There are many ways that international postdocs could provide an important contribution in science policy. For example, the inability to have a voice and representation in the policy realm particularly hurts when policies surrounding international postdocs, work visas and immigrant visas are brought up in the Capitol. The people directly affected by these policies are not present at the discussion table. A recent study found that immigrants who do have citizenship are potentially more likely to vote and engage in politics than those born in the United States. Thus, efforts to engage these new citizens could benefit from international postdocs being represented in science policy fellowships. Additionally, if you look at political activities (for example contacting a government official about a problem, working with one’s community to solve a problem, or discussing politics with others) that do not require citizenship, immigrants participate at a similar rate to citizens. International scholars also bring with them diversity of experiences in terms of cultures, languages and political landscapes. This diversity provides a fertile ground for innovation not just in STEM but also in policymaking. Taken together, these factors support the value of building a bridge between science policy and immigrants both to the immigrant community and to the host country.

During my time as an international postdoc, I developed an appreciation and keen interest in science policy and started to look for opportunities to build my skills and transition into a career in the field. Once committed to this path, I was dismayed that in order to fulfill my dreams, I would have to wait for my green card; this wait was further accentuated by the current backlog in cases being reviewed. As an international postdoc, it saddens me deeply to see that I and others in my position tend to take specific career paths based on visa status instead of expertise, skills and interests.

There are many ways that international postdocs could provide an important contribution in science policy.

Possible Reasons for Criteria Reviewed

This begs the following question: why do science policy fellowships have citizenship or residency eligibility criteria? Though the reasons for the eligibility are not explicitly stated, they might include some of the following. First, most international postdocs and students are in the United States on either F-1 or J-1 visas, which are categorized as having no immigration intent. This makes it difficult for organizations to justify spending resources on training international fellows in U.S. policy, only to see them leave. Second, during science policy fellowships, trainees might be exposed to sensitive policy insights; this potential may raise concerns regarding national security issues. Lastly, fellowships that allow international graduate students to apply require that fellows have a valid work visa; therefore, visa sponsorship becomes a possible additional administrative bottleneck. Further, this requirement restricts applicants to current international graduate students about to graduate and excludes international postdocs in the United States.

For those international postdocs who feel that science policy is fascinating and are willing to push the limits to have a broader impact on society, here are some suggestions.

• Do a self assessment: Start your journey with a little self introspection - ask yourself what change do you want to bring, assess your prior experience, analyze your goals and take little steps towards them.
• Build your skills: You have heard about the postdoctoral association at your university; consider volunteering with them or, even better, taking leadership roles. You can also volunteer for organizations whose mission aligns with your personal goals, advocate for science funding, increased wages and employment benefits for postdocs. These are excellent ways to meet peers who are interested in science policy and these activities will help you build crucial skills and experiences that are highly valued in policy careers. Consider volunteering with the National Postdoctoral Association.
• Contribute to the public domain: To take the next step, pick a policy topic you care about deeply and make your voice heard. This can involve anything from writing blogs, social media outreach, or writing opinion pieces in local outlets. An excellent place to consider publishing your piece is the Journal of Science Policy & Governance (JSPG). JSPG is an open-access peer review publication that provides opportunities for early career researchers (ECRs) to publish on issues at the intersection of science, public policy and governance.
• Research science policy fellowships for international scholars: Science policy fellowships and programs provide a training platform from academia into the policy sector. While science policy fellowship programs differ on their focus, they generally seek applicants who have demonstrated interest in public policy and possess strong interpersonal and communication skills. Here are the details of a select group of fellowships and programs that are open to immigrants.
• Network: Build your science policy networks by attending conferences, advocacy events, local government meetings, town halls and engaging in science policy groups. An example is The National Science Policy Network (NSPN) - a close-knit community of ECRs from diverse fields interested in various aspects of science policy. Also, expand your pool by reaching out to professionals in policy and ask for informational interviews with them to gain useful insights into the policy world.

Currently, the path to science policy for international postdocs may seem daunting, like climbing a mountain. There are measures that could be taken that would ease this climb, and an immediate improvement could be had by advocating for immigration reforms as listed below.

