Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
55030930
label
[Letters 1999-2000: Last Names Starting With “V”] [2]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
55030930
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
[Letters 1999-2000: Last Names Starting With “V”] [2]
citationUrl
collections
Records of the First Lady's Office (Clinton Administration)
Melanne Verveer's Correspondence files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
55030930
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
42219139-20130534S-028-001-2022
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
1988483fa3bc5495
ocrText
TELEPHONE: (215) 977-2065
FAX: (215) 977-2740
E-MAIL: [email protected]
elizabeth J. VRATO
ATTORNEY-AT-LAW
WOLF, Block, SCHORR AND SOLIS-COHEN LLP
TWELFTH FLOOR PACKARD BUILDING
111 SOUTH 15TH STREET
Philadelphia, PA 19102-2678
ON YOUR WAY
Betty Freidan once noted, "After having their feet bound for centuries, how did
Chinese women know they could run?"
That same question could be posed about each of the extraordinary women, the
extraordinary professional role models, we have featured in this book. In government, law,
academia, politics and business, they forged new paths, discovered new routes and blazed new
trails. Without a road map in uncharted terrain, this first generation of female professional
leaders truly went where no woman had gone before.
The purpose of this book is not simply to honor their passion and purpose, their
intellect and imagination -- but to teach all of us who each day must meet the demands and face
the difficulties of being a woman in the workplace. In many ways, this book is in keeping with
the ancient tradition of native Americans, where the wisdom of the elders was passed down to
younger generations entirely through stories.
This book should really be seen as a road map, a guide to the roadblocks,
obstacles and detours that young women will confront in their careers -- and how to overcome
them. It is also a map to finding the stars, because as the poet Schiller wrote, the stars of our
own fate lie within us.
1
But our ultimate goal in writing this book is to provide you with surrogate
mentors, women who can answer your questions, allay your fears and provide advice. Studies
have shown that the single most important factor for career success is a mentor; unfortunately,
very few women have ever had one. Hopefully, this work will somewhat fill the gap and
encourage you to find real-life mentors.
But before you begin the journey, it is important to look back to see how far we
have come -- to better judge where you want to go.
In England in the 1600's (not that long ago in the timeline of history), if William
Shakespeare had a sister named Judith, who was just as gifted and adventurous as he was, what
would have happened to her? Virginia Woolf contemplated this hypothetical. Judith would
have been kept at home while William went to school. Judith's parents would have arranged a
marriage for her with the son of a neighbor, while William went to seek his fortune in London
and work in the theater. She scribbled pages up in a loft and hid them or set fire to them.
Frustrated, she ran away and went to London. She stood at the stage door and said she wanted to
work in the theater, and the men who ran the theater laughed in her face. She was tormented by
her "poet's heart" that tugged at her without any means of expression. Stifled at every turn, she
killed herself. And the world has never seen a sonnet or play of hers.¹
1
Woolf, Virginia A Room of One's Own. (Harcourt Brace: 1989), p.47.
2
This is Virginia Woolf's way of delivering the rather extreme message that if you
were born a woman with potential and ambition not that long ago, you might as well have killed
yourself. So we have said to each other, as haunting shorthand throughout the years, "like
Shakespeare's sister" -- when a woman of brains and character has been unappreciated or
hindered.
In 1929, Woolf concluded in A Room of One's Own that women will become
great writers "in another hundred years' time," when they have a tradition behind them -- as
Shakespeare had Marlowe before him, and Marlowe had Chaucer, and Chaucer had the unnamed
men who "tamed the natural savagery of the tongue."2
One could not go to the map and say Columbus discovered
America and Columbus was a woman; or take an apple and
remark, Newton discovered the laws of gravitation and Newton
was a woman; or look into the sky and say aeroplanes are flying
overhead and aeroplanes were invented by women. There is no
mark on the wall to measure the precise height of women.³
2
Id. at 65.
3
Id. at 85.
3
What she has to say about women who aspire to be writers applies equally to
women who aspire to succeed in the workplace. In this country, women did not have a tradition
of working outside the home until just a few generations ago. It now seems hard to believe that
just a hundred years ago, most women were the property of their husbands.
Today, a woman can literally become anything she wants. Now we have a
tradition. Tradition brings with it opportunities and responsibilities. That tradition has been
made, in part, by the women in this book.
The women presented here have all been recipients of the American Bar
Association's "Margaret Brent Women of Achievement Award." Margaret Brent was our
nation's first woman attorney. She and her brothers arrived in Maryland in 1638 with a large
family land grant. With her brothers' permission, she represented her family in court on matters
concerning the family property. She also made other court appearances -- totaling over one
hundred in all -- listed in court records as "Margaret Brent, Gentleman." There is no evidence of
another woman lawyer in the United States until the suffrage movement in the late nineteenth
century.
4
First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, during her term as Chair of the ABA
Commission on Women in the Profession, established the Margaret Brent Award in 1991 to
recognize women in the legal field who have achieved a level of excellence, influenced other
women to pursue careers, and opened professional doors that were previously closed to women.
That said, this is not a book focused on Law, or lawyers, or even the biographies
of the Margaret Brent awardees. This is a book about mentoring. And we specifically chose this
pool because we thought interviewing this group of exceptional lawyers could provide
information and insight valuable to all working women. Lawyering fosters universal workplace
skills such as compromise, articulation, and reasoning, as well as the handling of diverse
personalities. Although we knew this exercise would not provide all of the answers, asking
some of the right people some of the right questions is a good start.
As you continue along -- or start -- your professional journey, take inspiration
from the women you are about to get to know. Women who, through this book, are about to
open their hearts to you, take you into their confidence, and become your mentors. They are
waiting for you in these pages
Enjoy the visit, and let them help you get on your way.
5
Authors' Notes
I only wish someone had given me a book like this when I started down my
career path; however, no such work existed then. But I did have the good fortune to be blessed
with a number of extraordinary role models. A tradition of intelligent, capable women in my
own family, especially my mother, gave me my roots.
The wings were provided by an amazing high school English teacher and former
lawyer, Joan Geruson, who showed us that a woman's world could extend far beyond the
horizon. Given her influence, it is probably not surprising that I was led down two parallel
paths -- to writing which is my love, and politics which is my life.
Today, I have the good fortune to be speech writer for one of the most
outstanding Cabinet Secretaries in our nation's history, the United States Secretary of Health and
Human Services, Donna Shalala. Like the women in this book, she proves to me almost daily
that good and great can exist in the same individual.
Elizabeth and I attended the same high school and college. Then our paths
diverged -- hers to law, mine to government. But even though we had taken different paths, we
were always astonished to learn we encountered, or witnessed, the exact same workplace
issues -- issues of equality and fairness, power and gender. We helped each other work through
these issues, and during those conversations the seed for this book was planted and took root.
6
Taken together, the women in my life -- and now I count the Margaret Brent
awardees in that number -- have definitely proved to me that, like the Chinese women Betty
Freidan applauded, I could run.
Michele M. Patrick
Washington, D.C.
September 1998
I wanted to become a lawyer because of Mrs. Geruson, my high school English
teacher -- a New York University lawyer by training. I remember her teaching Shakespeare's
Merchant of Venice with pleas for us to contemplate its questions of justice. I remember her
coaching me for speech and debate competitions, showing how arguments need foundation and
have to flow in logical sequence. I wanted to be just like her.
I actually became a lawyer because of Jerry Shestack, one of the most prominent
attorneys in the United States. My mother introduced us when I was sixteen. He questioned me
about school, told me about his practice, and edited the speeches I had composed with Mrs.
Geruson. He took me under his wing. I wanted to be just like him.
Jerry is a nationally recognized trial and appellate lawyer and just completed a
term as the President of the American Bar Association. He is a champion of women, minorities
and international human rights. When Michele and I met with him to discuss our ideas for a
book on the mentoring of women by women, he suggested we approach the Margaret Brent
7
awardees. If it were not for his patience, his encouragement, and his guidance, this book would
not have become a reality.
Eventually, I graduated from NYU Law School like Mrs. Geruson. And once in
the work world, issues that never concerned me in school became extremely important: the gap
between women and men in earnings, power, and positions of responsibility; sexual harassment;
discrimination. There are plenty of negatives on which to dwell. I have read a lot about these
issues, seen some touch my friends, experienced some firsthand. I chose not to study them or to
write about them, but to write about women who overcame them and what their stories can teach
all of us.
The intention of this book is to provide positive role models to follow, on the
premise that everybody can use a little help. It doesn't matter who you are, who your family is,
how much education, intelligence, or money you have. If you are a career person, you will
benefit from the knowledge of those who have gone before you.
Elizabeth J. Vrato
Philadelphia
September 1998
[Attached are sample chapters from among the interviews.]
8
I.
