Women in Science: some thoughts, by Kathryn Else

Why are there more men than women in science, and particularly at the highest levels? This is not a new question, and there have been numerous women in science campaigns, but the fact that the question continues to be asked reflects its complex nature. I am a scientist, a woman, a professor and a mum. I feel I should be well placed to comment, but there is no easy answer.

So many factors have been debated before. Is it about the general female character? Do we lack confidence? Do we acquire roles less likely to attract promotion when a job is well done? Do we not blow our trumpet enough? Or is about having children, maternity leave and career breaks? Or…..? One thing is for sure: it is impossible to be prescriptive and things true for one woman may not be true for another. There is a whole spectrum of women out there and indeed life would be very boring if we were all the same!

I have read many articles on women in science over the years – some I’ve agreed with and felt “yes that’s me”, and others I haven’t. It is a topic with multiple components, some tangible, some less tangible and difficult to vocalise.  And now I have my own opportunity, as a scientist, a woman, and a Mum, to gather my own thoughts on the topic.

Nowadays there is recognition that science needs women, and indeed diversity in general, as this enables thinking differently. Differences in opinion, including disagreements with your own ideas might not always be easy to deal with, but results in creativity and good solutions.

So with this acknowledgement, why are there still few women at the top of the science career ladder?

 

Women, children, and the “hot seat”.

It is not simply about having children, as men are parents too! However, I clearly remember when pregnant with our 4th child, being asked “but Kathryn what about your career?” No one asked my husband the same question. Nowadays men are usually equal partners in child care responsibilities and indeed enjoy that part of their lives, but nature does place women in the “hot seat” with pregnancy and birth. We still don’t often talk about difficult pregnancies and when pregnancy goes wrong. Having experienced four miscarriages, and a hospitalised pregnancy culminating in a very poorly, premature baby, I know this can change you, your priorities and your ability to focus, for months, possibly even years.  Emotionally upsetting for men and women, the physical toll is on the woman. Pregnancies, and certainly difficult pregnancies, impact on the rate of research.  Reality is your pace of publications slows, and there is an impact on the rate of your research programmes in a fast moving scientific area. I have had referees of my grants comment on my “slowed pace” – not quality, but quantity for sure; and of course having children usually coincides with the time when women are trying to progress up the academic career ladder.

For me, having children had another more subtle effect on my career progression: I stopped wanting to go on conferences and so I lost ground in the networking circuit.  I didn’t want to be away from the kids, – certainly whilst they were very young – and when I was away, I was utterly miserable: “separation anxiety” I think it was called.

 

Juggling family and life in the lab

There are some key things that have helped me through the period when our children were very young: a very supportive partner who shared the “drop-offs” at school and “pick-ups” from nursery, and the house work; total confidence in our child care; and the great perk of academia – our flexibility, both informal and formal flexible working. I remember well a mum telling me she had missed the school assembly for parents, as she couldn’t get time off at work. All I had had to do was reorganise a group meeting to one hour later – my choice; I was in control. Of course, you have to accept life becomes unpredictable for years once you have young children, as you never know when illness might hit or the school shut because of snow (those “snow days” still celebrated by our 12 year old).

 

The less tangible factors

So perhaps a few things there that might affect mothers in science more than fathers in science, but it is not just about having children. For me, self-confidence has always been an issue. Resilience training has been useful in learning how to control how you react to an outcome, be that a grant not funded, paper rejected or a disappointing lab result. For career progression it is also important to plan a strategy and take on the right sort of roles that take your CV in the right direction. Take risks – are women more risk adverse? Push yourself out of your comfort zone and see what happens. Apply for management roles even if you are already subconsciously analysing whether you can do a good job. The most important thing is to really want the job, not to necessarily tick every single box of the job criteria. I have always been a dreadful brooder: replaying in my head over and over again when things go wrong. I was advised to write the issue down, to in effect log what was bothering me, and then leave the issue, to move on. It worked for me. I also try hard nowadays to not worry about what other people are thinking about me, very much part of developing self-confidence.

 

What can we do to help?

Universities can, and indeed do, do things to help. Most are very aware of gender equality issues and provide training in, for example, unconscious bias. Making sure seminar series include top female and male scientists provides a norm, and important role models. Many Universities offer mentoring schemes now. Mentors, either formal or informal, definitely help – a critical friend to run the idea of applying for promotion, or a new job, past. For me, being encouraged to apply for promotion made a difference. I didn’t want to push myself forward (perhaps I was afraid of failing, or didn’t want to look “silly” if I wasn’t up to scratch); I didn’t want to champion myself and blow my own trumpet. Thus, encouraging women to apply for promotion in the first place is an important strategy which will make a difference.

 

Top tips

I have found over time that being a scientist and women with children has helped me keep a sense of perspective when things in the lab don’t go quite to plan. I used to be a brooder, with low confidence; I multi-tasked and had fragmented time. I am more confident now, and I am much more able to focus on single-work tasks; and I block my time for teaching and for research. Wherever you are on the career ladder, be realistic about what you can cope with and don’t be afraid to say “no.”

Be organized; don’t feel guilty if you leave work “early”; have confidence in your childcare and most importantly focus on what matters – do what you are passionate about.

 

 

 

Posted in Opinion piece | Leave a comment

Why #soapboxscience in Manchester? By Jo Pennock

My family have a history in Manchester. My dad was born in Hulme about 1 mile from the University campus in a house that was reduced to rubble in the 1969 ‘redevelopment’. When he met my mum they were both working for Refuge Insurance (now the Palace Theatre) and used to go dancing in the Ritz during their lunch break. My dad was fiercely loyal to Manchester as a city, a culture and an extended family. Even though he grew up in what was later referred to as the Hulme slums, he thought the city had been generous to him. He passed his optimism on to me.