1. Reduced wait times: For many international scholars and students, entry to the United States on an F-1 or J-1 visa is just the beginning of a long journey towards permanent residency. This process can take several years, requiring surmounting multiple bureaucratic obstacles. Reducing the wait times by establishing dedicated programs for international graduates and postdocs, as well as increasing the number of work visas and green cards issued each year, will help remove barriers.
2. Revamping J-1 visas (exchange visitors) so as to allow international postdocs and graduate students to pursue volunteer and internship opportunities outside their workplace would open new doors into the science policy world as well as many other non-academic career paths.

Universities can also play a vital role in helping international postdocs and graduate students explore a career in science policy through a two-pronged approach. First, universities could provide training opportunities for postdocs to engage in experiential learning in policy-related fields through the university's Office of Government/Federal Relations. Second, universities can join efforts with multiple professional societies and advocate for an ease in visa restrictions and streamlined paths to permanent residency, leading to new avenues in science policy for international postdocs.

While immigration reforms may be a long process, in the meantime organizations offering science policy fellowships should consider removing the roadblocks by updating their policies and sponsoring visas for the international scholars. Opening up these fellowship opportunities at different levels - institutional, state and federal - is a much needed step towards incorporating immigrants' voices in the political debates, and ensuring that we are truly representing everyone at the table.

Ankita Arora, PhD, is an international postdoctoral fellow in the University of Colorado- Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO and is member of science diplomacy and DEI committee at the National Science Policy Network.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of any other entity or employer.

In fact, the NPA staff and Meetings Committee have designed the conference to directly address the issues raised by postdoctoral scholars and representatives from postdoctoral offices in the needs assessment surveys sent out during fall 2020 by the NPA. From career pathways to work-life integration issues, the virtual annual conference is designed to meet stated needs head on.

Since the Annual Conference will be virtual, attendees will have multiple opportunities to obtain information, knowledge, and training from the comfort of their offices, homes, or sofas. While many elements of traditional face-to-face interactions are reduced in a virtual conference, there are other novel, exciting ways to build professional networks. In fact, the design of the virtual conference was chosen to maximize social and professional networking and interaction. This article will provide some tips for networking at the 19th NPA Annual Conference.

Establish your objectives and goals before the conference:

Before attending a conference (both face-to-face and virtual), postdocs should ask themselves a few questions. Am I here to:

• Find leads for a new job or career?
• Form new collaborations?
• Find new mentors?
• Learn a new skill set?

It is perfectly fine to have multiple objectives and goals, but the key is to develop an overall blueprint for the conference, which will help direct and prioritize networking efforts.

For face-to-face and/or virtual conferences, a little preplanning and effort can go a long way in building an effective network.

Let your supervisor know you’ll be “at” the conference

It may seem common sense, but make sure to notify your PI or supervisor in advance that you’ll be attending the NPA conference on April 15 and 16 as an educational and professional development opportunity. Giving advance notice to your supervisor allows them to adequately prepare and encourage your attendance. As appropriate, share some of the highlights planned for the conference so that your supervisor understands the sophistication and learning opportunities that come with attendance. Waiting until the last minute to inform supervisors can create misunderstandings, while giving advance notice can give you the space you need to fully immerse yourself in the event.

Create your conference presence and act on a blueprint

Take some time to make a professional profile, which should include a full bio, contact information, and a professional photo to actively engage with other attendees with mutual interests. Also, be sure to update your LinkedIn profile, resume or CV, and any other professional social media platforms that you may have. Once the conference’s agenda is finalized, identify areas of potential engagement.

Once you’ve registered for the conference, make sure to take the key information you’ve assembled and place it into your online profile. Pick and choose the information that will help you meet your aims and connect with the right people, such as your areas of study and interest, schools, employer, location, and hobbies.

During the conference, there will be chat rooms dedicated to various disciplines such as the life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences, and more. On deck are plans for virtual pub crawls where attendees can travel (or crawl) with their favorite cocktail (or mocktail) through different virtual spaces to engage with new connections. Increase your visibility by participating in breakout sessions, sharing your insights, and engaging through social media even outside the conference. For example, you can check out the conference’s hashtag to see who is tweeting about the conference and connect with other attendees. There will likely be platforms within the conference structure to allow you to watch trending topics and join the conversation, or create your own.