Lynn Hecht Schafran
"The concept that 'merit will out' is naive"
Hometown: New York, New York; Born: 1940; Personal: Married (and 2
children); Position: Director of a National Organization of Women project to promote equality;
1996 Recipient of the Margaret Brent Award
Lynn Hecht Schafran likes to invoke this consciousness-raising exercise:
Draw a circle in your mind. This represents all the people
in the world. Divide the circle in half. Mark one half "women"
and one half "men." Within the half marked "men,"
draw a line that marks out one-third of the segment. This
one-third is all the white men in the world. Now shade a tiny
sliver of this one-third. This sliver is all the educated and
privileged white men in the western world.
She explains that this sliver made our history, our literature, our art and our law. But this
sliver of men is not making all the rules anymore.
It was the world of this "sliver" that Lynn's mother inherited in the 1930's.
Lynn's mother tried to work outside the home by taking a job at a radio station. A few days
later, Lynn's great-uncle came to the station, pulled her outside, and told her to quit because she
was taking a job away from a man. She became an interior designer and worked from home.
By struggling to develop her own business and earn income, Lynn's mother was
far in advance of her time. Yet Lynn was always conscious that her mother never had the
opportunity to realize her potential and high intelligence. What she lacked was opportunity,
1
family support, and community culture -- all critical ingredients to career success that the
Depression years never gave to women.
Growing up, Lynn remembers feeling those around her had a very clear sense of
boys and girls' roles. Boys were given cars, and girls were not. Boys were given good
allowances; girls had paltry ones. Boys could get away with escapades girls could not. It was
expected that girls would stay in the house and wait to be telephoned by boys who wanted to
take them out (aided by their cars and allowances).
Lynn's father, a lawyer, was approached repeatedly throughout the years by
politically active friends to become a judge. He always declined, telling his family he had a dim
view of the ability and integrity of many of the judges he knew.
These early influences -- Lynn's belief that her mother did not have enough
opportunities, the expectation that males and females had roles to follow, her father's concern
about the quality of judges -- all came together to help shape Lynn into the person most
responsible for changing the way the American court system treats women.
But the legal profession almost lost her before it got her. In autumn 1961, Lynn
was a senior at Smith College. She planned to apply to Harvard Law School, until a fellow
student told her Harvard had only started accepting female law students in the 1950's. At once,
2
she recalls, "I felt unwelcome to the field of Law." Instead, she went to Columbia University for
graduate work in art history and held positions as an art curator, lecturer, and critic.
Nonetheless, somehow Lynn's interest in law persisted. So ten years later, she
started at Columbia Law School. One of her teachers would change her life. Professor Ruth
Bader Ginsburg taught her how the civil rights laws that had helped minorities could advance
women as well. She credits Justice Ginsburg with putting her on the path of women and law.
Lynn worked for Ginsburg at the American Civil Liberties Union; and after graduation, she was
a clerk for the same federal judge for whom Ginsburg had clerked after law school.
Several years after graduation, while working on a panel to screen and to
recommend women for judgeships, Lynn was asked to help prepare a report for some visionary
members of the National Organization of Women ("NOW") on the way courts were treating
women. That report was the genesis of a new project: the National Judicial Education Program
to Promote Equality for Women and Men in the Courts ("NJEP").¹ Lynn became its first
director in 1981.
1
The NJEP is a project of the NOW Legal Defense Fund in cooperation with the
National Association of Women Judges, whose founder, Judge Joan Dempsey Klein, will be
discussed in chapter
3
Lynn met with tenacious resistance when she approached judges and lawyers to
assist in the NJEP's mission to eliminate gender bias as an institutional problem in the courts.
Resistance was threefold:
(1) Denial -- there is no problem with the way women are treated in our courts.
(2) Difficulty in sustaining interest -- changes cannot be made because over the
long term, there will be personnel changes and changes in the level of
commitment needed.
(3) The "generational thinking" defense -- problems will disappear
when the next, more enlightened, generation arrives.
She found this third type of resistance, "generational thinking" -- which meant
that men could not alter the way they treat women in the courtroom and other professional
settings -- the most objectionable. She points out that given the dynamic nature of Law,
openness to change is essential to being an effective lawyer: "When a revised tax code is issued,
no one would dream of suggesting that those who were used to the old code
had used it for
more than 10 years
were comfortable with it
were excused from learning the new tax
code -- that the next generation learning it would be enough."
Lynn overcame the resistance she encountered by gathering evidence of bias from
the country's courts, in order to make her "case" that there was an immediate need for
improvement. She set out to "see women's cases through women's eyes." Although she knew
4
her investigation would reveal an institutional problem of bias, "I didn't know what I didn't
know!" she exclaims, describing the process she went through and its results. She gathered
information from trial and appellate judges, court personnel, lawyers, law professors, juries,
sentencing surveys, and academic research.
Interviews with women revealed they often felt ambivalent about turning to the
courts because they wondered whether they would be treated fairly or would be victimized
further.
For instance, in divorce cases, she found a version of the old boys' club. Many
judges displayed a protective attitude toward fathers' incomes and lifestyles. Testimony by a
father as to his limited ability to pay alimony and child support would be accepted by a judge
without question, but a mother would be required to prove all of the expenses related to their
children. And courts were unwilling to value a homemaker's nonmonetary contribution to the
marriage. They also did not recognize that a woman who did enter the workplace was unlikely
to reach the economic level of her former husband. Studies found women living in
economically depressed circumstances after divorce, while their ex-husbands continued to have
the same standard of living as before divorce.
This lack of knowledge about women's reality, which resulted in unfair trials and
unfair results, was also found in the way rape cases were conducted. That rape is a crime of
violence, the seriousness of "date rape," and the long-term mental and emotional injury to a rape
5
victim were not considered. Some lines of questioning included improper sex stereotyping and
harassment of the victim. For example, a rape victim might be asked if she enjoyed the sex, or if
she had been wearing something seductive. Some judges categorized a rape as "non-violent" if
the victim was not beaten and bruised, not realizing that the bruises from rape are often left on
the psyche and the soul.
Women lawyers representing clients in our nation's courts did not fare any better
than women litigants and witnesses. The American Bar Association Commission on Women in
the Profession has observed:
Women [lawyers] report that they are often treated with
a presumption of incompetence, to be overcome only by
flawless performance, whereas they see men attorneys
treated with a presumption of competence overcome only
after numerous significant mistakes.²
A probable explanation for this perception, Lynn explains, was that most judges
had few, if any, women colleagues when they were in law school or practicing in a law firm.
And, their wives were probably not professionals working outside the home. They had limited
contact with this "new breed;" as a result, they were not entirely comfortable with young women
lawyers. They would tend to focus on their "femaleness," without realizing this chipped away at
credibility and professionalism in front of a jury. For instance, by addressing a male lawyer as
2
American Bar Association Commission on Women in the Profession, Resolution and
Report to the House of Delegates, Aug. 1988 at 12.
6
"Mr." or "Counselor," and then calling the female adversary "young lady" or "Lynn," a clear
message was sent to the jury as to who is the more competent person.
She used the information gathered to begin conducting gender bias seminars for
judges all over the country. Most people were responsive to her; she credits this to judges'
sincere interest in being impartial and fair. But she still met with periodic resistance. She
remembers: "I gave a seminar where three judges were openly contemptuous to me. When I
went around the room and asked each of the judges why they had chosen to attend, these three
judges said it was so ridiculous they had come to laugh! The next year one of those judges was
asked in court by a lawyer what she could do to convince him that her client should receive an
alternative sentence. The judge replied, 'You can start by taking off your clothes.' Later -- as
part of his apology to avoid the judicial conduct commission -- the judge told the lawyer that he
had attended a course about this kind of thing, but had not paid enough attention."
Lynn believes breaking stereotypes wide open was essential to making progress,
because there is a link between female stereotypes and sex discrimination. Many of the custody
decisions where mothers were treated unfairly stemmed from the stereotype that mothers are
pure, self-sacrificing and at home full-time. For instance, a mother with a live-in boyfriend
would be treated as a bad influence on her children, but a father with a live-in girlfriend was
seen as "starting his new life." Yet distorting application of the law to perpetrate male-female
stereotypes can harm men as well. In one case, a judge said he would not award custody to a
7
"househusband" father because he would be a terrible role model for his son.³ In several cases,
judges showed reluctance to give fathers overnight visits with their infants, assuming a man does
not know how to care for a baby.
As a result of her efforts, the mood and conduct in courtrooms during the last
decade have changed dramatically. Bias and fairness training is now accepted as a component of
any judge's orientation for the bench. In divorce cases, an expert may testify that a woman's
at-home work has value. And in rape cases, a psychologist can testify that the trauma a victim
experienced kept her from reporting her rape to the police. Judges who think a woman lawyer is
being treated in a condescending manner by a male lawyer are likely to admonish the male
lawyer on the record in open court. These were not accepted practices just twenty years ago.
Since starting along her path, Lynn has trained thousands of judges, lawyers, and
court personnel on how to provide justice without gender bias. She notes, "Now I'll teach a
session about the economic consequences of divorce and a judge will come up to me afterward
and say, 'When you explained the difficulty for a homemaker rejoining the workforce, I realized
I did not give enough alimony to a woman who came before me last week."
3
Peterson V. Peterson, No. 86-0642 (Iowa Ct. of Appeals 1986).
