Having programs in place to support people who do chose to have families and do not have the option or the inclination to rely on spouses or others for caregiving doesn't take away from those who want to spend all their time working. Power to them! They will probably make tenure faster! But I think it is important to make it possible for those who can't spend all their time working also to advance their careers.
I think it is important to recognize that, if as a society, we want more gender equity in academia then we have to create institutions that don't force people to chose work over family in order to succeed. It is simply a reality that, historically, women have had to make that tough decision and that is why so many university departments are disproportionately male. If we want a more equitable gender distribution then we need to create institutions that deal with the world as it is rather than addressing policies to some abstracted supposedly equal individual. There are other reasons why creating a more flexible workspace is important -- for people caring for relatives, for people dealing with illness, and for those who have physical disabilities. I want to be part of a more inclusive future in academia. On Sep 22, 2011, at 10:26 PM, Aaron T. Dossey wrote: > The last two paragraphs seem sexist to me, assuming that it's only women who > are the "home makers", and all women are home makers. > > The recommendations in the last paragraph seem discriminatory against > unmarried people, and especially unmarried people with no children. At some > point, I think the reality has to be recognized that one's family life is not > the responsibility of one's employer. Let's say some special perks for > married people, and then married people with kids, are instituted (they > already kind of are, spousal hirings and such).... where does it end? The > needs of a single parent are tremendous compared to those of married parents. > There is also a large difference in the needs for someone or a couple with > one child versus 3, or 5, or 8 (sometimes all at once! :) )! Then there's > differences in cultures and religions to consider..... > > It seems like weaving a very complex web. However, maybe, just maybe everyone > can be treated equally as an individual/professional and leave it at that? > > Aaron T. Dossey, Ph.D. > Biochemistry and Molecular Biology > http://www.allthingsbugs.com/Curriculum_Vitae.pdf > > > > On 9/22/2011 5:19 PM, Judith S. Weis wrote: >> This article from the AWIS newsletter is pertinent to recent discussions >> on this list. >> >> Work-Life Balance and Success in a Scientific Career >> >> Work-life balance in a rigorous academic career is slowly being adopted as >> part of the scientific community’s lexicon, although some resist its >> infiltration. Especially in a tough economic climate with a dwindling >> number of grants being awarded these days, it is of utmost importance for >> researchers to stay on top of their game and produce results. This often >> comes at the expense of personal and family obligations, let alone leisure >> activities. However, some have realized that leisure is an integral part >> of a researcher’s life…not only for work-life balance, but also for the >> betterment of ideas and scientific discovery. >> >> This month in Nature, Dr. Julie Overbaugh from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer >> Research Center in Seattle, WA argues, “Scientists should make time for >> play to complement their intense work, maintain creativity and keep the >> ideas flowing.” She acknowledges that while it is sometimes necessary to >> pull all-nighters in the name of pending deadlines, more hours in the lab >> does not equate to better results. “In fact,” she notes, “I have many of >> my best ideas while walking the dogs in the morning, riding my bike home >> from work or weekending in the mountains.” >> >> For Dr. Quinones-Hinojosa at Johns Hopkins, on the other hand, these types >> of activities are utterly incompatible with a serious career in cancer >> research. Heidi Ledford of Nature News recently decided to investigate >> “24/7 labs” where the number of hours logged is most crucial to success in >> the eyes of the PI, and she interviewed the students and postdocs who work >> for them. Contrary to many who turned her down due to fear of being >> portrayed as “slave-drivers” Dr. Quinones-Hinojosa welcomed her into his >> lab, eager to show off his neurosurgery skills and devoted research team >> of tired students and postdocs. >> >> At first glance, it would seem that with 13 concurrent grants, 113 >> publications since 2005 and an h index of 27, compared with the average of >> 10.7 among his neuroscience colleagues, that the long hours Dr. >> Quinones-Hinojosa requires of himself and his team have paid off in >> spades. However, it all depends on how you measure success. Attending >> late-night lab meetings every Friday and working through all major >> holidays, some of the students in this lab cited not being able to see >> their families abroad for years. Furthermore, the PI himself admits to >> being an absentee father. He notes that while in residency at the >> University of California, San Francisco, his three young children thought >> he lived at the hospital, and effectively – he did – clocking 140 hours a >> week. Yet strangely, he seems to truly enjoy his career and life choices. >> >> This then begs the question of how to define work-life balance. Some have >> argued that this term is insufficient; rejecting the notion that any >> semblance of balance between work and family or personal life can >> reasonably by achieved in the throes of a research-oriented academic >> career. Instead, terms such as “work-life satisfaction” have emerged. This >> suggests that whatever ratio of work to personal time needs to be achieved >> in order for an individual to be satisfied is sufficient. But one has to >> wonder if Dr. Quinones-Hinojosa would even be able to choose his current >> work-life ratio without a spouse at home to take care of their three >> children? >> >> Because many women scientists don’t have the luxury of choosing between >> work and family, it is vitally important for academic institutions to >> adopt flexible work-life policies, and encourage employees to take >> advantage of them. At AWIS, we have just begun a new initiative to study >> and identify best practices for workplace flexibility in academia. Tools >> for Change: A Project for Stepping Up Retention of Women in the Academic >> STEM Pipeline is a partnership between AWIS and Dr. Mary Ann Mason from >> the Center for Economics& Family Security at UC Berkeley, as well as Dr. >> Joan C. Williams from the Center for WorkLife Law at UC Hastings. Funded >> by the National Science Foundation (NSF) ADVANCE program, our study will >> provide a rigorous economic analysis on the cost of losing precious talent >> throughout the "leaky" STEM pipeline and the benefits of implementing >> flexible, family-responsive workplace practices. > ---------------------------------------------- Georgina Cullman Ph.D. Candidate American Museum of Natural History/Faculty Fellow Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Biology Columbia University [email protected]