I am proud of Manchester. The Manchester Society for Women’s Suffrage was formed here in 1867 and the Pankhurst family lived and protested here until 1909, when they moved to London to become part of the growing women’s movement. The NHS was born here at Park Hospital, Davyhulme (now Trafford General Hospital) in 1948. Labour has held a majority in Manchester city council since 1973. The University of Manchester appointed its first female president in 2010, Professor Dame Nancy Rothwell who has championed social responsibility amongst staff and the widening community, making it the University’s third primary goal in the 2020 strategic plan.  As a city, Manchester has shown itself to be pioneering, outward looking and overwhelmingly in favour of gender equality and opportunity for all.

And yet. There is still room for improvement particularly for women in science.  Across the University of Manchester only 18% of professors are female. Some faculties host significantly more than others but the average is still low. We are very good at putting successful women in the spotlight, but I think still fail to nurture young female staff through the challenges of being a woman in science. We share the UK statistics which show that despite having more than 50% female science graduates, fewer than 11% of senior lecturers are female. We suffer from the UK ‘leaky pipeline’ so well described, demonstrating a significant loss of women as they move up the scientific career ladder. Bringing Soapbox Science to Manchester will raise the profile of 12 amazing women, from PhD student through to Professor, astrophysicists to biologists, who produce science worthy of public attention. We want to bring their science to the streets to inspire future generations of women with diverse stories from clouds to cancer, protons to parasites, neuropsychology to nanoscience.

I know Manchester will embrace Soapbox Science. I know that Piccadilly Gardens will be receptive to this fantastic, entertaining, inspiring event. Maybe we can contribute to the changing landscape of female scientists in Manchester. I hope it will become an annual event. #Science needs women and Manchester once again needs to join an inspiring women’s movement to look forward to change. I hope to see you there at 1pm Saturday 23rd July, Piccadilly Gardens, City Centre Manchester.

 

 

Posted in Event promotion | Leave a comment

Studied it? I’ve lived it! Meet Sarah Bennett

Pic3Sarah Bennett (@SarahBPhD) is a part-time PhD student at the University of the West of England (UWE) in Bristol. Her research focuses on Joint Hypermobility and Ehlers-Danlos Syndromes, heritable disorders of connective tissue, with a special interest in the psychological impact of these conditions and how people cope. Alongside this she works for the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) as a Higher Education Student Reviewer, support first-year UWE students as a Resident Accommodation Mentor and is a member of UWE’s Athena SWAN team. Come hear her talk “If You’re Hypermobile and You Know it, Clap Your Feet!” at the Bristol Broadmead podium on 16th July 2016.

 

SS: Sarah, how did you get to your current position?

SB: After graduating from the University of Exeter in 2011 with a 2:1 honours degree in Psychology, I spent a year supporting young people with a variety of special educational needs and disabilities, with a particular interest in young women with Asperger Syndrome. I went on to study for a Masters in Health Psychology at the University of Bath, with a placement in Adult and Adolescent Chronic Pain Management at the Royal National Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases (RNHRD). Here I worked on a research project looking at staff attitudes towards patients presenting to A&E with chronic pain. This was a fascinating opportunity; interviewing NHS doctors and nurses who felt powerless in the face of an ever-growing group of patients they could not cure.

My chronic pain research led me to discover a condition called Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome, also called Joint Hypermobility Syndrome. Spotting a potential gap in the research I wrote a PhD proposal and was put in touch with Professor Shea Palmer at the University of the West of England in Bristol, who has a great wealth of experience in joint hypermobility research and impact. I am now studying for a PhD with UWE, collaborating with two local NHS Trusts and two patient support groups: the Hypermobility Syndromes Association (HMSA) and Ehlers-Danlos Support UK (EDS-UK). We are due to begin recruitment shortly and I am excited to get started on research of my own!

 

SS: What, or who, inspired you to get a career in science?

SB: My family have always been incredibly supportive of all my ventures! I have always had a fascination for Biology, Chemistry and human health and disease, but it wasn’t until I reached College that I discovered Psychology and all the curious questions relating to experiences and behaviour that go along with it. As a result of being born very prematurely at 25 weeks I have faced many health-related challenges and -although I didn’t plan it- statistics examining contributing factors in Extremely Low Birth Weight (ELBW) premature babies and essays exploring gender differences in severe chronic pain have suited me very well! As one of my consultants put it: “Studied it? You’ve lived it!”. Just after completing my MSc I was diagnosed with Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome Hypermobility Type and Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome (POTS) by teams in Bath and at the Bristol Heart Institute. These experiences have allowed me a great positive appreciation and insight into under-represented groups within society, such as those with chronic pain and invisible disability.

 

SS: What is the most fascinating aspect of your research/work?

SB: The incredibly privileged position that we hold as researchers, hearing about people’s experiences and being lucky enough to be allowed into their lives, if only briefly. I am always enormously grateful to all participants for taking time to help with this under-studied area.

 

SS: What attracted you to Soapbox Science in the first place?

SB: The ability to connect with the general public. Although gender equality has come a long way, there is still underrepresentation of women within science and technology based subjects. I think it’s brilliant especially for younger children to gain an awareness of the variety of science-based roles out there to explore. Plus it forces researchers and academics to get years of work down to a few key messages that are clear, accessible and easy to understand.

 

SS: Sum up in one word your expectations for the day – excitement? Fear? Thrill? Anticipation?

SB: Enthusiasm! It’s a real privilege to be speaking at this event.

 

SS: If you could change one thing about the scientific culture right now, what would it be?     