8
Recently, Lynn has been participating in focus groups sponsored by NOW to
gauge what is important to our country's girls and women. She has found that females
everywhere care about the same things: equal pay for equal work, equity in the workplace,
prevention of domestic violence and rape, and increasing the respect shown them both in the
workplace and at home. Variables such as the age, race, social background, and economic
background of the focus group participants does not change the results.
She tells these girls and women, "The concept that 'merit will out' is naive
There are plenty of qualified and talented women who have not gotten their due because they are
women." Female employees from some of the most prestigious firms and companies have
contacted her with complaints that their employer has basically said to them, "we don't want you
to succeed here."
Lynn advises younger women to raise their awareness of gender issues because
after all of the battles that have been fought, discrimination is not as blatant -- but just as
destructive -- as it used to be. Now it is rare to have a male supervisor say to a female
subordinate, "Have sex with me and you'll get a raise," or "Go on a date with me or you're
fired."
9
Yet discrimination against women is still prevalant in its more subtle forms -- in
fact. Lynn believes it is the last publicly acceptable form of discrimination. For instance,
regardless of a judge's or lawyer's private prejudices, no one will say in open court, "What can
you expect from a Jewish lawyer?" or "What can you expect from an African American
lawyer?" But if you substitute the word "woman" for the words "Jewish" or "African
American," this is an incident women lawyers still report over and over again.
Lynn believes that the huge influx of women into the workplace is slowly
chipping away at the traditional workplace model. Women are now less often excluded from
formal and informal networks in their companies and communities. Employers are forced to
deal with talented female workers who make important contributions, but who do not have a
spouse in the suburbs taking care of their children and running the house. As a result,
progressive policies such as parental leave, corporate-sponsored daycare centers, flex-time, part-
time, and telecommuting -- which were championed by women -- are being institutionalized.
10
Through untiring effort, Lynn Hecht Schafran created a new legal concept called
"gender bias in the courts." Judges who exhibit gender bias in the courtroom are now sanctioned
by judicial conduct commissions, and judges sanction lawyers who exhibit this behavior.
Thanks to this remarkable woman, who once believed that boys should get the
cars and bigger allowances, our courts are a fairer place for America's women. And Justice is
becoming blindfolded to gender.
11
II.
Patricia Schroeder
"Is America man enough to
back a woman?"
Hometown: Denver, Colorado; Born: 1940; Personal: Married
(and 2 children); Number of political consultants hired and polls taken while serving
24 years in Congress: zero; Position: President of the Association of American Publishers;
1996 Recipient of the Margaret Brent Award
Pat Schroeder observes, "The White House might as well have a 'No Girls
Allowed' sign posted on the door." The number of women who have pursued the United States
Presidency can be counted on one hand. Pat launched her campaign in 1987. Before her were
Shirley Chisholm (in 1972); Belva Lockwood (1884); and Victoria Woodhull (1872).
But Pat Schroeder has spent her life tearing down "No Girls Allowed" signs.
When she began attending Harvard Law School in 1961, there were only fifteen women in her
first-year class of more than five hundred. She remembers male students changing their seat
assignments in the lecture halls so they would not have to sit next to a female law student.
"Infiltrating the boys' club of Harvard prepared me for infiltrating the boys' club of Congress,"
Pat observes.
1
When she first entered the House of Representatives in 1972, Pat wanted to sit on
the Armed Services Committee. The committee controlled about 65 cents of every dollar
Congress spends -- but no woman had ever breached that sacred male bastion.
At the time, the committee's Chairman was F. Edward Hebert of Louisiana.
He was dead set against women or minorities becoming members of his committee. When the
first woman and the first African-American were appointed to that committee (Pat Schroeder
and Ron Dellums), they found only one extra chair in the committee meeting room. Hebert was
furious that his veto of their appointments was ignored. He had announced that women and
blacks were worth only half of one "regular" member. So he allowed only one new chair to be
added to the room for his two new "half" members. Pat remembers, "No one else on the
committee even offered to scrounge up another chair. Everyone was afraid of Hebert."
Pat and Ron decided they did not want to jeopardize their appointment to the
most powerful House committee by starting a commotion over the lack of a chair, so they sat
together on the one extra chair -- "We were 'cheek to cheek,' trying to retain our dignity."
"Once in a heated debate, Ron said to Hebert, 'there are only two of us with the balls to stand up
against what we all know is wrong.' I tugged on his arm and suggested 'balls' was not a
precisely accurate description of our coalition of two."
2
She exercised her right as a committee member to attach additional views to the
annual defense budget bill, even though she knew Hebert would be displeased. Some colleagues
thought her motivation was to goad Hebert, but that was not the case. Pat considered the
submission of supplements with alternative views as part of her duty as a free-thinking
committee member. And, she continued to do it for as long as she served on the committee,
long after Hebert was gone.
Repeatedly, she felt committee members were afraid of Hebert and, even more,
afraid of vigorous, open debate about the role of the military. When she asserted her views, a
frequent refrain from committee members was, "What could she know? She never served in the
military." Yet most of them had not served in the military either.
Committee members who criticized her were just following the example of their
Chairman. Hebert continually characterized her efforts in the most denigrating light.
"I questioned U.S. bombing raids on Cambodia, and he said, 'I wish you'd
support our boys like you support the enemy."
"And when I voted to cut off the funds for the continued bombing, he yelled,
'No! That's the dumbest thing I ever heard!"
3
One must appreciate the power of a committee chair like Hebert to realize how
truly brave Pat was to challenge him with her opinions, in documents promulgated by the
committee, indeed by her very unwanted presence on half a chair. Pat elaborates on the
historical context. "When I arrived in Congress, these chairmen were demigods. Younger
Representatives were expected to be quiet, wait their turn, and hope they could outlive their
opposition! And if you became a committee chairman, you were there for life. But that all
changed when the first group of post-Watergate Representatives came to Washington in 1974."
These reform-oriented Representatives requested a report from the chairman of
each committee on progress and goals. Because of them, chairmanship was changed from an
appointed position to an elected one, with a secret ballot every term. "Hebert had been branded
as an autocrat, in part because word was getting around about the way he had been treating me
and Ron over the past two years. The freshmen decided Hebert should be voted out. He tried to
campaign for votes, but it was too late." And with Hebert's replacement, Pat and Ron had chairs
of their own.
Pat believes often just the willingness to stand up for yourself -- though in her
case it was to sit down for herself -- and to remain tenacious is the most effective means to an
end.
4
She points out that she did not always follow her own advice, using this tragic
example: The second time Pat was pregnant, which was before she entered Congress, she started
to bleed in her fourth month. Her obstetrician brushed off her concerns. "He called me high
strung, and said that since I was a Harvard lawyer, I must be having trouble adjusting to life as a
housewife."
Two months before her due date, she went into labor. In the delivery room, it
was discovered that Pat had been carrying twins, a boy and a girl. The girl died early in the
pregnancy and had been the cause of the hemorrhaging. The boy was born barely alive,
weighing only four and a half pounds, and died by the next morning. Pat explains, "I was angry
at the doctor for refusing to listen to me, but I was furious at myself for letting a doctor convince
me I had no right to question his judgment." She has never forgotten this lesson brought home
in tragedy.
Most of the time, Pat has stood up not only for herself. She stood up for what
some would call "women's issues" -- but which she calls American issues -- issues such as
fairness and equality and justice. Nowhere was this more evident than in her historic
Presidential campaign.
In the spring of 1987, Pat was co-chairing the Presidential campaign of Senator
Gary Hart of Colorado. At the time, she was a Congresswoman from Denver. Her role as
5
co-chair came to an abrupt end. At a press conference, Gary (who was married) defended
himself against accusations of womanizing by daring the press to "go ahead and follow me."
They did, and he was found out. The Miami Herald obtained photographs of him on a yacht
with a blonde woman named Donna Rice on his lap. After that, his campaign dissolved virtually
overnight.
Pat's supporters urged her to take a look at the Presidential race herself. "I asked
myself, 'Could I raise the necessary money? Build an organization? Be accepted?" She
identified some big obstacles to joining the race, besides her gender:
*
it was already June, and the Democrats would be choosing
their candidate at the convention in August;
*
the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary were over --
as the first events of the primary season, they were essential
for any candidate to win the party nomination; and
*
seven other Democratic candidates had been campaigning full-time
for months.
Knowing all of this, Pat nonetheless decided to throw her hat in the ring. She
knew she could not win, but she also knew she could add something to the candidates' debate
that would not be contributed by her male counterparts: a discussion of family issues with the
American people. It was a subject that needed answers, and she was the person to do the asking.
6
As she started to campaign, the focus on her gender (which she expected) began:
"Some people could not get past the fact that I looked so different from the other candidates."
The press called her "the women's candidate" and measured women's progress in society by her
candidacy. At one of her fundraisers, the state Democratic Party chairman introduced her in
glowing terms, then ended with, "Of course I can't vote for her because I have a problem with a
man for First Lady." At another fundraiser, she was asked, "Does your husband know you're
running?" She could not even imagine a male candidate being asked the outrageous question of
whether his wife knows if he is running for President.
