home to ask these questions, for fear of being overheard at the laboratory.
The first thing I tell them is that there is far more to science than the "bench." I myself
entered the science field as an undergraduate, when I chose to study veterinary microbial
genetics. I worked in the laboratory of Dr. William Sischo, an epidemiologist who specialized
in number-crunching but who needed technical assistance with field sampling and laboratory
work to generate the data. Dr. Sischo instilled in me a strong desire to learn about and
experiment in genetics. I was fascinated by the many ways genetics can be used to help
understand how or why certain biological functions occur, and I wondered how I could use
my knowledge of genetics to benefit society.
After I obtained my bachelor of science degree, I went on to graduate school earning a
master of science degree part-time while working full-time jobs in a couple of well-establish
research institutions. I enjoyed both graduate school and working in the laboratory. I also
learned the "correct" career path-an academic position at a respectable research university-
was what we were supposed to want out of life. More specifically, academic laboratories
were acceptable, but working in industry, even to do research, was generally looked upon as
"selling out." I believe this attitude has relaxed somewhat since then, since grants and jobs
have become harder to secure and tenured positions lack the security they once possessed.
It was during my graduate studies that I began to question my goals and the assumptions
they were based on. I was becoming increasingly unhappy with the direction my career was
heading, and I began to question my abilities and motivation. Finally, when I heard myself
mutter out loud "I don't want to do bench work forever," I sat up and took notice. I decided
that in spite of my training, and even though I still loved science, research was not right for
me.
I wanted a career, or at least a job for starters, that valued my graduate degree and training,
and that was a better fit for my skills and future ambitions. I decided I would do best with a
job that was externally driven either by deadlines or by the needs of others; in addition, I
wanted to talk, write, and/or evaluate science as a whole rather than focus on one particular
aspect of a research project.
As a molecular geneticist, I had occasionally interacted with the patent department at
SmithKline Beecham Pharmaceuticals in support of my supervisor's patent applications.
They worked on a variety of intellectual property issues in a number of scientific disciplines
that were of interest to the company. I realized then that I could make very good use of my
science background as a patent attorney.
Earlier this year, I accepted an offer to work as a patent agent in the Corporate Intellectual
Properties Department at SmithKline Beecham. The job involves writing and prosecuting
patent applications, which in turn requires broad knowledge of both science and law. I soon
realized that, in order to become an effective patent practitioner, I must become intimately
acquainted with U.S. patent law. Because SmithKline Beecham is an international
corporation, I have also learned a great deal about international patent law so that I can
assist in foreign prosecution of SmithKline Beecham's patents. When I first started the job, it