SB: Student membership of the Athena SWAN charter has given me valuable involvement recognising and supporting the advancement of gender equality within Allied Health Professions, Midwifery and Nursing. While originally devised by the Equality Challenge Unit (ECU) to support the careers of women in STEMM professions (science, technology, engineering, maths and medicine), our statement has since broadened to include representation for transgender members of staff and students. As a team we examine and evaluate qualitative and quantitative data regarding diversity, protected characteristics, professional career support and student outcomes. While nationally some areas are still lacking in gender equality, we are certainly taking progressive steps towards greater appreciation and celebration of diversity within the scientific community.

 

SS: What would be your top recommendation to a female PhD student considering pursuing a career in academia?

SB: As an early-career female PhD student I will pass on a recommendation that has been given to me: it IS achievable and you CAN do it!

 

Posted in 2016 speakers blog | Leave a comment

Get out of the lab! Meet Sarah Bailey

Sarah Bailey - Bristol - PhotoDr Sarah Bailey is a Senior Lecturer in neuroscience and pharmacology at the University of Bath. Her research focuses on understanding the molecular mechanisms underlying depression and anxiety. Here, Sarah answers questions about life as a researcher, her inspirations and top tips. She is discussing “Is stress killing your brain cells” at the Bristol Broadmead Podium on the 16th July 2016.

 

 

SS: Sarah, how did you get to your current position?

SB: I don’t really know – there were many factors! I was the first person in my family to go to University, and I knew very little about academia or getting a job doing research. I had no ambition as an 18 year old to be a University lecturer because I didn’t really know that job existed.

What I did know, was that I was interested in how the body works and how drugs work in the body – so physiology and pharmacology – and I had some vague ideas about maybe working for a drug company one day.

At University I was able to do a placement year working in a research lab and that was the first time I really found out that you could have a career doing science research. The rest of how I got here is down to a combination of luck, perseverance, networking and being in the right place at the right time?!

 

 

SS: What, or who, inspired you to get a career in science?

SB: Two women inspired me. My mother was not a scientist, but she was very clear that I needed to know what I wanted to do with my life from quite an early age. She encouraged me to think about medicine – becoming a doctor – but I am just not that interested in sick people! This did help me realise that I am interested in medicines, and that’s how I found out about pharmacology. My next door neighbour, Mrs Brookfield, was also my biology teacher at school and she always had the most interesting classes on animal behaviour.

 

 

SS: What is the most fascinating aspect of your research/work?

SB: The complexity of the brain and how little we know about how it works at this point. We know the basic machinery of how a nerve cell works, but how networks of nerve cells combine to produce specific behaviours is really fascinating and we are only just scratching the surface of understanding that.

 
SS: What attracted you to Soapbox Science in the first place?

SB: The challenge I think. Slightly regretting it now though as the reality of standing on a soapbox for an hour is getting closer!

 
SS: Sum up in one word your expectations for the day – excitement? Fear? Thrill? Anticipation?

SB: Yes! All of those!

 
SS: If you could change one thing about the scientific culture right now, what would it be?

SB: I’m not sure. I have seen a lot of positive changes in recent years: more female lecturers and researchers, more female staff with families, greater acceptance of part-time working, greater openness in publications, more emphasis on collaborations & team working. I think all of these create a more positive and supportive environment for female researchers.

 
SS: What would be your top recommendation to a female PhD student considering pursuing a career in academia?

SB: I think for a PhD student one of the most important things is to network because you never know where your next research job is coming from, who is reviewing your papers or your grant applications. So my top recommendation is to get out of the lab; go to conferences, even talks within your own Department. Meet your peers and the leaders in your field – if you are unsure, get your supervisor to introduce you!

 

Posted in 2016 speakers blog | Leave a comment

Continually inspired by the creativity of everyone who works in science: Meet Denize Atan

Denize AtanDr Denize Atan is a Consultant Senior Lecturer in Ophthalmology at the University of Bristol and Bristol Eye Hospital.  She is a doctor, a scientist and currently works as the Lead for Women in Science in the School of Clinical Sciences at the University of Bristol.

She uses her position to promote a fair and positive working environment in the University that embraces diversity. You can hear her speak at Soapbox Science in Bristol this Saturday.

 

 

 

SS: Denize, how did you get to your current position?

DA: I am a medically qualified doctor who also does basic science research. I qualified as a doctor from the University of Oxford and initially set upon a career in medicine.  I had always been fascinated by the physiology of the eye and how we perceive the world as a medical student, and though I did not exactly plan to become a neuro-ophthalmologist in medical school (mainly because I did not know the specialty existed then!), I think my career path evolved towards neuro-ophthalmology because of my inherent interests in vision and the visual system.  I took time out of my medical training to do some research in ophthalmic genetics and a PhD.  This period of my life really opened my eyes to the opportunities that a parallel career in science would give me to make new discoveries and help people in ways other than direct clinical care.
SS: What, or who, inspired you to get a career in science?

DA: The opportunity to make further discoveries about how amazing the human body truly is!  It is quite remarkable how each individual is put together from a instruction booklet encoded in our DNA – something far more complicated than a well known brand of flatpack furniture. I am continually inspired by the enthusiasm and creativity of everyone who works in science.

 

SS: What is the most fascinating aspect of your research/work?

DA: I would say that every day I spend, either in the hospital seeing patients or in the lab conducting experiments, is different and that I am always learning new things.  There are highs and lows with any job, but the highs of making a difficult diagnosis that no-one else has thought of, or making a new scientific discovery that no-one else has encountered yet are really exceptional and keep me motivated to continue what I am doing.

 
SS: What attracted you to Soapbox Science in the first place?

DA: I am strongly supportive of everything that Soapbox Science represents and believe that the general public is inherently interested in science when presented in varied and accessible ways.  I also believe that young girls and boys should be encouraged to pursue careers in science and not discount them because they believe scientists are like what they see in the movies!  Of course, scientists are all normal people!!!

 

SS: Sum up in one word your expectations for the day – excitement? Fear? Thrill? Anticipation?