Pat was struck by how "ripe" people were to talk candidly about family issues.
Audiences comprised of both sexes asked how she managed to be in Congress, have a spouse,
and raise two children. Men had been running for President for generations, and they were
never asked these types of questions because it was assumed their wives handled all the domestic
responsibilities. Those candidates would have been unaware of the juggling of personal and
professional responsibilities most adults in America now do. This dialogue with the American
electorate convinced her that people needed government policies to help them with health care
and family issues.
7
Her reasoning appeals to common-sense: "After World War II, America was the
world's 9-1-1 number. We poured money into providing the world's military defense, while our
allies put money into paid health care, free college tuition, and excellent child care for their
citizens. They could afford these programs because we denied them to ourselves in order to
provide the world's defense."
When August arrived, Pat ranked third for the Democratic nomination in a Time
magazine poll. But winning would have taken "a lot more money and time than I had or could
put into it." Reluctantly, she withdrew from the race. Finances triumphed again.
She began to cry while delivering the farewell speech of her campaign -- as she
looked into her parents' eyes, as the audience groaned, as people chanted "Run, Pat, run." She
recounts, "Those seventeen seconds were treated like a total breakdown
I went on with my
speech, but it was my tears that got the headlines, not my words."
The media discussed her tears for weeks. She recalls, "Some writers went so far
as to say that my tears had dampened all hopes for women in Presidential politics for the rest of
this century." The critics who angered her the most were "the ones who said they wouldn't want
the person who had their finger on the nuclear button to be someone who cries
But I
wouldn't want that person to be someone who doesn't cry!"
8
Many were supportive. A constituent wrote to remind her that President Lyndon
Johnson had sobbed through a civil rights ceremony at the White House. She started a "sob
sister" file. It included news items on the public tears of Ronald Reagan, George Bush,
Margaret Thatcher, and Oliver North. She notes, "Now crying is something male politicians
need to do to show they're compassionate
Crying came out of the closet."
Since Pat's pioneering campaign, issues important to American families have
become a priority in politics codified in new laws, including: the Family Leave and Medical
Act; the Children's Health Insurance Program; the Health Care Equity Act, which guarantees
that women's health issues receive adequate funding; the National Breast Cancer Action Plan;
the National Domestic Violence Hotline; and substantial funding increases for everything from
child care to battered women's shelters.
Today, she characterizes her candidacy as a quest to answer the question,
"Is America man enough to back a woman?" The answer, she then found, was "NO!" It is
probably still the answer.
Pat Schroeder not only brought crying out of the closet, she also proved feminine
qualities belong in leadership. She proved feminine policies belong in government. And she
proved that a woman definitely belongs in the House. Hopefully, someday soon, that House will
be White.
9
Seated, Pat sets down her glass of ice water, raises her arm in the air, gives her
characteristic Cheshire cat smile, and says, "I'm passing this torch
Come and get it!"
When she left Congress in 1996 after serving for twenty-four years, Pat taught at
Princeton University's graduate school of government. She was both amazed and dismayed to
learn that most of her students had no intention of ever running for public office.
Pat wants young women to aspire to serve in Congress. "Study after study shows
that women make a real difference when they finally become a critical mass in any institution --
'critical mass' is somewhere between 35 and 40 percent
Congress is a long way from critical
mass -- it's barely 10 percent female."
Pat also encourages young women to become comfortable with the term
"feminist," as it is a term and philosophy designed to help them. Pat says, "I can't tell you how
many girls and young women I have met who insist they are not 'feminists'
I don't know
how they came to associate feminism only with mythical acts like bra-burning. But I always
think, 'Give it a couple years out in the work world, and then we'll talk.' Sure enough, so many
working women came into my Congressional office to complain about the unfairness of lower
pay or favoritism shown to men
And I'd say, 'Welcome to feminism!"
Warm welcomes aside, Pat could use a hand pulling down some of those "No
Girls Allowed" signs
10
III.
Louise Raggio
"You can't go through what I've been through
and not be a feminist"
Hometown: Dallas, Texas; Born: 1919; Personal: Widowed; Children: 3 lawyer
sons (two of whom practice with her); Position: Partner in the law firm Raggio & Raggio;
1995 Recipient of the Margaret Brent Award
Louise Raggio had a plan. Her plan was to marry the lawyer she had fallen in
love with and then to stay home, be a "lawyer's wife," and raise their family. She planned to
spend her spare time volunteering for church and community affairs. With a twinkle in her eye,
she says, "If you want to make God laugh, go ahead and make a lot of plans for yourself."
Louise did do some of what she planned. She married the lawyer. She raised
three sons. She was involved in her church and her community. But she never got to stay home
and be a "lawyer's wife." World War II intervened and changed the course of her life. Louise
never told close friends and relatives the full story. They just saw Louise grow into a feminist
lawyer who transformed the face of law for women in Texas. She kept silent in order to protect
her husband. She is willing to tell the whole story now only because he has passed away. The
story involves a slice of World War II history. And, as one of the possible answers to the
question "What makes a feminist?"-- as well as for its lessons in loyalty and strong character -- it
is a story worth knowing.
1
She met her husband, Grier, when they were both working for government
agencies in Dallas. On their very first date, he told her they would marry. She recalls, "I just
thought he was being a smoothie -- he was tall, handsome, personable." But Louise found
herself falling for the smoothie lawyer. And Grier's assessment of their compatability was
correct. In April 1941, after knowing each other just three months, they married.
In December, the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, and the United States
entered World War II against Japan and Germany. Louise had found out she was pregnant just
days before. Grier obtained permission to delay going overseas until their baby was born.
When Louise gave birth to Grier Jr., Grier left for the South Pacific. But the man who left
Louise to go to war was not the same man who came back.
Grier was sent to "island hop" in the South Pacific. "Island hopping" was a
military strategy to first invade and liberate the surrounding Japanese-held islands before
invading mainland Japan. The gruesome pace can be imagined by considering a version of the
storming of the beach at Normandy on D-Day happening every couple of weeks. Under a hail of
bullets and grenades, American soldiers and sailors stormed successive beachheads, where the
sands turned red from the blood of dead and mutilated comrades.
The last major battle of World War II was fought on one of these South Pacific
islands: Okinawa. It is generally acknowledged to have been the bloodiest battle of the war.
The second to last battle of WWII was on the island of Iwo Jima. It is generally acknowledged
2
to have been the second bloodiest battle. Over the course of weeks and months, American
soldiers fought to occupy these islands -- climbing over bodies of dead soldiers, dodging enemy
flame throwers, mortars and bullets.
Grier lived in a cave on Iwo Jima for five months, as the battle for Iwo Jima
raged and ebbed, raged and ebbed. He buried the bodies of friends he had fought alongside,
handling their severed arms, legs, and heads. When the battles of Iwo Jima and Okinawa were
over, President Truman ended World War II by dropping two atomic bombs on Japan.
After three long years of separation, Grier returned to Louise. Louise remembers,
"Grier was a changed man. He had weighed two hundred pounds when he left home, and he
weighed one hundred and twenty-nine when he returned. Today we would say he suffered from
post-traumatic stress disorder, although nobody called it that back then
He was still a loving
person, but he seemed sad a lot of the time. And for the rest of his life, he had flashbacks
he
would awake in the middle of the night, screaming and crying with nightmares. Of course, I was
grateful my husband came home alive, when so many men had died in the war."
Grier tried to resume a normal life in Dallas by starting a job with the Veterans'
Administration. Then, as Louise tells it, "After serving his country selflessly, his country kicked
him in the teeth." Grier was fired because he was labeled a Communist and "blacklisted." At
the time, Senator Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin capitalized on America's post-war fear of
communism by opening the "House UnAmerican Activities Committee" in the U.S. House of
3
Representatives. He recklessly investigated alleged communists and pilloried them in the media
and in Senate hearings, so the public could carry out the intention of McCarthy's blacklist by
shunning and censuring these people.
A person who was blacklisted was unemployable. In fact, an employer willing to
employ a blacklisted person could suffer in the business community. Senator McCarthy's
methods were ruthless and vicious. He destroyed peoples' lives and livelihoods on the flimsiest
of evidence or none. With horror, Louise followed news stories of blacklisted people
committing suicide because their lives were ruined. "When you saw the way McCarthy tapped
into peoples' fears and how people reacted to him and joined the frenzy, you could better
understand how someone like a Hitler could ever have come to power. In Dallas, a rabbi and a
Unitarian minister spoke out publicly to say what McCarthy was doing was wrong. They were
the only ones. I was so grateful to them -- and so impressed by them -- that I converted from
Catholicism to the Unitarian church."
Grier was not a Communist. Louise believes he was targeted because of some
work he was doing with the United Nations -- "many people in Dallas in the 1950's considered
the U.N. to be a subversive organization." As with most people who were blacklisted, she does
1
Some thought the UN was a tool of Communist agents; and some, as now, thought
the UN was on a mission to create one world government and destroy individual national
sovereignty.