With virtual conferences, it is very easy to be distracted by other work obligations, meetings, or a new Netflix series. If possible, block off time in your schedule to actively engage in these sessions as if you are at a face-to-face conference.

Keep those connections active!

Remember that networking does not stop at the end of the NPA Annual Conference. The next step is to nurture the connections made during the conference. Start organizing the new connections (e.g. email addresses, LinkedIn profiles, social media accounts, etc.) based on your objectives. These connections may fall into the following subsets:

• No obvious connection, but someone to keep on the radar
• Connections with specific reason to follow up (e.g., a recruiter or potential collaborator)
• Connections intended for deeper relationships (e.g., potential academic or professional mentors)

Making a simple spreadsheet is a great way to organize and keep track of the connections made at the Annual Conference. Outside of relevant contact information, feel free to include the strength of your relationship (high, medium, low), the last point of contact, and one mutual interest outside of your academic discipline for each connection. Once you’re at the event, there will likely be a way to flag specific attendees as intended contacts.

Based on the priority of engagement with your new (or existing) contacts, send a follow-up email within 72 hours after the initial engagement. Since you are using this opportunity to build your network, definitely ask members of your new network to recommend other potential contacts. Do not get discouraged if a contact does not respond right away; you can always follow up a week or so later. If the contact does not respond after two follow-ups, it might be best to move on. Remember that networking is a two-way street where both parties must be willing to engage.

Take the event back home

After the event, try to schedule time with your supervisor and peers to share some of the ideas you’ve learned, even if it’s only 5 minutes during a set team meeting. By hitting highlights of learning - from academic subjects to policy matters affecting postdoctoral life - you can spread the learnings of the event even further and encourage others to either get more involved with the NPA or prepare to attend the 20th Annual Conference in 2022.

For face-to-face and/or virtual conferences, a little preplanning and effort can go a long way in creating a more effective experience and building an effective network.

Kwame Osei-Sarfo, PhD, (Twitter: @smokinscientist) directs the Bridge to the Ph.D. Program in STEM at Columbia University and completed his postdoctoral training in cancer pharmacology at Weill Cornell Medicine.

Osei-Sarfo is also a communications subcommittee member for the NPA Meetings Committee, co-chaired by Lisa Maria Mustachio and Anne Wyllie.

Even without the additional adverse effects of the pandemic, challenges to work-life balance have been rampant for women postdocs or scientists in academia especially during or after childbirth and parental leaves.

COVID-19 – a wake-up call to the “work-life balance” myth?

Inequality in household responsibility for women postdocs and scientists has become a stark reality of the COVID-19 pandemic―but wait, didn’t it always exist? During the COVID-19 pandemic, quarantined with a six-year-old, Megan Frederickson, an ecologist at the University of Toronto, Canada, suspected that women academics were assuming disproportionate increased childcare responsibilities, and must therefore be falling behind their peers at work. Lockdowns implemented during the coronavirus breakout turned many households worldwide into home offices and school classrooms overnight. Frederickson surveyed preprint data of women scientists and her analysis suggests that women’s publishing rate has fallen across all disciplines relative to men’s publishing rate during the pandemic. Similar trends found in Sugimoto’s analysis of author gender on nine popular preprint servers further corroborates the findings from Frederickson’s research. Women scientists reported that they could not devote the same amount of time to their research in COVID-19 time as they did before the pandemic. These effects were most pronounced for women scientists with young children. The above study further indicates women in these dual-academic households are also more likely to take care of more household work than men. Experts suspect that the same holds true for childcare. In a ‘publish or perish’ world, it seems this pandemic could be setting back the hard-won progress of women in STEM.

Even without the additional adverse effects of the pandemic, challenges to work-life balance have been rampant for women postdocs or scientists in academia especially during or after childbirth and parental leaves. Many universities in the United States such as Stony Brook University do not even provide maternity leaves for women faculty. In fact, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development indicates that the United States is the only industrialized country that does not offer a mandatory paid leave for new parents. As revealed in a 2018 study of 205 research universities in the United States and Canada, “about 60 percent of institutions have some form of paid parental leave” —implying that 40 percent do not! The community of young women faculty believes that these policies contribute to the “baby penalty” for women academics, and the penalty is increased when race and gender intersect. With COVID-19 accentuating these issues across the United States, women postdocs might leave the workforce during the pandemic without a clear path back into academia later.