DA: Butterflies (in my stomach – not the insects)

 

SS: If you could change one thing about the scientific culture right now, what would it be?

DA: I would like to change how the scientific community is currently perceived and encourage greater diversity.

 
SS: What would be your top recommendation to a female PhD student considering pursuing a career in academia?

DA: Go for it!  Determination and self-belief are all you need (as for any career path)

 

 

Posted in 2016 speakers blog | Leave a comment

At School, I never thought about becoming a scientist: Meet Catherine Back

Catherine BackDr Catherine Back is a Post-Doctoral Research Associate in the School of Oral and Dental Sciences at the University of Bristol. She is a molecular microbiologist with particular interest in microbial surface adhesins – molecules that help bacteria stick to other cells and surfaces. Here Catherine explains her journey to becoming a scientist and how important promoting women in science is to her. She will be bringing her talk “Sticky bacteria: The science behind how bacteria attach to us and to each other, and why this is important in disease” to Bristol on the 16th July 2016.

 

 

SS: Catherine, how did you get to your current position?

CB: I finished my PhD in 2014 and was offered a Post-doc position working in the same lab to complete the work I had begun during my studies. I accepted and have been here ever since.

 

SS: What, or who, inspired you to get a career in science?

CB: When I was at school I never thought about becoming a scientist. I enjoyed a wide variety of subjects and consequently had numerous ideas for potential careers: I wanted to be a vet, then an astronaut, then a classicist, then a doctor, then an art historian…the list was endless! It wasn’t until I was looking at options to go to university that I considered science as a possibility. I had studied the sciences at A-level, and after a long, hard think during a gap year I decided on a degree in Cellular and Molecular Medicine. My inspiration for a career in science came during my final year undergraduate research project – I enjoyed the lab work so much I decided that I would like to continue studying for a PhD, so I could get a job as a scientist.
SS: What is the most fascinating aspect of your research/work?

CB: Discovering how proteins, only nanometres in length, work and what they physically look like is absolutely amazing.
SS: What attracted you to Soapbox Science in the first place?

CB: Most people who know me know I am passionate about promoting women in science and publicising that scientists aren’t all old men with crazy hair and beards! When I heard about Soapbox Science I thought it sounded terrifying, but decided to practise what I preach and go for it.
SS: Sum up in one word your expectations for the day – excitement? Fear? Thrill? Anticipation?

CB: Mostly fear, mixed with thrill.
SS: If you could change one thing about the scientific culture right now, what would it be?

CB: That is a difficult one – there are quite a few things I’d like to change! If I could only change one thing however, it would be how success in academia is judged on the number of publications you have. This leads to a preference to study quick and easy, high impact research, resulting in a large number of publications. While more challenging research, which takes longer to come to fruition, and thus accrues fewer publications, is less attractive.

Additionally, the atmosphere of academia is inherently competitive. This is good for the advancement of knowledge, but not for a healthy, balanced work-social-family life. Researchers who can and want to work all hours of the day and night get more papers published, and thus get ahead. But this can mean those who do not wish to, or can’t because of family commitments, get left behind.

This leads to researchers (many of them female) either dropping out of academia for a more stable career, or not even attempting to begin a career in academia due to fear of failing or of insurmountable competition.
SS: What would be your top recommendation to a female PhD student considering pursuing a career in academia?

CB: Go for it! It is a wonderful career, which will take you around the world and allow you to meet so many interesting people. It is undoubtedly hard work, but please don’t be put off – it is worth it in the end.
 

Posted in 2016 speakers blog | Leave a comment

Your day-to-day science can be productive AND fun: Meet Caroline Morris

rp_Caroline-Morris-Bristol-test-300x220.jpgDr Caroline Morris is a postdoctoral researcher in the School of Chemistry at the University of Bristol. Her area of study is synthetic biology, specifically in designing peptides, small proteins with many exciting potential applications. Here, Caroline answers some questions about how and why she became a scientist, and dispenses some useful advice. You can hear her give her talk “Designing vaccine delivery systems using synthetic biology” at the Bristol Broadmead Podium on the 16th July 2016, 12pm-3pm.

 

SS: Caroline, how did you get to your current position?

CM: The science subjects were always my favourite at school, and so I chose to study chemistry, biology and physics at A level. I got my undergraduate degree from Cardiff University, on a BSc Biochemistry course that included a year’s work experience. This time was invaluable experience for me and I decided that academic research was definitely something I wanted to pursue. I then spent four years at the MRC National Institute for Medical Research in Mill Hill, London studying for a PhD on a UCL program. My work focused on peptide synthesis and investigating specific interactions between them, and I am currently developing skills gained during this time in my first postdoctoral position. I’m now a year and a half into a post at the University of Bristol in the lab of Professor Dek Woolfson, as part of the BrisSynBio Synthetic Biology Research Centre.
SS: What, or who, inspired you to get a career in science?

CM: I will always remember an inspiring conversation with my secondary school chemistry teacher about the choice of GCSE subjects. He gave me real confidence in my ability, and from that point on anything science-related was my main interest. I also had a wonderful teacher for A level biology and have fond memories of stimulating career-oriented conversations with her after class.

 
SS: What is the most fascinating aspect of your research/work?

CM: I am very fortunate to be working in an interdisciplinary collaboration with immunologists and virologists. There is always something new and interesting to read about, and it’s really exciting for your work to be used for something beyond your immediate research area. The fundamental science and design is fascinating, but there’s something really cool about seeing your work as part of the bigger picture.

 
SS: What attracted you to Soapbox Science in the first place?

CM: Soapbox Science seems like a wonderful platform to help increase visibility of women in science. I hope it will be a fun afternoon engaging with, and hopefully inspiring, young people interested in all things scientific. With any luck we can dispel a few scientist stereotypes and simultaneously get people excited about some awesome science!