4
not know the actual reason. She says part of her wants to see the FBI files on herself and her
husband, but she dreads the re-opening of the old wounds.
Louise and Grier challenged Grier's firing, and he was reinstated. Louise's
dream of being a lawyer's wife and staying home to raise their sons and being taken care of had
been derailed for a few years, but it was now shattered for good. Grier had a heart-to-heart talk
with her in which he confessed that he felt too frail to be relied upon to support their family. He
revealed to her that he felt so ravaged -- physically, mentally and emotionally -- from the war
and the blacklisting, that he did not know if he would just "snap" and become completely unable
to work.
Grier asked Louise to go to law school so they could open a law practice together.
He believed he could work for a living if he could work alongside her in their own business,
instead of working for strangers. Also, in case he became unable to work -- as he feared he
might -- she would have a marketable trade she could use to raise their three boys alone.
Louise did not want to go to law school. She did not want to be a lawyer. But, as
women have done through the centuries in so many different contexts, she did what she had to
do to ensure the survival of her family. Louise muses, "My husband was a fine person, and if it
weren't for World War II, who knows what he could have done."
5
She attended Southern Methodist University Law School at night so her husband
could be home with the children after work, because they could not afford a babysitter. ("We
were dirt poor," she recalls. "We didn't have a phone, a refrigerator, or a dishwasher.") She did
homework during the day, during lulls from watching the boys and doing housework. "I was
the only woman in my class
They didn't want me there
Ironically, students told me all
the time that I was taking the place of a man who could use a law degree to support his family.
But that's why I was there! I was so worried about Grier, and I needed to find a way to support
my family."
Louise obtained her law degree five years later in 1952. Her degree read
"Mrs. Grier Raggio." There were only a handful of women lawyers in Dallas, and law firms
stated openly they would not hire women attorneys. Louise's career got a boost, and then started
on an upswing that still has not stopped, when she met and befriended U.S. District Judge Sarah
T. Hughes (who, years later, swore in Lyndon Johnson as President aboard Air Force One after
John F. Kennedy was assassinated). Sarah mentored Louise and emboldened her.
Judge Hughes said she wanted to see a woman in the all-male District Attorney's
Office, and she wanted it to be Louise. With Sarah's support and assistance, Louise became the
first female Assistant District Attorney in Dallas. Louise recalls, "Sarah called up the District
Attorney for Dallas, Henry Wade, and said she was going to keep calling him until he appointed
a female to be a prosecutor in his office. He later said he knew you might as well do what Sarah
asked you the first time she asked, because she always got her way."
6
Louise and Judge Hughes began holding monthly meetings for all the women
lawyers in Dallas. The meetings were held in a small room at one table. They encouraged
young women lawyers to become active in the community, city politics, and bar association
activities. "If any one of us heard about an opportunity, we called all the others. If one of us
had a problem, we called all the others." She smiles, "Back then it was survival -- now it's
called mentoring."
The two of them undertook many progressive projects and had many fun
adventures, one of which Louise refers to as "Our campaign of terror on Republic Bank."
"Sarah called me up and said buy some stock in Republic Bank. I said, 'Yes Ma'am, I'll do it --
now why am I doing it?' Apparently, Republic's president had said there would be no women
vice presidents as long as he was there. So we were going to go to the shareholders' meeting
and protest
I bought the stock, and two weeks later, I dressed up, and we went to the meeting
Sarah now owned fifteen shares of Republic stock, and I had twenty-five
We found out
they had learned of our plan and appointed two women vice presidents before the meeting
So we had to change the plan a bit -- I stood up and thanked the bank's officers for appointing
the female vice presidents. Then Sarah stood and said she was furious at them for not having
women on their Board of Directors! Very soon after that, Republic and every other bank in the
city had a woman on its Board."
Shortly after Louise had entered the D.A.'s Office, Grier opened a law firm.
Louise planned to join him as soon as she gained some experience with family law cases and
7
established some connections that would bring clients to their firm. When she joined Raggio &
Raggio, they tried to set up a satisfying professional experience that would serve clients but
would keep their children as the top priority.
For instance, in order to make sure they spent time with their sons everyday, they
tried to get to the office about 7 a.m. and leave for home by 5:30 p.m. Sometimes they brought
home files to work on after the boys went to bed. Louise still participated in her sons' activities
at school and took her turn serving lunches in the school cafeteria with the other mothers. On
weekends, she cooked roasts and meatloaves and froze them, so there would always be a
home-cooked meal at night. Certainly, having her own business gave Louise the flexibility to
balance the competing needs of being a competent professional and a good parent.
It was a hard pace, and Louise was making up the rules as she went along. "I was
probably one of the first women lawyers to put it together and have a family and a career
Growing up, I could only conceive of three careers for a woman -- teacher, nurse, and secretary.
I would have loved to have been a journalist, for instance -- I took courses and wrote for the
high school and college papers -- but a woman couldn't get a job in journalism."
She felt great anxiety as a result of her nonconformance with the societal
expectations of women at the time. "In the 50's people said, 'If you're not with your children all
day, they'll end up in the detention center.' And I was scared of that. I used to shudder to think
8
what the local headlines would say if my kids ever got into trouble My own mother used to
tell me I was ruining my children by going out to work in an office."
"The only reason I did it is because I had to. I had to have Grier in an office with
me. I felt if I didn't do this to protect him and nurture him, he was going to die. We used to tell
people that Grier had just been unhappy with government service and that we wanted to work
together. That's even the story we told relatives."
Although she was licensed to practice law and was a partner in her own law firm,
Louise was not allowed to sign a bail bond for a client. Grier would have to sign it for her. This
was because under Texas law, a married woman could not sign a contract on her own, even in
the context of professionally representing a client. Additionally, a married woman could not run
a business without her husband's consent or control the property she owned before she was
married. Louise recalls, "We used to say if you're a minor, a mentally incompetent person, a
felon, or a married woman, you have no rights in Texas."
Louise vowed to use this frustration as an impetus to change the law for herself
and for the women of Texas. "You can't go through what I've been through and not be a
feminist," she reasons. She persuaded the president of the state bar association to let her put
together a committee to rewrite the law. She organized a task force of domestic relations experts
who drafted legislation and then worked for its passage in the Texas Legislature. The new law
allowed a wife to run a business and to control her separate property.
9
Next, Louise spearheaded an effort to write a Texas Family Code that pulled
together state statutes on marriage, custody, family, adoption and divorce scattered throughout
many different volumes into one cross-referenced source. Contradictory or antiquated statutes
were eliminated. It was the first unified domestic relations law code in the world and served as a
model for many other jurisdictions that took on the task of writing a unified code. She was the
code's principal author and participated in seminars all over the state to educate lawyers about it.
Thinking back, Louise observes, "Being a woman was an advantage when I
started practicing law, because everybody underestimated me. But, I was a child of my time. I
grew up accepting that girls were not as valuable as boys. I used to 'sweet-talk' to get my way
instead of being direct or having a confrontation. I wouldn't do that today though. Girls don't
have to do that today."
There is a speech Louise gives when she is invited to speak at schools, which she
calls the "I was a Nerd" speech. She explains that as a child, "I was heavy and tacky [only wore
hand-me-downs] and poor and had uneducated immigrant parents and lived on a dirt farm in the
country." She tells students "the only way for me to go was UP!" Then she explains that the
only way for her to move up was to get good grades in school. She tells students that doing well
in school is the key to having options in your career path. And she stresses, "Don't concentrate
on what you don't have. Concentrate on your assets, on your strengths, instead of your
disabilities."
10
Louise believes young women should avoid the kind of piecemeal schooling she
received because of her circumstances. She advises female students to focus on their education
first, before they consider taking on the roles of wife and mother, saying, "Women didn't use to
accomplish much out in the world when they got married and then had a child every two years."
She warns young women, "Never think you have it made. That's what the
suffragettes thought after they won the right to vote in 1920, and we've had plenty of new battles
for equality since that one." Louise speaks from experience. She was friends with suffragettes
Jane McCallum and Minnie Fisher Cunningham, who led Texas's campaign for passage of the
19th Amendment. She met them when she did some volunteer work at the Austin League of
Women Voters after college. "I could listen to their stories all day long
I often thought of
Jane and Minnie for inspiration during my dark days
They went through a lot
They were
harassed and insulted for something which seems common sense. Who could doubt today that
women have the right to vote?"
She concludes, "I had some horrible obstacles to overcome, but they made me the
person I am today
As women get more support in their families and communities, get more
education and make more money, things are only getting better for us."
11
IV.