The leaky pipeline of women postdocs

Despite a steady increase in women in academic science, the relative ratio of women compared to men in tenure track positions in most scientific disciplines remains unbalanced. Studies show that a typical academic career path from graduate school to postdoctoral scholar to tenure track faculty loses both men and women, but the loss is more significant for women. As an example, a recent paper by Emily Marshman, PhD, shows that women in physics have a lower belief in their own capability of succeeding (self-efficacy); this could lead them to leave the field disproportionately despite equivalent academic talent.

The question of race and class

The interplay of race and gender in self-efficacy for women postdocs and scientists navigating an already difficult career path in science and engineering is undeniable. NSF Science and Engineering Indicators, 2018 suggests that while the U.S. science and engineering workforce has become more diverse, many racial and ethnic minority groups remain underrepresented. For example, several racial and ethnic minority groups including hispanics, blacks, and American Indians/Alaska Natives constitute only a small share of the science and engineering workforce (11 percent) compared to their rate of participation in the general population. Subsequent to the pandemic, these participation rates might be negatively impacted by a loss of opportunities in academic and industrial sectors, an effect that may be potentially greater for racial and ethnic minority women postdocs and scientists.

Scarcity of female role models in STEM fields

The low representation of women minority groups in STEM fields is a historic problem and its impact on the next generation of global workforce can be detrimental. Several studies have long reported that boys asked to draw a mathematician or scientist will draw men, and young girls were also more likely to draw men than women. Persistent subconscious images of men as STEM professionals might be an important contributor to women entering STEM or continuing as a faculty, scientist, R&D leader or government official in STEM fields, expresses Carly Berwick, an English teacher at a STEM magnet high school in New Jersey.

Women make up over half of the workforce in social sciences, biological, agricultural and environmental sciences, but only 15 percent in engineering and only 26 percent in computer and mathematical sciences. The imbalance of gender ratio is attributed to prioritizing family life over career, but this does not explain the imbalance between scientific disciplines. However, these fields have lower rates of women role models as well. The challenge of increasing women representation in STEM fields and leadership positions could become more difficult due to the influence of COVID-19 on education of young girls. As the pandemic has put 743 million young girls out of school all over the world, it is feared that the rising drop-out rates will be mostly adolescent girls. To keep these girls engaged, we must solve the already existing crisis of women role models in STEM fields.

Imposter syndrome

In an interview from National Geographic’s book ‘women’, Jennifer Doudna, a 2020 Nobel Prize winner in chemistry, suggests that everyone must be “very open about the challenges that women face.” One of the key challenges that she faced during her graduate school and scientist career is imposter syndrome, which is a feeling that hundreds of graduate students, postdocs and scientists go through, thinking that they are frauds and will be revealed by their peers. Imposter syndrome is common in under-represented groups in STEM and in women. Huda Zoghbi, MD, a renowned doctor and winner of multiple awards throughout her career, confessed that she doubted her abilities to succeed until later in her 50s. Strikingly, she observed this same distrust in one’s own accomplishments among hundreds of young researchers, mostly women. She emphasized in her findings, “many women doubted if they could be good enough; that they could move on to the next step of their careers.” A major correlate of the imposter syndrome in women is the “leaky pipeline” in STEM fields which may be a manifestation of women postdocs and scientists having imposter syndrome. A key finding of Martinez's study of biomedical postdocs was that women lacked confidence in their abilities to a greater degree than men. For example, the study found that biomedical postdoc women had less confidence in their ability to obtain a principal investigator position than postdoc men, despite each group indicating that they felt they were qualified for such a position. Imposter syndrome is not an individual disorder, it is a symptom of a faulty system, and is detrimental to the healthy growth of not only the careers of women postdocs, but also to advancement of the STEM fields; it is a roadblock to solving global problems of health, energy and environment. In the COVID-19 pandemic, women postdocs are likely facing increased levels of imposter syndrome as they balance work-life and home-life with the addition of huge uncertainty around job search and economic instability, which could further undermine their self-beliefs and contribute to high levels of imposter syndrome.