 
SS: Sum up in one word your expectations for the day – excitement? Fear? Thrill? Anticipation?

CM: Animated!

 
SS: If you could change one thing about the scientific culture right now, what would it be?

CM: Some PhD and postdoc positions may be less fruitful than others and result in fewer or even no publications, which is not necessarily representative of the talent of the individual. That’s just science, things don’t always go the way you might have planned or expected! Publishing negative results more often would ultimately help the progression of research, by preventing others from having to repeat things that don’t work. Additionally, having a little less pressure on your publication record might not be such a bad thing. This would be beneficial for people taking maternity/paternity leave, for example, where an absence from the lab may naturally result in fewer publications.

 
SS: What would be your top recommendation to a female PhD student considering pursuing a career in academia?

CM: It might sound like a cliché, but find something you enjoy. Academia requires you to be hard-working and self-driven, and the easiest way to achieve this is if you’re happy and enthusiastic about your research. This will come across to others, whether in academia or the general public, and give you the greatest chance of success in your academic career.

Related to this I’d add that a career in academia doesn’t necessarily mean a lack of social life, and that it’s important to maintain a healthy work/life balance. In the right environment your day-to-day science can be productive AND fun. Though academia can bring long hours, you don’t have to work every evening and weekend if you are focused, disciplined and engaged during core hours.

Posted in 2016 speakers blog | Leave a comment

I love the potential of what my work is capable of achieving: Meet Alice Banks

Alice Banks - Bristol - Photo2Alice Banks (@alice_banks) is a research associate working at the University of Bristol in the School of Biological Sciences. Her research is in the area of drug discovery and she is working to identify new antibiotics being produced by mushrooms, to tackle the problem of antibiotic resistance. She is currently working as part of the BristolBridge initiative at the University of Bristol which is a multidisciplinary approach to tackling antimicrobial resistance, funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC). Alice will be speaking about ‘The Magic of Mushrooms: could mushrooms be the solution to antibiotic resistance?’ at Bristol’s Soapbox Science.

 

SS: Alice, how did you get to your current position?

AB: I did my undergraduate BSc in Biology at the University of Bristol and as part of the final year of my degree I carried out a short research project to identify different mushrooms which were making antibiotics. This intensive research project was one of my favourite parts of my degree and I knew it was something that I wanted to continue with.

Following my BSc, I spent a year carrying out a Research MSc where I was able to continue aspects of my undergraduate project but in much more depth. This helped me to make up my mind that I wanted to pursue a career in research so I decided to undertake a PhD. My PhD has been working in the area of drug discovery, and I have been looking for new antibiotics produced by mushrooms and working out which genes are responsible for making these antibiotics.

I have recently started working as a research associate at the University of Bristol as part of the BristolBridge initiative, which is a multidisciplinary approach to tackling antimicrobial resistance. I was able to apply to be part of this initiative by proposing a research project based on some of the findings from my PhD, and I was fortunate enough to be awarded funding to carry out this work.

 

SS: What, or who, inspired you to get a career in science?

AB: I think I have been inspired by many people and experiences over the years but I have always been particularly fascinated by the natural world, and curious to find out how organisms behave and why. At school, I was also encouraged by many supportive science teachers and I was fortunate enough to visit different University science departments on outreach schemes to get a feel for what it would be like to work as a scientist at a University.
SS: What is the most fascinating aspect of your research/work?

AB: I love the potential of what my work is capable of achieving. Antibiotic resistance is a major problem globally. So for me, having the opportunity to contribute to solving this problem is a real privilege. I also love the excitement of being able to discover something completely new!
SS: What attracted you to Soapbox Science in the first place?

I have worked as a STEM ambassador for several years and I feel that it is really important to promote studying science and scientific careers, particularly to young people. Events like Soapbox Science are a great opportunity for the public to hear first-hand from scientists about current research and to ask lots of questions.  I also volunteered at the Soapbox Science event in Bristol last year and I thought it was such a fantastic experience that I wanted to come back again this year!
SS: Sum up in one word your expectations for the day – excitement? Fear? Thrill? Anticipation?

AB: Excited!
SS: If you could change one thing about the scientific culture right now, what would it be?

AB: I would like science not to be viewed as isolating, but as something accessible to anyone. That way we should be able to attract as many keen minds as possible into research.
SS: What would be your top recommendation to a female PhD student considering pursuing a career in academia?

AB: Go for it! The scientific community needs more enthusiastic female scientists. Take the opportunity to gain as much experience as possible and ask lots of questions. There are so many different directions a scientific career can take you and it is always fascinating to find out how people have made it to the positions they are in today.

 

Posted in 2016 speakers blog | Leave a comment

Never let anyone underestimate you – Meet Maddy Nichols

IMG_2325white1Maddy Nichols is a first year PhD student at the Bristol Centre for Functional Nanomaterials.  She works in the area of science on the nanoscale – 1000x smaller than the width of your hair!  It’s an interesting area to investigate as the properties of materials change a lot and they can behave very unexpectedly when they become very tiny.  Nanoscience combines aspects of all science and engineering areas so Maddy is currently based between chemistry, physics and engineering for her project.  Come meet Maddy at our Bristol event on saturday the 16th of July

 

SS: Maddy, how did you get to your current position?

MN: At school I loved physic and maths which eventually lead to me choosing a physics degree at University of Manchester, with a year abroad studying in California!  Decided I really liked research During my masters year where I undertook a research project I discovered that I really enjoyed doing research, a whole lot more than lectures.  So I decided to do a PhD.  I was doing some work in nanotechnology which meant that a Doctoral Training Centre in Nanoscience appealed.  Excitingly I managed to secure a place on the Functional Nanomaterials Doctoral Training Centre.  As part of the program I have tried out several different projects, none of them particularly physics related which was a novelty. Here I am now primarily working in Chemistry!
SS: What, or who, inspired you to get a career in science?