Jamie Gorelick
"Government service lets people
show their stuff"
Hometown: Washington, D.C.; Born: 1950; Personal: Married (and two children);
Position: Vice Chair of Fannie Mae; 1997 Recipient of the Margaret Brent Award
At Jamie Gorelick's swearing in as Deputy U.S. Attorney General in 1994 by Supreme
Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Attorney General Janet Reno asked, "Who would have
thought when we graduated law school that a deputy attorney general would be sworn in who is
a woman, to serve under an attorney general who is a woman, and sworn in by a Supreme Court
Justice who is a woman?" Indeed, the appointment of these three women by President Clinton
to such high-powered posts furthered his goal of changing the composition of government to
better reflect the composition of American society.¹
The Deputy Attorney General is second-ranking only to the Attorney General, who leads
the Department of Justice. The U.S. Department of Justice (often referred to as "DOJ")
represents the United States in legal matters generally, focusing on law enforcement and crime
reduction. With Jamie as Attorney General Reno's deputy, for the first time in our country's
218-year history, women held the two most powerful law enforcement positions and were
running "the largest law firm in the world," as the DOJ is called.
I
Attorney General Reno and Justice Ginsburg will be discussed in chapters - and ,
respectively.
1
The wall outside Jamie's office at the Justice Department was lined with photographs of
her male predecessors. Five former Deputy Attorney Generals became Attorney General, two
served as Secretary of State, two were appointed to the Supreme Court. These photographs
served as constant reminders that Jamie was a trailblazer in a new era for women. They were
constant reminders that the upper echelons of power are filled with men who may or may not be
receptive to women entering their realm.
The Deputy Attorney General is the day-to-day manager of operations at the Justice
Department, which employs nearly 100,000 people. He or she supervises investigation and
litigation in the areas of civil rights, antitrust, tax, immigration, environmental and criminal law.
The Deputy Attorney General also coordinates DOJ relations with Congress, the President, the
judiciary, and federal agencies.
When Jamie was briefed on her new duties, she learned the Attorney General was facing
a problem inherent in many bureaucracies: she was often presented with issues that were not
defined enough, requiring precious time to be spent asking questions and analyzing facts before
a decision could be made. "I called the person who had the job before me, and he said she
[Reno] wants a job done that can't be done. So my first goal became to serve up issues to the
A.G. in a crisp and clean way for final decisions. I wanted to enable the A.G. to do her job of
making decisions and representing the DOJ to the public."
2
Attorney General Reno saw virtually immediate changes under Jamie's management:
"She swept in here one day, dressed to the nines, took command, ordered people around like she
was a general, but did it in such a gracious way, and I kind of sat there and looked and they told
me that was a Jamie Gorelick."
Jamie decreased the number of people reporting directly to the Attorney General and had
them report to her instead, giving the A.G. more time for policymaking and public duties. She
increased the frequency of meetings between the Department's top officials to make the DOJ
more responsive to inquiries. She identified issues festering unresolved, met with the pertinent
people, assessed the ramifications of various courses of action, and forwarded her
recommendations to the A.G. for resolution. A systemic review of Congressional testimony by
DOJ officials was undertaken, to ensure follow-up promised during testimony was being
provided.
Her knack for streamlining to the heart of issues is memorialized in a gift from one of her
former law partners. He gave her a gavel inscribed "Because I said so," which rests on a base
inscribed "Jamie's Law." Jamie used this gavel to run meetings, rapping the table to bring order
to arguments and to cut through emotional exchanges to the bottom line. She elaborates, "I'll
say what we need, and I'll give deadlines. People need to know what you want and when you
want it."
3
Jamie believes the secret to her effective management style is her organizational skills.
"I have a whole system of lists detailing what needs to be done at home and at the office -- and I
always have back-up plans." She grins and chuckles, "That's what happens when you put a
working mom in charge! So many working women I know are great organizers
When the
tasks on a list have been accomplished, I toss the list away
I don't hang onto information I
don't need to propel me forward -- it is just gone from my brain."
Jamie faced a mind-boggling array of issues on any given day. "We used to say to each
other, 'If you don't like an issue put before you, wait fifteen minutes
somebody will give
you a new one.' For example, Jamie supervised the first DOJ gathering of intelligence on how
to secure our nation's computer infrastructure against "cyber-terrorists." Terrorist on-line
attacks in cyberspace could paralyze ground and air transportation, telephone systems, gas and
oil pipelines, medical records, banking, financial markets, and police and government
operations. Jamie warns, "There has to be a structure in place to protect us against a cyberspace
Pearl Harbor attack."
She also worked extensively on old-fashioned crime prevention. "I love cops," she says,
in her straightforward manner. "This may sound corny, but it is so patriotic that these people are
everyday willing to die for their country. To me, cops are the very models of public service.
My parents were immigrants, and they were extremely patriotic and hardworking, so I'm very
comfortable with those values
Cops I've talked with, cops on the street, the most
experienced, say to me they know criminal sanctions are not enough to prevent crime. Cops
4
need to know the kids, and the kids need to know the cops. Communities have to offer
alternatives to hanging out on street corners and getting in trouble. It doesn't take much
imagination to picture a community or a public housing project with a Girls and Boys Club and
one without, and the one with it will have less crime because the kids have someplace to go after
school. I grew up that way. In my community, there was plenty for us to do
Communities
have to be places where we can make friends, make a difference, and make a home."
Jamie flourished at the DOJ and talks about her tenure there with unbridled enthusiasm.
"Government, unlike the private sector, doesn't have the ability to waste resources. We're lean
and mean. A talented woman will have her talents used to the fullest -- and with less prejudice
about her functioning properly in any particular role. Government service lets people show their
stuff!"
She recommends the zig-zag career path she has taken, moving back and forth between
government service and the private sector. "Career paths don't have to go in straight lines.
Getting involved outside your organization makes you more valuable to your organization. If
the organization you're working for can't accommodate your involvement in outside endeavors,
find another place to work." This is part of the reason she never pursued a high-paying job in
one of New York City's corporate law firms: "I feared I would have been buried and
pigeon-holed." Also, she knew she wanted to have a family, and she did not like the
work-intensive lifestyle offered by those firms.
5
The course of Jamie's career path started at a small white collar defense firm in
Washington, D.C. When President Carter started the Department of Energy, she served there
with Colin Powell. Then she returned to the private practice of law. During the Clinton
administration, she served as General Counsel of the Department of Defense, supervising over
six thousand lawyers. After only one year, President Clinton tapped her for service in the Justice
Department. She recently left DOJ to become the Vice Chair of Fannie Mae, the company that
is this country's largest source of home mortgages.
Jamie's transforming work at the DOJ, her focus and her efficiency received such rave
bipartisan acclaim when she departed that it is likely she will be nominated as Attorney General
at some point. What is not so sure is which political party will nominate her. With fans on both
sides of the aisle, President Clinton and General Colin Powell among them, it is conceivable she
could be selected by either a Democratic or a Republican President.
She advises students mapping out careers, "Make sure you will be challenged everyday,
and avoid the easy tracks
Make sure you're learning all the time. You don't want to be just
treading water
And find your own pace -- don't be driven by what those around you are
doing
Be open and ready for opportunities that arise
You can't fully plan the most
interesting careers."
6
"I've developed a certain lack of awe through the years, and it's been helpful. I am never
daunted when people say things can't be done. I recommend a lack of awe
it gets the job
done."
"There are still not enough women in senior positions to give young women enough
different kinds of female role models I take seriously my own role as a mentor -- not so
much my giving of advice, but just my being there and setting an example."
The primary example in Jamie's life has been her parents. "My brother and I grew up
feeling our parents would do anything for us. My parents had grown up poor, so they wanted to
give us every possible opportunity. I had so many lessons -- every lesson under the sun -- piano,
guitar, clarinet, glockenspiel², tap dancing, jazz, modern dance, French
"
"My mother gave me her empathy and caring for people and her commitment to
community and friendship. On any given weekend, one day I could be in a parade with my
Brownies troop and another day I could attend a civil rights march
My father gave me an
enormous curiosity about the world. And, virtually every woman of achievement I know has a
father who believes girls can do anything they want to do."
²A percussion instrument with tuned metal bars in a frame, played with hammers.
7
As much as she learned from her parents, Jamie is also open to learning from her kids.
She and her husband have two young children, a boy and a girl. They started a family when
Jamie was in her late 30's, after her career was blooming.
"It's great to be at home and have your kids just treat you like a mom." Jamie
remembers the bombing of the federal courthouse in Oklahoma City happened when she first
started at DOJ. One night, her son, who was busily running around the house pretending to be a
Power Ranger, picked up the phone. He then stuck his head in the doorway of the kitchen and
said, "Mommy, THOR is on the phone!!" Her son had been talking to the Secretary of Defense,
Les Aspin, who has a deep, resonant voice and called to update Jamie on the bombing
investigation, but also called at a convenient moment to play-act as the leader of the Power
Rangers with little Daniel.
"I have expanded my own hobbies, gardening and tennis, in order to hang out more with
my kids so I've learned a lot about their hobbies - Star Wars, dinosaurs, and building with
Lego."
"I like reading to my kids
Childrens' books have so many nuggets of truth in them. I
like The Little Prince by Antoine de Saint Exupery, for instance. It says that which you give the
community builds your community."
8
"I've caught myself quoting storybooks at big meetings. One night we had a senior staff
meeting at the DOJ, and one of the assistant attorney generals said something like, 'Oh, we can't
get the terrorism bill passed, and the immigration bill is hung up, and the nominations are such a
problem,' and the first thing that came out of my mouth in response was 'Stop it! You sound just
like Eeyore!'