Immigration and travel policies influence the choice between family and career

Evolving immigration policies and visa rules dictate the lives of many families of international postdocs, particularly impacting women postdocs. Sometimes the choice becomes which parent should leave behind a lucrative job opportunity or tenure-track faculty career to take care of the children. With very limited opportunities to get work authorization or dependent visa status such as H4 and H4-EAD or J-2 for a spouse, women postdocs who chose to stay with their family in the United States and support their spouse working on the family’s primary H1-B or J-1 visa might be subjected to long gaps and slowdowns in their career growth. In response to the pandemic, U.S. immigration rules have been continuously altered in order to secure more jobs for U.S. citizens, which could exacerbate the work slowdowns for international women postdocs.

Solutions to barriers for women postdocs

A key solution to the near-term problems for women postdocs in the pandemic time and beyond must include better childcare policies and benefits. Additionally, increased efforts from the academic departments and mentors/supervisors to help women postdocs feel more valued and to provide a forum for them to share their issues around work-life balance would provide a valuable counterbalance to encourage women to stay the course. The departments and advisors should be equipped to guide their postdocs, especially, new parents, to appropriate employee assistance programs available at their institutions. Workshops on immigration policies should be made more accessible to international women postdocs to guide them through the complex system of visas and help them make informed choices about career and life. Long-term solutions to the long-standing barriers such as the leaky pipeline, a lack of sufficient role models, the interplay of race and gender, and the imposter syndrome, have been slow in coming, but universities and scientific institutions should not let up in their efforts to implement strategic planning and actions to overcome the gender, racial and ethnic disparities in hiring postdocs. The institutes should also actively provide professional development opportunities to their diverse postdoc community with a focus on promoting equity-minded mentorship. High quality mentoring could not only assist women postdocs to find a career path well-suited for their life, but also empower them to thrive in it.

Arpa Ghosh, PhD, is a postdoctoral research associate at Bioeconomy Institute at Iowa State University, Ames, IA, and is member of Diversity and International Task Forces at the NPA.

Although social distancing guidelines inhibited large in-person gatherings, virtual meetings provided an exceptional opportunity for busy postdocs to attend events both at their own organizations and institutions across the country.

As most of you know, NPAW is an occasion for institutions to recognize and celebrate the accomplishments and contributions of postdoctoral researchers around the world. Although social distancing guidelines inhibited large in-person gatherings, virtual meetings provided an exceptional opportunity for busy postdocs to attend events both at their own organizations and institutions across the country. The more than 30 national events and nearly 300 reported local events provided postdocs with everything from socially-distanced appreciation breakfasts and lunches to career development expertise. The NPA chose NPAW to launch its NPA Communities platform to foster greater collaboration and networking among its members.

Francis Collins, MD, PhD, director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), opened the national festivities for NPAW with an inspirational welcome message from his home office and broadcast via the NPA. The University of Illinois at Chicago kicked off this year’s NPAW with a career development symposium which catered to help individuals in the STEM fields discover and network into a wide range of post-graduate career paths. NIH and University of Kentucky also provided helpful career advice through career panel discussions for both academic and non-academic career paths.

The power of mentorship seemed to be a hot topic with an NPAW collaboration keynote address by John Beacom, PhD, and Chris Pfund, PhD, on Monday, followed later in the week by a webinar from the University of Utah, a national webinar by The Postdoc Academy, and a virtual tour of the National Research Mentoring Network highlighting how postdoctoral scholars can connect as mentors or mentees. University of Texas Southwestern even gave an award for “Excellence in Postdoctoral Mentoring,” highlighting this important aspect in helping postdocs cultivate successful careers.

Of course we had to make time for some fun and games. There were numerous virtual happy hour events, trivia nights, and coffee and ice-cream socials (with safe social distancing of course). University of California, Berkeley got creative with a live concert and Tahitian dance lessons while Lawrence Berkeley National Lab hosted an open mic night for postdocs to show off their talents. I think we can all agree that these social events give us a much needed break to relax and recharge from our busy and sometimes stressful lives in the lab or behind the desk.

The NPA is so grateful to everyone who organized and participated in these events to help our postdocs build successful and rewarding careers. We were delighted to see the commitment in honoring our postdocs through virtual webinars and networking events. And we look forward to seeing what next year has in store!

