Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
23 July 2025 | Story Tshepo Tsotetsi | Photo Kaleidoscope Studios
Global Student Well-being Summit 2025
Students from across South Africa and the continent gathered at the University of the Free State’s South Campus for the 2025 Global Student Well-Being Summit, engaging in three days of dialogue, learning, and collaboration.

The University of the Free State (UFS) recently hosted the 2025 Global Student Well-being Summit, bringing together more than 20 institutions from across South Africa and the African continent. The three-day event, which took place from 16 to 18 July at the UFS South Campus, was themed ‘Co-Creating Student Well-being Strategies from the Student’s Perspective’ and positioned students at the centre of the conversation on well-being in higher education.

Universities such as the University of Zambia, National University of Lesotho, University of Namibia, the international Limkokwing University of Creative Technology, and 15 South African universities were among those represented by students, academics, institutional leaders, and wellness experts. Together, they tackled pressing issues related to mental health, academic pressure, inclusion, identity, and care in university spaces.

 

Building a culture of well-being and collaboration

“We came here to address the critical issues that our students are facing, especially in relation to student well-being,” said Dr Temba Hlasho, Executive Director of Student Affairs at UFS, in his opening remarks. “In today’s fast-paced and demanding academic landscape, student well-being is essential for academic success, personal growth, and future career prospects.”

The summit’s programme included plenaries and parallel sessions covering a broad range of topics such as healthy masculinity, transactional sex, stigma and discrimination, and the struggles of minority groups in higher education. These sessions were led by a combination of students and staff, reflecting the summit’s commitment to co-creation.

In a recorded address, UFS Vice-Chancellor and Principal Prof Hester C. Klopper highlighted the need for a collective response to student well-being across institutions and national borders. “They are part of a shared human experience that demands a shared response,” she said. “Students are not merely receivers of academic knowledge – they are whole human beings… carrying hopes and fears, dreams and anxieties.”

Prof Klopper also pointed to the need for honesty and vulnerability in the sector. “We should not be scared to fail – as long as we fail forward,” she said, adding that innovation in student support comes not only from sharing best practices but from learning what doesn’t work.

Student participants described the summit as eye-opening and deeply personal. “I realised that mental health is crucial, serving as the driving force behind daily functioning,” said Olwethu Sigcu, a BCom in Economics and Finance (extended) student from the UFS Bloemfontein Campus. “I previously overlooked its significance, but the summit motivated me to adopt a more comprehensive approach to health – considering physical, mental, and spiritual well-being.”

Institutional Student Representative Council President Mpho Maloka said the experience offered both leadership growth and personal transformation. “As a young woman navigating complex spaces, I was given an opportunity to grow that I didn’t even know I needed,” she said. “This summit is not just another checkbox on a list of student initiatives – it represents a culture.”

Dr Hlasho also noted that the outcomes of the summit align with several United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, in particular SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), SDG 4 (Quality Education), and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals). He encouraged students to lead the shift towards healthier, more inclusive communities, stressing the need for long-term impact driven by young people.

The summit closed with a clear message: student well-being is not a side programme but is foundational to academic success and meaningful social change. And it must be co-created with students, not for them.

 

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