Eeyore is the pessimistic donkey from the Winnie the Pooh stories
so then
we started teasing him that he needed more Pooh and Piglet in his life."
She observes that societal expectations of mothers have reversed. Working mothers used
to have to explain away the stigma of working outside the home. Now it is assumed women will
work outside the home while raising a family, and they often have to justify to others the choice
to stay home to raise children full-time. Yet one thing that has remained unchanged is mothers
with careers have a difficult balancing act to perform in fulfilling professional and personal
responsibilities. Also, a supportive spouse can make the often precarious balance easier to
maintain.
Jamie gives her husband a lot of credit for her ability to have a successful career while
raising a family: "He's more than a supportive husband
I have a partner. My husband is my
best friend. He says I have only two states of being -- bored or overworked."
"I'm always thinking about how to create a balance in my life. I try to be home in the
evenings. I can work on a computer at home after the kids go to bed if I need to
My view is
9
that I'm not so indispensable from day to day, and usually another couple of hours of work at the
office every night does not make a difference And, I try to not work on the weekends
I
try not to be away from home more than one night a week."
"The balance I have come to in my life might be one other women would not enjoy, but
there are so many different balances that can work. Everyone has to make their own decisions
about how to best balance priorities. It is an individual choice
that's what our womens'
movement has been all about -- choice."
10
V.
Maureen Kempston Darkes
"You'll never break through the glass ceiling until
you crash down some glass walls"
Hometown: Oshawa, Ontario, Canada; Born: 1948; Personal: Married;
Position: President of General Motors Canada; 1998 Recipient of the Margaret Brent Award
Maureen Kempston Darkes is a leader in the male-dominated automobile industry.
"Women buy 50 percent of cars and influence 80 percent of car-buying decisions," she
comments. "So why can't a woman run an auto company?" she asks. This begs the question,
"How would it be different if she did?"
In 1994, Maureen became the first female President of General Motors Canada, making
her one of Canada's most important business leaders and the highest-ranking woman executive
in the history of General Motors (the largest company in the world).
"My father died when he was fairly young -- I was 12 -- and my mother went back to
working outside the home
she got a job as a bank secretary to support us. So an early lesson
was that one needed to prepare for this life because we don't know what it will hold. My mother
was independent, and she raised me to be independent. She valued education, and she raised me
to value education. Thanks to her, I became a lawyer, and my two brothers are now a doctor and
a dentist."
1
Maureen joined the legal staff of General Motors in 1975 after graduating from
University of Toronto Law School and a brief stint at a law firm. Being a lawyer was not her
first choice of profession. "I had first gone to university to get a doctorate in history, teach and
do research at the university level. But as I went on, I thought I might like to try something
more non-traditional for a woman at the time, something where I could achieve greater results.
I became interested in Law, and what I found very quickly is I enjoyed the intellectual content of
it and I saw it very much as being an aid to people. I saw lawyers making things happen,
creating things of real value. Lawyers are perhaps the most creative group in society -- we tend
to focus only on the image problem brought about by personal injury lawsuits, but most of the
profession is engaged in creating worthwhile projects and opportunities for people."
It is interesting to note that Maureen pursued a legal career as a result of looking for
something more "non-traditional" in a career, because "non-traditional" is the very first adjective
to come to mind when looking for a word to describe her. She practices "management by
walking," which means she strolls frequently through corporate headquarters, talking with
employees and getting tasks accomplished as she goes. Her "office" has no walls or doors or
leather couches; it is an open workspace with a desk, found at the end of a row of similar
cubicles inhabited by fellow employees. She uses a nearby glass-enclosed conference room for
private meetings and phone calls.
2
"I like informality and flexibility
they are critically important qualities in business
today Sitting out in the open, I know what's going on here -- people stop by to chat with me
all the time."
Maureen lists some of the same goals one would expect to hear from any person in
charge of Canada's most profitable company, with $33 Canadian billion ($22 American billion)
in annual revenues: "Customer enthusiasm and loyalty, product quality and value." Then she
names a more "non-traditional" goal -- "diversity in the workplace," she says.
"Some people think I spend too much time talking about workplace diversity. I don't
think I spend enough. The inherent importance of diversity has got to be recognized. We need a
work culture where everyone makes a contribution
I want employees to come to work at
General Motors every day and say, 'I can make a difference. I contribute to this business."
"We should mirror the global mosaic within our own organizations. To do this will give
us an enormous competitive advantage -- globally. Look at the marketplace we serve
it's
very diverse
men, women, different cultures, different ethnic backgrounds. Why wouldn't
you want the inside of your company to mirror your consumer marketplace? Because if it does,
you probably understand your consumers better and will be more successful
This is a
business issue, and I think as more and more business leaders come to realize the absolute
importance of diversity, we will see a major cultural change. If I can further that cause, I want
to do that."
3
Maureen explains that GM includes the goal of workplace diversity in developing
business strategies in marketing, community affairs, human resources, and with its suppliers.
For instance, GM's television and print media targets women consumers and depicts women of a
variety of ages, lifestyles, professional and ethnic backgrounds.
She continues, "Successful corporations need to attract the best talent and then nurture
and develop that talent. Equality and diversity are management challenges." To this end, in the
early 1980's, she spearheaded the creation of a very non-traditional sort of entity: the General
Motors' Women's Advisory Council. Maureen's devoted work on the Council brought tangible
changes to the corporate culture.
The Council is comprised of about twenty employees from all areas of the company,
including senior management. Maureen remembers, "Senior management recognized women
were facing considerable difficulties in their efforts to become part of the GM of Canada
mainstream. So the Council was formed to integrate women, by identifying issues and by
responding to the needs of women in the workplace."
The Council sponsors networking events for female employees on career planning,
family law issues, how to travel alone, stress management and financial planning; it publishes a
newsletter for all employees. The Council identified barriers to women reaching their full
potential, including prejudice, poor career path planning, exclusion from networks, and the
difficulties associated with career/family balancing. To assist women in overcoming these
4
barriers, the Council developed progressive policies for General Motors to adopt, such as a
mentoring program, job sharing, and telecommuting. "What you find," Maureen points out,
"is those policies are then utilized by and appreciated by employees of both sexes."
The mentoring program assigns, upon request, a more senior person with whom an
employee can meet regularly to ask questions and to discuss setting and reaching professional
goals. "Employees appreciate the support and coaching. It's terrific for employee morale
And when employees are content with their career progress, they are more likely to remain with
the company So the mentoring program has had two positive end results -- employee
development and employee retention."
Maureen believes, "Those women in an organization who have met with some success
have an obligation to assist other women coming along
They do this directly, by providing
mentoring. They are also doing this more generally by helping to lead changes in our corporate
culture and practices -- to facilitate the fuller participation of women and minorities. Changing
the culture of an organization is a long-term activity, but it is happening at GM."
The Council also assisted with implementing alternative work schedules. In addition to
part-time schedules, GM offers "flex-time," which allows employees to choose the start and
finish times of their workday within certain ranges of time. This better enables employees to
meet personal obligations such as sending children off to school each morning.
5
GM allows "job sharing," which means that two employees literally pair up to "share"
one full-time job. For instance, one possible scenario for job sharing is the first employee works
Monday, Tuesday, and then Wednesday just until lunchtime; after lunch on Wednesday, the
second employee arrives and works Wednesday afternoon, Thursday, and Friday. The second
person works at the same desk, computer, and phone extension and is responsible for continuing
on the same projects and completing the same tasks as the first person. The two employees
essentially function as one. Job sharing provides workplace continuity because an office
"position" is covered each workday by one of the two employees assigned to it, whereas if a
part-time employee is out of the office, a task or request may have to wait until they return.
Telecommuting enables employees to perform work assignments at a location other than
their traditional work site, perhaps assisted by a lap-top computer, fax machine, cellular phone,
or beeper. The amount of telecommuting an employee can do varies with the amount of
responsibilities they have which are transportable. For example, some tasks cannot be
performed away from the traditional work site -- such as work on a production assembly line.
Of these alternative work arrangements, Maureen observes, "Experience has shown that
when people are given flexibility, they are generally grateful for it, don't exploit it, and do a
better job because they are better able to manage the competing interests in their lives
They're happier Productivity and accountability do not suffer. Jobs can get done without
giving me ten hours a day of 'face time' at the office. Clients and customers are still satisfied
and properly served."
6
The Council has also developed outreach programs to the community. For example,
after noting that a disproportionate number of young females drop math, science and technology
courses -- thus narrowing their future career opportunities -- the Council paired up with
educators to prepare a video-based career counseling program for high schools, which
encourages students to continue developing knowledge in those disciplines.
Maureen is especially proud of the Council's Targeting Improved Participation
Strategy ("TIPS"). TIPS allows an employee to try a new position at GM for a six-month period
while maintaining the option of returning to their previous position. She explains, "For instance,
a woman might want to try a short-term manufacturing assignment to ascertain her aptitude for
the work and to measure her desire to move into the manufacturing area. But if it weren't for
this program, she would not otherwise be pursuing her interest."