This conference will bring a blend of keynote speakers, hands-on workshops, e-poster presentations, networking, and various sessions focusing on different themes related to postdocs, postdoc associations, and postdoc offices. The conference provides a wonderful platform for immersive discussions with speakers and presenters, and plenty of opportunities to network with both peers of similar interests as well as experts from various postdoc organizations and associations.

As we are soon approaching the Annual Conference, it is time to start making plans. Specifically tailored for the professional development of postdocs, we are confident that our Annual Conference platform will benefit you in meeting both your short- and long-term goals. However, we know that sometimes it may be difficult to convince your lab’s PI to take some time away from work to attend a conference. Thus, here are a few tips that may help in your preparation to convince your lab’s PI to allow you to take part in this must-attend event and how your continued investment in this conference could benefit your lab and aid in your current and future professional and career development.

Plan for the conference and emphasize its value

Familiarize yourself with the NPA 2021 Annual Conference agenda, that will be available on the NPA website in a few weeks and make note of the sessions that align with your research interests and contribute towards your short- and long- term goals. Create an outline of your selections with a brief and specific justification for each choice including the conference theme, topics of the plenary, workshop sessions and various other sessions of the meeting. By identifying and planning your schedule, you will have a solid case to convince your lab’s PI that this conference will benefit your professional development.

Put yourself in the PI’s position and think about what you would expect if your postdocs made the same request. To attend a conference, you need to do your research, present the benefits, and simply make it easy to get your lab’s PI’s approval. First, factor in the time you will be away from research and the costs associated with attending the conference. Make a list of how the conference would affect your other responsibilities, including any potential delay in meeting project deadlines and how you intend to ensure your projects continue to move forward while you are away. By acknowledging this aspect and making the calendar work for you, you will show that you are really interested in benefiting from the conference while taking care of your lab responsibilities upfront.

Looking at the offerings of the 2021 NPA Annual Conference, think about what skills and tools you can learn or improve at the event and bring back to the lab to improve your work, the environment of the lab, or the overall success of the whole lab’s objectives. There is always an abundance of transferable knowledge available for you to learn at the conference that you can then share with peers and even with your PI. You may even want to explain to your PI that sharing this information with your peers gives you the opportunity to improve your presentation skills.

An added advantage of the virtual nature of the conference is the flexibility it provides attendees to fit any schedule, including postdocs who wish to attend to some extent but not completely take time off from research.

You may go the extra mile to find and share examples from previous attendees to show that participation in the conference generates substantial benefits to postdocs on a similar career path. Feel free to reach out to the NPA if you need additional information.

Contact your University’s Postdoc Association (PDA)/Organization (PDO):

Do not forget to contact your university’s PDA and PDO, as they may also help in financing postdoc events including conference fees, or if you have missed the deadlines for the NPA sponsored travel/childcare awards. Applying for these awards is always beneficial for your CV, and awardees will get help covering specific fees associated with the conference.

Networking Opportunities:

The virtual conference will offer a different experience compared to an in-person event, and as such it guarantees a plethora of networking opportunities. You may want to make note of the talks you would like to attend, speakers you would like to connect with as well as prepare a few questions you are interested in asking. You can use this list of speakers and questions as another tool to help prove that the conference will be a worthwhile experience and that you are prepared to make the most of the time you are taking to attend it.

Another benefit of professional conferences is that they bring together many people with similar interests and missions; you never know how your network can provide an opportunity for your dream career. Do your research of the individuals and organizations participating in the conference and reach out to experts and peers to network and generate new connections. For more tips on networking at the NPA’s virtual conference, check out our article “ Networking at the NPA Annual Conference and maintaining those connections” published in this issue of the POSTDOCKet.

By illustrating the value of the conference and how it will help your professional development, it will be easier to convince your lab’s PI to let you attend. Set up a time with your mentor to talk about why you would like to attend the event. Make sure to show a compelling agenda and work plan including all basic information, such as the name of the conference, the link to the agenda of the conference/event, conference dates, registration cost (which is lower this year because of its virtual nature), any important project deadlines and how you would like to meet them. It is your job to illustrate the value of attending any conference or professional event!

PROTIP: After the conference, share information regarding what you learned and your experiences with your mentor and coworkers. This will help justify future trips to conferences.

