”, and, in 2021 the theme was: “The Year of Charlotte Mannya Maxeke: Growing youth employment for an inclusive and transformed society”.

Cooperation and partnership between government and the youth is fractured

For a government known for abject failure especially regarding education and economic policy, these are lofty ambitions for which we have not seen positive results. I fear that most of our country’s youths are not aware of these themes or else take note with understandable cynicism. The trust they should have in our government to expect positive outcomes for policies and plans simply does not exist. The cooperation and partnership that needs to be forged between government and the youth in South Africa is therefore fractured to say the least. Consequently, a sense of disillusionment has taken hold.

Feelings of marginalisation and being unheard have bred disengagement, apathy, and even resentment. It appears this government can only talk a great game. None of this is news, is it? The problem is that the breakdown in trust undermines the foundation of a healthy democracy, hindering the government’s ability to effectively represent and address the needs of our youth. The effect of this failure has disastrous consequences for young people to the very core of their dignity.

It is therefore crucial to recognise the profound human consequences that come with unemployment and dire prospects. The impact of unemployment on young individuals is not to be underestimated or only boxed into aspects of economics, as it significantly disrupts their sense of self and place in the world way beyond that. I believe the approach in South Africa should therefore also recognise the intrinsic value and dignity of the youth beyond their economic productivity. As it is, I fear they have ended up finding their self-worth in only ever being prone to confrontation and protest, instead of constructive problem-solving. It is then no surprise that a grim view of the future can hinder the formation of new social connections and limit opportunities for networking, further exacerbating the isolation experienced by unemployed youth which feeds this apathy and disinterest the majority seem to have in the political process.

What is to be done?

I don’t see any purely political drive or approach to provoke widespread youth participation being successful in this context. What is to be done? We must start with ways to create ‘willingness’ first. For that, purpose beyond politics, in which they have lost trust and interest, is necessary. I have no doubt that the country’s youth care about their communities even if they feel disconnected and have little to offer to assist because of their dire socio-economic realities. We must create spaces for dialogue, storytelling, and collective reflection to challenge societal narratives surrounding work and success, promoting alternative measures of value and worth. Emphasising the importance of empathy, compassion, and community solidarity can help combat the stigmatisation and isolation faced by unemployed youth.

Moreover, recognising the agency and potential of young people is essential for the nation's future development and prosperity. It would be best to first focus on independent initiatives and collaborations outside of the government’s sphere of influence. Emphasising grassroots movements, civil society organisations, and community-led efforts that can drive change from the bottom up, could get the youth involved without focusing on politics alone. By focusing on initiatives that bypass or work independently of the government, youth can still actively participate and work towards their goals, and I believe that willingness to participate lies just below the surface.

Change will take time

The challenge, and perhaps frustration, is to recognise that long-term perspective and focus on building a sustainable foundation for youth political engagement will be necessary. With the damage that has been done, change will take time and involve continuous efforts beyond any specific government’s tenure. And relying so heavily on any community’s resilience should be seriously questioned, especially when it comes to the youth. There must be a more positive outcome than what they have thus far lived, after showing such perseverance. I believe we can help recover a willingness in our youth to again or for the first time participate in constructive ways to promote necessary change for themselves and their communities beyond a day or a month; for a lifetime.

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.

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

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