Comment on the interview with Ken‐ichi Arai in EMBO reports, July 2001

Abstract

Correspondence1 October 2001free access Comment on the interview with Ken-ichi Arai in EMBO reports, July 2001 Irena Mlinaric-Rašcan Irena Mlinaric-Rašcan Search for more papers by this author Irena Mlinaric-Rašcan Irena Mlinaric-Rašcan Search for more papers by this author Author Information Irena Mlinaric-Rašcan EMBO Reports (2001)2:860-860https://doi.org/10.1093/embo-reports/kve214 PDFDownload PDF of article text and main figures. ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyWechatReddit Figures & Info I enjoyed reading the interview with Professor Arai, the director of my former workplace. However, I would like to add a short commentary regarding the issue of women in science mentioned within it. Two years have passed since I completed my postdoctoral fellowship at the Institute of Medical Science at the University of Tokyo (IMSUT), Japan. The Institute provided me with an opportunity to continue my scientific career during my family's stay in Japan. Moreover, by supporting the on-campus nursery, it enabled me and other mothers to continue living our private lives while advancing our careers. But despite this positive personal experience, I would like to add my concerns about the prospects of women scientists and other professionals in Japan. I agree with Professor Arai that the number of female scientists in Japan is increasing. However, the reality is that postdoctoral fellowships, which are a fairly recent scheme in Japan, have absorbed a great deal of excellent female PhDs, and thus merely postponed the question of what to do with them. Upon completing their term, the prospects of becoming a staff scientist or university professor are very slim for these women, and I am afraid that this is not being addressed. I do not enjoy hearing or saying that women scientists have to be protected as a minority. And I highly respect Professor Arai's opinion ‘to encourage them as better scientists’. But I would like to stress that while I met several excellent young women scientists in Japan, I felt a lack of measures designed to support them in combining their scientific careers with their roles as wives and mothers. The Japanese way of life and professional working habits make the desire of women to combine these diverse roles almost impossible to achieve. I therefore think that something needs to be done, even if it is labelled ’applications of positive measures’. Besides being professionals, women often have a family and are thus in need of a different way of organising work and everyday life. The contribution of women to modern society as well as to all fields of science is necessary. We are intelligent, educated, rational and well organized. We have good intuition and we want to contribute to the future of our children. These are indeed reasons for us to stay in science! We will do so, but have to be accepted as we are, even at the expense of changing prototypes in society, rather than making us change to fit. Simple changes such as addressing the question of maternity leave during fellowships, applying a 42 hour working week, allowing child-care vacation time for either the mother or father, would all make things better. Having shared Professor Arai's experiences of slow bureaucratic procedures, proposals for change have to be immediate in order for improvements to be realised in the near future. I would not say that the position of women postdocs in Slovenia is any better, and so sharing these concerns about the Japanese situation is only debating what is an everyday situation for many women scientists around the world. Biography Irena Mlinaric-Rašcan is at the Institute Jozef Stefan, Ljubljana, Slovenia Previous ArticleNext Article Volume 2Issue 101 October 2001In this issue RelatedDetailsLoading ...