MN: I have always enjoyed learning about the world around us.  It always helps if you have enthusiastic science teachers at school! When it came to deciding on further education I took a lab tour in the physics department and it was seeing the experiments that were part of the course that made me settle on physics and I’ve never looked back.  It’s pretty awesome that you’re determining universal constants using the same methods that some scientists came up with many years ago.
SS: What is the most fascinating aspect of your research/work?

MN: For me, I am always super excited by the thought that I’m seeing and doing stuff that nobody has done before.  When you try out something new and get it to work in a way you’re hoping for, it’s very exhilarating!
SS: What attracted you to Soapbox Science in the first place?

MN: It’s important that everyone can get a chance to find out about the work going on at the universities in their cities.  It’s also important to abolish the stereotypes of scientists that people might hold, so that it doesn’t play any part in putting children off pursuing science at a higher level.
SS: Sum up in one word your expectations for the day – excitement? Fear? Thrill? Anticipation?

MN: Adrenaline-fuelled
SS: If you could change one thing about the scientific culture right now, what would it be?

MN: I would like everything to be more transparent, sharing knowledge and expertise across the board.

 

SS: What would be your top recommendation to a female PhD student considering pursuing a career in academia?

MN: I’m hoping for some advice myself! But for anyone considering a PhD, choose something that you find interesting and go all out to get a position doing it. Never let anyone underestimate you and the contribution you will bring.

 

Posted in 2016 speakers blog | Leave a comment

Autism is nothing to be A-shamed about: reflections on the muddled messages from the media

Rachel Moseley - Bristol - PhotoBy Dr Rachel Moseley, a Bristol Soapbox Science Speaker

 

There are various taboo words we all avoid, but here’s a new one; do you know what I mean by the “A word”?

Many of you reading this may have tuned in recently to BBC One. There’s been a major BBC drama called ‘The A Word’ about a family whose little son is diagnosed with an autism spectrum condition (ASC). The drama followed the family through their initial anxiety about the child and their despair at his subsequent diagnosis, at the differences that had suddenly become glaringly obvious alongside other children. It focused on parents Alison and Paul coming to terms with a label they had never imagined confronting in their son. It’s a label which carries a lot of emotional baggage alongside the symptoms which will pop up if you research the word online: difficulties in social relationships and communication, understanding emotions and non-verbal behaviour; insistence on sameness, rigid and repetitive behaviours, obsessional interests. The National Autistic Society, the leading charity for autism in the UK, will tell you that it’s “a lifelong, developmental disability that affects how a person communicates with, and relates to, other people and the world around them”.

 

That’s pretty scary stuff to a parent sitting in a doctor’s office, and the programme paid homage to the feelings that parents and families often experience when a child is diagnosed with an ASC. A recent study surveyed the emotions that parents go through on hearing their child is on the autistic spectrum. Fernańdez-Alcántara et al. (2016) found that parents often feel a strong sense of grief at losing the child they thought they had.

 

There’s no doubt that the trajectory of a life is markedly different in people with autism. The condition may mean that certain milestones, like language, are reached late or not at all. Little things, like being invited to play with another child, may be monumental. The programme really captured the sense of loss that permeated family life and the worries of the parents for their child’s future, with that dreaded label. It received very good reviews from this quarter.

 

What, however, about other kinds of viewer?  It was a diverse little collection at my home that evening as we sat down to watch the first episode. I’m a researcher trying to understand how people with autism think and experience the world by studying the brain. I was joined by my aunt and by my cousin, who has a form of autism called Asperger syndrome. As a scientist studying autism, my excitement slowly seeped away. The programme contained many common misconceptions which niggled uncomfortably at me and were frankly painful for my family, as these outdated beliefs only serve to retain the unhappy stigma and misunderstanding around autism.

 

I have no doubt the BBC had great intentions when they decided to air a drama about autism. Little Max Vento did a cracking job as five-year-old Joe, portraying a subtle and accurate presentation of what autism looks like in some children. Raising awareness can be a great thing – but spreading misconceptions can be greatly damaging for people with autism and their families.

 

As a scientist, I was concerned about several potentially harmful messages put forward by the programme. The organisers of Soapbox Science kindly offered me an opportunity to write about something I’m passionate about, so I’m nervously going to leap at the chance to replace some of the messages from the programme with some of my own. My cousin has kindly agreed to lend me a perspective from the spectrum, and my aunt to chip in with a few comments as to what it’s like raising an undiagnosed child with autism.

 

Autism is a neurodevelopmental condition: it’s visible in brain development from early life into adulthood

In a very touching episode, mother Alison experiences an unexpected warmth and closeness with her little autistic son. He’s suffering from the flu and is unusually cuddly and attentive. Very understandably, Alison relishes this bonding opportunity with her little boy. Her longing is heart-rending: “I could see the real Joe underneath all the autism”.

The idea that autism descends like a mist over a healthy personality is deeply misleading and utterly detrimental to understanding and assisting people with autism and their families. The programme talks about a ‘fever effect’, alluding to a study which found that mood and behavioural problems are less obvious when autistic children are ill (Curran et al, 2007). If anything, though, the fever state would be the anomaly, not the child’s usual behaviour.

Autism is very different from illnesses which are marked by a clear period of before and after. Although there are some cases where children appear to be developing normally before regressing in toddlerhood, many studies have found the signs of autism present in infants within the first 12 months.

Since autism is often diagnosed between ages two and three, how do scientists know which infants to look at before the signs are overtly obvious? Here, they often take advantage of the fact that infant siblings of people with autism have a much higher risk of having autism themselves. By following these ‘high risk’ cases from birth, scientists have found that those who do turn out to have autism show abnormal social behaviours from 6 months of age (Klin, Schultz and Jones, 2015). They may be less responsive to their names being called and less interested in their mothers and the social world around them.