Be prepared for a possible “maybe LATER” or “NO”

Most mentors understand the requirements of professional development and encourage their lab members to attend annual conferences as part of their professional development. In some situations, your lab’s PI may say “maybe later” or “NO” to your request to attend a conference. In those cases, re-evaluate your approach and consider addressing your mentor´s concerns and try again ahead of time for the next conference of interest that may help your career development and benefit your team. Doing so allows you to better outline your proposal in a clean and easy-to-read manner and thereby increase your chances to get your lab’s PI to approve you attending a conference. Again, don’t forget to check the NPA website or to reach out to the NPA if you need the latest or additional information to help inform decisions.

If you still get a ‘NO’ because of unforeseen circumstances, thank your lab’s PI for taking the time to review your proposal. Follow the conference just the same through available channels such as the event’s official website and social media. Leverage your network and get updates, snippets and learn from contacts who were able to join/attend the conference.

Interested in sharing your ideas for the NPA’s Annual Conference in April 2021? We would love to hear your input regarding what you like or dislike in virtual conferences. Please add your ideas/suggestions HERE!

Interested to participate as a NPA volunteer for sessions or activities on subjects or skills you are an expert in? If so, please reach us at: meetings@nationalpostdoc.org.

Lalitha Kurada, PhD, is a postdoctoral researcher at the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute (USUHS), Bethesda, MD.

Kurada is also a communications subcommittee co-chair for the NPA Meetings Committee, co-chaired by Lisa Maria Mustachio and Anne Wyllie.

I know from experience that the practice of providing clinical healthcare to family and friends can be risky. As a young mom, having my dad and brothers readily available for medical advice with my children was advantageous. But on one occasion, poor judgment led my fourteen year-old son to the intensive care unit. In hindsight, it would have been prudent for me to involve only my son’s doctor and not his physician grandpa. Classic case of family medical perks going awry.

What do the “experts” say?

The American Medical Association (AMA) states that in general, physicians should not treat themselves or members of their own families. However, it may be acceptable to do so in limited circumstances:

• In emergency or isolated settings where there is no other qualified physician available. In such situations, physicians should not hesitate to treat themselves or family members until another physician becomes available.
• For short-term, minor health conditions

Things to consider when healthcare physicians comes to treating family or friends:

• These individuals often expect you to treat them medically. Set the necessary boundaries and be prepared to communicate your policy.
• Practice within the standard of care and follow your treatment protocols to the letter.
• Decide if you will treat employees on a limited basis or not at all.
• Consider being a “doctor” only to your “patients.” Avoid curbside consults as you need a complete medical history and examination.
• Use caution with situations beyond your scope of training.
• Prescribing medications with a high risk of abuse or for a mental health condition can pose added risks (legal and personal) to those close to you.
• Treating others in casual settings leads to casual follow-up care. Be diligent.
• Keep detailed medical records and manage these patients just as you would with established non-family patients.

Here are some questions that may help you discern if a physician-patient relationship with these persons is in their best interest and yours:

• Do I remember that my personal emotions can interfere with professional objectivity and medical judgment?
• How will you feel if an adverse event occurs? Will you feel at fault? Will you accept that the personal relationship is likely to be jeopardized?
• Due to the close relationship, will this person be at ease questioning your plan of care or medical recommendations?
• Will treating this person be challenging due to questions I may have to ask to make a diagnosis?
• Would confidentiality be a challenge with this person as a patient? What about mandatory reporting if the relative is a minor?
• Will reimbursement be affected?
• Do I realize that there is always the possibility of litigation?

Some healthcare physicians I have consulted choose to avoid treating family members except in emergent or isolated settings. Others are comfortable with ‘weekend’ prescribing and then diligently transferring the patient back to their own physician. Still others have a strict policy that they will not assume care for family.

There are different schools of thought on this dilemma, so I suggest weighing the pros and cons along with invoking common sense and your own discretion.

For more information, please reach out to Steve Johnson, Area Vice President of Gallagher’s Student and Scholar Services at 949.317.5918.

Mary Stoll, RN, BNS, is a senior risk manager at Gallagher National Risk Control.

