Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
27 November 2023 Photo KALEIDOSCOPE
Prof Francis Petersen
Prof Francis Petersen, Vice-Chancellor and Principal of the University of the Free State.

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


The 16 Days of Activism Against Women and Child Abuse campaign has over the years raised valuable awareness around the pervasive scourge of gender-based violence that continues to plague our country in general – and our institutions of higher learning in particular. But, as with any campaign around an issue of such importance, it is vital that awareness evolves into real action. And in the higher education sphere, there is much that universities can do to make a real difference, says Prof Francis Petersen.

South Africa’s levels of violence against the more vulnerable sectors of our society remain alarming. The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) recently expressed grave concern over the latest crime statistics released by the South African Police Service. It revealed that more than three children and twelve women were murdered daily in South Africa over a 90-day period between October and December last year – while another 21 434 women and children suffered attempted murder or grievous bodily harm.

Such staggering levels of abuse can simply never be accepted as the norm. On our university campuses in particular, the rate of gender-based violence remains unacceptably high. As university authorities, it is essential that we never lose the impetus to combat this, and that we keep on dedicating resources, time, perspectives, skills, and insights to help bring about real change. 

Creating safe spaces 

It starts by ensuring that our campuses constitute physically safe spaces for our students – with all the necessary security measures in place to ensure a living and learning environment free from risk or fear. Here, special attention should be paid to ensuring safety at on-campus and off-campus accommodation, and while commuting to and from them. Policies around gender-based violence need to be developed and regularly reviewed, and the necessary support structures should be established and empowered – not only to provide aftercare, but also to work towards prevention. Universities should treat all incidents of gender-based violence in a serious light, consistently responding with swift and thorough investigations and appropriate disciplinary action. The ultimate aim is to create environments where all students and staff feel secure and respected, regardless of their gender and sexual orientation.

But our campuses should also be intellectually safe spaces, where students feel free to speak out about issues that concern them, and where archaic ideas around masculinity can be exposed, challenged, and contested without fear of humiliation or retribution. Platforms for discourse and discussion need to be deliberately created for this, with the university leadership setting the tone by speaking out against issues that work against a culture of social justice on our campuses.

Creating a safe, caring environment for our students includes listening to them, responding in an appropriate and timely way, and working with them towards co-creating real workable solutions. An important part of this is to include students in university governance structures, where they can actively influence policy and decision making around issues that affect them.

Changing harmful gender stereotypes

As centres for innovation, research, dissemination, and application of knowledge, it is essential that universities use their society-focused role to speak out against harmful gender stereotypes and outdated perceptions around gender roles. In the process, we play an important part in influencing a new generation of leaders and helping to reshape societal norms and expectations.  Our curricula should include a comprehensive focus on principles of gender parity, incorporating GBV awareness and prevention – which is why curriculum renewal remains so important. And why curricular and co-curricular programmes should all be underscored by a value system of equity, care, and social justice. 

As microcosms of what an ideal society should look like, it is of course equally essential that this equity is reflected in universities’ own human resources policies, staff complements, and hiring procedures. 

Mental health support

Universities are ideally placed to provide professional mental health support to victims of abuse – many of whom would otherwise not have easy access to it.  This support extends to cultivating assertiveness and resilience in our students. Through individual therapy, as well as the various self-awareness programmes offered on our campuses, we empower potential victims to realise their own worth. It also equips them with knowledge on how to avoid an abusive situation, and how to act when they find themselves in it. 

Combating economic abuse 

Economic abuse is a manifestation of gender-based violence that is too often overlooked. This silent and insidious form of abuse traps women in a cycle of dependency and can prevent them from pursuing employment prospects and attaining personal growth. Education remains one of the most potent weapons in the fight against economic abuse. But it needs to go even further than that. As hubs of research and critical thinking, universities should use their resources towards understanding the dynamics of economic abuse – its prevalence, consequences, and the most effective interventions to address it. As part of our society-focused role, we should also use our knowledge and skills to provide counselling, legal aid, and economic advice. 

Harnessing technology to fight abuse

The digital sphere has become a critical battleground in the fight against gender-based violence. Not only does it provide access to online platforms where survivors of gender-based violence can speak out, share experiences, and create a support network – it also enables counsellors and caregivers to reach victims who would otherwise not be able to make use of their services.

On top of that, online platforms offer a safe and discreet way for survivors to report incidents and access legal and other aid. Part of our teaching and learning as well as our community engagement functions as universities is to educate our staff and students and also the wider community about these possibilities, equipping them with digital competencies, and helping to facilitate access to online resources.

Driving a collaborative approach

I believe it is abundantly clear that institutions of higher learning have an important and meaningful role to play in the fight against gender-based violence on a variety of fronts. It is a role we should embrace, develop, and refine with growing determination. What is equally clear is that it is a fight we cannot win on our own. A collaborative approach by higher education, the private and business sector, and government is needed – to reinforce anti-abuse discourse from various angles and to escalate it into real, sustainable, and effective action.

Creating a culture of responsibility 

This much remains clear: The responsibility of preventing gender-based violence lies not only with the potential victims, but with every member of society. Universities should establish clear and mandatory reporting protocols for staff and students who witness or are aware of instances of abuse. But even more important – create a culture of responsibility, where information sharing, support, and assistance are a natural outflow of a caring, cohesive institution. 

Establishing such united university communities, based on equity, inclusivity, and social justice, is the only way we can hope to eradicate gender-based violence from our campuses – and in turn, from our society as a whole. 

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