What of those children who do seem to show a later trajectory of symptom development? These children also departed from the typical trajectory of language and social development by 14 months of age, according to Landa et al (2014). By 36 months, these researchers found early- and late-onset ASC to be indistinguishable.

My particular interest is in the brain; what’s happening there in early infanthood? It appears that even as early as six months old, these children later diagnosed with autism have brains that work differently from other six month olds, which are even different at a structural level.

The thing about the brain is that a little kink in even a tiny area is likely to have cascading effects which derail further development. Normal social development, for example, might be dependent on very early interest in other people. If someone is born with a biological difference which means that they’re less likely to look at other people, they will be slower to learn to talk; to understand other people’s minds; in other words, a whole chain of difficulties can progress from a little biological difference. As the brain develops, it develops along a different trajectory, with completely different wiring.

So how does the research relate to that comment about the ‘real person below all that autism’? Quite simply, it shows that autism is a part of a person from very, very early life and always will be. An autistic person’s symptoms and ‘presentation’ may change, may improve, but their autism is hard-wired within their brain and genetic makeup.  It is difficult to impossible, and some people would say wrong, to try to separate the person from the unique manifestation of their autism. I’ll go into this further below.

 

Autism is unrelated to family traumas or ‘unresolved tension’

 In a painful scene, we find the family sat around the kitchen table with their speech and language therapist, who’s sold as a bit of an autism specialist. She wants to talk about unresolved family tensions and traumas. I felt so sorry for the family as the normal difficulties that every family face were stripped bare. (It later turns out that there are unresolved tensions between mother Alison and the autism therapist herself).

This scene echoed with a dangerous and tragic precedent. For many years autism was blamed on cold and unresponsive parenting: ‘refrigerator mothers’. Bruno Bettelheim, who wrote about this topic in a book titled The Empty Fortress, suggested that “the precipitating factor in infantile autism is the parent’s wish that his child should not exist.” Distressed children turn inwards and away from their cold parents, utterly isolated and resembling the empty fortress of Bettelheim’s title.

When professionals blame neurological or mental illnesses on stress and conflict in the family, there’s a lot of the old “chicken-and-egg” problem about; as any parent knows, the tremendous worry about a child’s problems is likely to generate a lot of that stress and conflict itself. The A Word didn’t go as far as to make this accusation – there was just a strong suggestion that the stress in the family might play a causal role in Joe’s difficulties, as this was highlighted whilst biology never even got a mention.

But autism actually has one of the greatest genetic components of all psychiatric conditions (Persico and Napolioni, 2013). If your identical twin who shares your genetic makeup has autism, you’re 73-95% likely to be diagnosed with it too (studies differ on the precise likelihood). The chances dramatically drop if you’re a non-identical twin or a sibling brought up in the same family, but because you share some genes, you’re still much more likely to be diagnosed with autism than a non-related individual.

We still don’t know what causes autism, and it’s likely that there are many routes to these conditions. Prenatal or postnatal accidents are two possible routes, but it’s fair to say that the contribution of arguing parents and family tension to the development of autism is utterly minor if not completely non-existent. Watching The A Word, I had a strong desire to burst into the room and tell poor Alison and Paul that all they’d done was play the normal genetic lottery that all parents face. Family strife might be distressing for Joe and for the family themselves, but in no way is it related to the fact of his autism. I would have liked to have seen this pointed out in the programme, to definitively and once and for all rule out any blame that might still find its way to parents. As a scientist in 2016, I was deeply troubled by the programme including these scenes without a single mention of the completely blameless brain basis of these conditions.

 

Diagnosis isn’t always so straight forward

How is autism normally diagnosed? In The A Word, the family are whizzed through the National Health Service and their little boy is neatly labelled half way through the first episode. In reality, the route to diagnosis can be lengthy and require multiple professionals, consultations and assessments.

This is especially true for people with subtler presentations of ASC. Something very important to realise about autism is that people on the autism spectrum are every bit as varied as people off the spectrum. They share the same core symptoms but these appear in very different ways. One person’s social difficulties might manifest as being unable to make eye-contact or have trouble understanding if and when it’s socially appropriate to share. Another person might have learnt these rules in the same way that you or I might learn our times tables, but might find it really hard to intuitively feel when it’s their turn to speak in a conversation.

My particular interest is in autistic girls and women, and that’s something I’d like to bring to the public’s attention in my Soapbox talk. For many years, autism was very much associated with young boys (autistic adults got far less attention, but even reported adult cases were overwhelmingly male).

Autism does exist in girls; but it presents very differently and we don’t really know why. Autistic girls are often better at camouflaging their social difficulties and they tend to have special interests which are normal for little girls; their obsession with ponies or pop bands might just be a little beyond the norm, but are gender appropriate. They’re often the passive, quiet loners who may be adopted by other girls and allowed to exist at the fringe of a social group.

Their problems may become more apparent in the more socially demanding world of adolescence. The pain of not fitting in; many of us will know it, to an extent. Many undiagnosed girls and boys with ASC, bullied and ostracised within the peer group, become lonely adults who struggle with relationships at work and in their personal lives – always the odd one out, and never understanding why.

 My cousin Michelle was diagnosed when she was 27, and it came as a tremendous relief for all of us. Chelle had always felt there was something wrong with her because she was different to all of her peers and couldn’t fit in. She often got into trouble with adults as she just didn’t seem to ‘get’ the rules. An experienced child psychologist suggested Asperger syndrome might be the reason. Her mother, my aunt, took her to a clinician who dismissed the possibility out of hand because Chelle, then 11, made eye contact with her throughout their short assessment. (We really appreciated that The A Word starred an autistic child who makes eye-contact!).