Disclaimer
Gallagher provides insurance, risk management and consultation services for our clients in response to both known and unknown risk exposures. When providing analysis and recommendations regarding potential insurance coverage, potential claims and/ or operational strategy in response to national emergencies (including health crises), we do so from an insurance/risk management perspective, and offer broad information about risk mitigation, loss control strategy and potential claim exposures. We have prepared this commentary and other news alerts for general informational purposes only and the material is not intended to be, nor should it be interpreted as, legal or client-specific risk management advice. General insurance descriptions contained herein do not include complete insurance policy definitions, terms and/or conditions, and should not be relied on for coverage interpretation. The information may not include current governmental or insurance developments, is provided without knowledge of the individual recipient’s industry or specific business or coverage circumstances, and in no way reflects or promises to provide insurance coverage outcomes that only insurance carriers control.

Gallagher publications may contain links to non-Gallagher websites that are created and controlled by other organizations. We claim no responsibility for the content of any linked website, or any link contained therein. The inclusion of any link does not imply endorsement by Gallagher, as we have no responsibility for information referenced in material owned and controlled by other parties. Gallagher strongly encourages you to review any separate terms of use and privacy policies governing use of these third party websites and resources. Insurance brokerage and related services to be provided by Arthur J. Gallagher Risk Management Services, Inc. (License No. 0D69293) and/or its affiliate Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. Insurance Brokers of California, Inc. (License No. 0726293).

The Committees of the Membership, along with the International and Diversity Officers, are at the core of the NPA. They work to develop events and resources that support the postdoctoral community, and their work would not be possible without volunteers. Volunteering with an NPA committee is a great way to gain professional experience at the national level, while giving back to the postdoctoral community. Here are some highlights of what committees and officers have been up to and how you can get involved.

International Officers

The highlights from the International Officers are below:

• Since the inception of new International Officer in June 2020, we have formed a task force with seven volunteers to date.
• Developed SMART goals and created projects and action items that align with the SMART goals for 2020-2021.
• Published an article on The POSTDOCket on the recent visa ban and its impact on the international postdoctoral community.
• Worked with the ResDev Committee in their new endeavor to intentionally incorporate diversity, equity, inclusion values and international perspectives in their content (ResDev sub-committee on DEI/international perspectives).
• Worked on the engagement campaign (“Did you know?”) in collaboration with the Advocacy and the Outreach Committees.
• Working on two more articles for The POSTDOCket newsletter: An article on immigration and the U.S. economy, and another on international spouses group."
• Working on improving access to and revising resources on the NPA International Hub webpage - will be collaborating with the NPA staff and other committees as necessary.
• Working on increasing awareness about international postdocs in the humanities and their issues/challenges including diversity/inclusion.

Meetings

The highlights from the Meetings Committee are below:

• The 2021 Annual Conference is going virtual! We welcome you to our online conference.
• The communications subcommittee (SC) has been nicely collaborating with The POSTDOCket to publish monthly articles related to the NPA Annual Conference (the POSTDOCKet Committee should have a list of these, please let me know if you would like for me to resend the titles).
• The networking SC prepared a nice list of virtual networking events for the virtual component of next year's conference. We are in the process of testing these out before making it official.
• We just closed our call for workshops and posters that will be presented during next year's conference. We are currently reviewing them.
• We just closed our call for awards and are currently reviewing them.
• The fundraising SC has been working strongly with the Development Committee on developing strategies to fundraise for the 2021 conference.

Outreach

• NPAW 2020 - we are still curating our database to see what worked and what could be better, especially as the NPAW model went completely virtual this year. We are also working on our NPAW wrap up article.
• Postdoc success stories to initiate and retain member engagement. Our collected stories will also serve as a database of NPA alumni in case we decide to exploit that for future endeavors.
• Working on rebranding the postdoc LinkedIn group and brainstorming ideas how to best establish and promote this to maintain connections at member institutions.

POSTDOCket

The POSTDOCket is currently searching for new leadership positions! Now is the time to apply.

Resource Dev

Many postdocs will be choosing benefit plans for 2021 during fall open enrollment. The Resource Development Committee's October webinar was on "Insurance 101" with Steve Johnson from Gallagher Benefits Services. Steve introduced postdocs to the world of U.S. healthcare insurance - defining insurance terms and how to understand different benefit plans.

On November 11 the webinar was on the NIH K99/R00 Pathway to Independence awards. Webinar recordings are available for members in the archive.

We are searching and on-boarding new chairs. Great time to join the committee as we plan for 2021!