On to secondary school, and to those on the outside, it seemed like Chelle launched from one crisis to another. Bullied at school. Socially isolated. Self-harm. A stream of diagnoses: anxiety; depression; anorexia; borderline personality disorder? Psychiatric illnesses are common in ASC, and it’s quite normal for autistic girls to be missed or misdiagnosed (Gould and Ashton-Smith, 2011). All the pieces started fitting together when she was finally diagnosed. To Chelle, it was wonderful to know that actually there was a place she did fit in. The diagnosis allowed her to finally join support groups and meet people who understood.

The A Word showed one particular experience in which the parents were devastated by the diagnosis they were given. I feel the need to point out the other parents with whom I have so much empathy. Many parents push very hard to seek diagnoses for their (young or adult) children, as they open the gateway to support. To these parents, it’s an immense relief to get some recognition of the fact that they know there’s something different about their child. It was difficult viewing for my aunt, who was always dismissed as neurotic or worse: a bad parent with a naughty child. It’s the adult end of the spectrum whom I study, and through my research I’m keen to do something to prevent this kind of suffering and improve things for people with autism and their families.

 

Autism is not a dirty word

“I wouldn’t call anyone autistic,” said the A Word clinician in tones of horror, preferring the apparently less offensive ‘on the autism spectrum’. This sparked a hubbub of noise in my house as we all asked: why not?

The wording we use to describe autism is a highly contentious issue. Traditionally, clinicians and researchers have spoken about “people with autism” in the same way as we speak about people with diabetes, people with schizophrenia, people with cancer… through a medical lens, with that label as a nasty appendage on an otherwise healthy person, an affliction to be cured or prevented. In line with a broader disability movement, many people with autism, or rather, autistic people, prefer ‘identity first’ language. By saying ‘autistic person’ rather than ‘person with autism’, they argue that 1) autism is not intrinsically negative and 2) that autism cannot be subtracted from the person. It can’t be cured. It can’t be fixed, and nor should it have to be. (Many of these advocates argue against preventative research, too. They’d certainly have hated the programme’s comment about the real child behind the autism).

As I previously stated above, autism is part of that person from their earliest childhood. Autistic symptoms cause difficulty, as does the interaction of the outside world with those symptoms. Some individuals are profoundly disabled by their condition and deserve utmost support and assistance, along with their families. We don’t know yet why some people are more disabled than others, but autism truly isn’t universally negative.

It can bring beautiful quirks in personality, loving and genuine daughters, sons, sisters, brothers, and even mothers and fathers. People who can bring exceptional skills and strengths to the workplace, if only employers have the imagination to use them. People who can be utterly valuable and accepted members of society.

I asked my aunt whether she wished that Chelle didn’t have Asperger syndrome. She looked at me blankly, because Chelle is… all of her funny quirks, many of which do relate to Asperger syndrome. Her spectacular eye for detail even when she misses the bigger picture. Her ecstasies on seeing sparkly, flashing Christmas lights, and her need to touch fragile ornaments just to feel their cool, smooth surfaces. Her often amusing, literal understanding of language; her inability to lie; her endearing tendency to take stories and jokes seriously.

Sometimes she’s maddening in her pedantry, and she can’t walk along a beach without stopping every two seconds to pick up an unusual rock; she’s got a whole shelf full of stones which are indistinguishable to anyone else. But extract these things from Chelle and… who would she be? Part of Chelle’s ‘rehabilitation’ has been in learning that she isn’t a bad person and there isn’t something wrong with her. Some people have asthma and struggle to breathe; some people have diabetes and struggle to control their sugar levels; Chelle has Asperger syndrome and so she struggles with some aspects of daily life related to organisation and socialising.

I use both person-first (‘person with autism’) and identity-first (‘autistic person’) language in this article, but I respect the right of the individuals I write about to use whichever language they prefer. (It seems that the majority of autistic adults, family, friends and parents do prefer identity first language – ‘autistic person’ [Kenny et al, 2015] – despite what The A Word suggests). I’m absolutely passionate about neurodiversity, a perspective that autism is just one form, one type of mind that arises from the human brain.

This perspective recognises that although people share a lot in common, their brains are also spectacularly diverse and give rise to the different strengths and weaknesses seen in what are called ‘conditions’ or ‘disorders’. At its core, the movement champions the absolute worth of individuals of all neuro-types, most notably those who might in darker days have ended up in Bedlam. It promotes respect and compassion for all.

That’s why it was so painful for us, in The A Word, to hear the word “autistic” spoken with such denigration. To see the parents’ reluctance to tell others that their child had autism, even when his safety was at risk. Even the little play on words in the title stung, as autism shouldn’t fall in the ranks of the starred expletives that are banned from polite conversation. This isn’t all the fault of The A Word; it’s never clear how much the media influences or simply mirrors public knowledge and opinion.

The programme showed, however, that stigma and misinformation about autism is still rife, and neurodiversity is a long way away.

I’m going to be talking more about autism and the brain as part of my Soapbox Science talk on the 16th of July, and I’d love to invite you to come to speak to me. Please bring your friends and family for a natter. I’d love to tell you more about autism and neurodiversity. I’ll also tell you about your own brains; the fascinating way they create your personality and your world, the bizarre things that can happen when something goes wrong.

 

For the people who read this article but can’t make it to Bristol on the 16th of July – could I ask you, with greatest kindness, to carry away a few messages which are close to my heart?

Autism is genetic and biological; it has nothing to do with bad parenting. Autistic people are unique and valuable; autism isn’t necessarily a curse. We’re every one of us at the mercy of biology, the differences in the brain that give rise to our personalities, strengths and weaknesses.

The best kind of world would be one in which these are not derided but viewed with compassion and respect; the kind of world where we make space for individuals of all neurotypes. I really hope with all of my heart that through education and research, we can create such a world.

Posted in Opinion piece | Leave a comment