Maureen anticipates positive long-term effects from assisting young women to pursue
other interests in the company: "Certainly women are breaking through the glass ceiling in
larger numbers, and it needs to happen more, but how do you really plan to do that successfully?
One thing I've noticed is glass ceilings are often supported by glass walls that are just as
detrimental to women's careers. You'll never break through the glass ceiling until you crash
down some glass walls. When I say 'glass walls,' I mean that for young women to progress in
an organization, they have to develop a broad base of experience from a variety of experiences
within the organization. That is how you groom yourself for top positions."
7
"For instance, a woman who works first in a company's financial offices ultimately
needs experience in marketing. And if it's a manufacturing business, she also needs to learn
how the plant operates. If the company has offices overseas, she'll need international experience
on her way up. You need the widest exposure possible to all of the key elements of an
organization to become a leader in that organization."
"As a case in point, in my own career, I went to New York City in 1985 for two years to
work on GM's divesture of its South African operations. General Motors had agreed to divest
its operations in South Africa in response to anti-apartheid pressure. My job was to find the
most expeditious, least costly approach to do that. It was a huge and very complicated endeavor.
And that's when I stopped being perceived in the company as just a lawyer and was seen as
someone who could move to higher corporate levels and take on much more."
"Also, I can't stress enough to young women that they must learn the way decisions are
made within their organization. When you understand the decision-making process in your
organization, you can then influence the process and the decisions."
"There were not very many women in management when I first came to GM. But I think
over time people came to respect the fact that I worked hard, I was very serious about my work,
and I intended to make a significant contribution to the business." She laughs, "People tell me I
8
must have gasoline in my blood!
Also, I was fortunate to be noticed by two very
progressive-minded senior executives who took a liking to me and helped me -- Jack Smith (now
Chairman of the Board in Detroit) and George Peapples (now Vice President of Corporate
Affairs in Washington, D.C.)."
If it is true that "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery," then proof that Maureen is
effecting a great deal of positive change at GM and in the business community may be seen in
that competitor Ford Motor Company of Canada recently appointed its first female President,
Bobbie Gaunt, in 1997 (three years after Maureen first took the helm at GM). Thus the "Big
Two" North American car companies, GM and Ford, now both have female Presidents of
Canadian operations. If Maureen Kempston Darkes has anything to do with it, this is just the
beginning of a changing mosaic, inlaid with a lot of shattered glass.
9
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
July 17, 1998
Alexei Vranich
Department of Anthropology
University of Pennsylvania
325 University Museum
33rd and Spruce Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6398
Dear Mr. Vranich:
Thank you for your letter and invitation to the First
Lady to attend the ceremony for the return of the recovered
artwork, with the Peruvian ambassador, on July 15.
Regrettably, because of schedule conflicts, Mrs. Clinton
K
was not able to accept your invitation. I know Mrs. Clinton
would want me to convey her appreciation for your
thoughtfulness, along with her best wishes for a successful
exhibit.
I have asked my staff to determine if we have the
pm mentioned
pictures of the guards which you mentioned. Should the photos
e coile
exist, we will send you copies.
Best wishes.
Sincerely,
Nee Melanne Verveer
Chief of Staff to
the First Lady
@
UNIVERSITY of PENNSYLVANIA
requel
event
School of Arts and Sciences
Department of Anthropology
325 University Museum
33rd and Spruce Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6398
Kaly to Nicole Alexei Vranich
Tel: 215-898-7461
croy
University of Pennsylvania
Fax: 215-898-7462
July 6, 1998
Melanne Verveer
lat's 8
Office of the First Lady
Old Executive Office Building
Room 100, Washington, DC 20500
Melanne Verveer:
Thank you very much for the pictures of my families visit with Mrs. Clinton. The picture graces both
offices of my parents at the University. Rarely a day goes by without a some comment or another from a
student or member of faculty.
11
When I went to Bolivia in November, several of the ruin guards asked me if I could get a copy of picture
that they had with Mrs. Clinton. The picture was taken in front of the museum with the ruin guards
standing behind Mrs. Clinton. I would greatly appreciate if I could get a copy of this picture. I fear that I
will not hear the end of it if I arrive at Tiwanaku without this picture.
My research is going very well. The dissertation is nearly complete and I was able to reach my fundraising
goals for the following stage of research. I will be leaving for another season of excavation in September.
At the present, we are working on a very interesting and important exhibit at the Museum for which I
would like to extend an invitation. Recently, the FBI caught two smugglers in Philadelphia attempting to
sell the largest piece of gold artwork looted from a royal tomb in Peru. On a nationally and internationally
covered ceremony on the 15th of July, the Peruvian ambassador will receive this piece of artwork. The
object will remain on display for a few more weeks before returning to Peru. The event will highlight the
cooperation between governments in the effort to stop the illegal art market and the destruction of our
cultural heritage, and the importance of archaeology for the identity of the indigenous peoples of the
Americas. Mrs. Clinton mentioned this final point as being something she considered to be particularly
important. Mindful of the time constraints of the First Lady, I would like to extend and invitation to Mrs.
Clinton for this event. We expect over one hundred people including other archeologists, local politicians,
prominent Philadelphians, and representatives from the FBI and law enforcement. A significant group will
be arriving from Washington including nearly the entire Peruvian embassy and the members of a
Presidential commission recently revitalized by Mr. Clinton. Please contact me if there is any interest in
the event. I would immediately send more information.
Again, thank you for the photographs. It was a wonderful and memorable visit.
Sincerely,
Alexei Vranich
tel. (215)898-7561
(215) 222-6716
email: [email protected]
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 14, 1999
His Excellency Joris Vos
Ambassador of the Netherlands
4200 Linnean Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20008
Dear Ambassador Vos:
Thank you for the diary. I appreciate your
thoughtful gift very much and will enjoy reading all about
Dutch architecture!
You may have heard that the First Lady will be
traveling to the Hague in February for the Family Planning
Conference. If you would like any details, please let us
know.
As the bearer of a Dutch last name, through
marriage, I have a special regard for the Dutch! I also want
to extend very belated congratulations on your wise and
witty remarks several months ago at the National Gallery
dinner in honor of the Van Gogh exhibit. Your remarks
were very impressive.
Best wishes for a happy new year.
Sincerely,
Melanne Verveer
Chief of Staff to
the First Lady
R
Ambassade van het
E MAINTIENDRAL
Koninkrijk der Nederlanden
Washington DC, December 22, 1998
Dear M, vauca,
Dutch painting, Dutch music, Dutch dance and Dutch
courage are well known in the United States, because our
Rembrandts and Mondrians, our orchestras, dance
companies and our gin can, and do, travel.
Dutch architecture cannot travel, but we are equally proud
of it.
Please accept this diary for 1999, devoted to two centuries
of Dutch architecture, with my very best wishes for
Christmas and the New Year.
your sincerely,
for Joris Vos In
Ambassador of the Netherlands
The Honorable
Melanne Verveer
Deputy Chief of Staff to the First Lady
OEOB, room 100
Washington, DC 20500
2.1.15
The Honorable
Melanne Verveer
Deputy Chief of Staff to the First Lady
OEOB, room 100
Washington, DC 20500
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
February 26, 1999
Frances M. Visco
National Breast Cancer Coalition
200 S. Broad Street, 8th Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19102
Dear Fran:
Thank you for your invitation to the Second World
Conference on Breast Cancer Advocacy in Belgium, March
11-14. The conference program looks excellent.
Regrettably, I will not be able to attend as I will be
traveling with the First Lady in Central America at that
time. It is heartening to know that the conference facilitates
cooperation between so many distinguished experts. Best
wishes for a successful and productive meeting.
Thank you for your leadership and all you do.
Sincerely,
Melanne Verveer
Chief of Staff to
the First Lady
2)
NATIONAL BREAST CANCER COALITION
INDCC
Regul
a grassroots advocacy effort
February 10, 1999
Melanne Verveer
Deputy Chief of Staff
Office of the First Lady
Old Executive Office Building, Room 100
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Melanne,
I hope this letter finds you well. I want to let you know about the National Breast
Cancer Coalition Fund's upcoming international conference. NBCCF will host its
Second World Conference on Breast Cancer Advocacy-Influencing Change in Brussels,
Belgium, March 11-14, 1999.
Over the last few years, as NBCC's visibility and reputation have grown, we have
been approached by many individuals and organizations from various countries for help
in achieving success in their countries. In response, NBCCF hosted the First World
Conference On Breast Cancer Advocacy-Influencing Change in March 1997 in Brussels,
Belgium. We brought together more than 250 breast cancer advocates from around the
world to help create or expand networks and collaboration; share information and
experiences; disseminate medical, scientific and educational information from different
countries and cultures and begin to develop an interest among all groups to learn more
about the research process and how to become involved as advocates within that process.
Participants from the First World Conference indicated on the Conference evaluation
forms that they wanted to meet again in two years to continue learning from one another
and to measure progress. We expect more than 300 participants at the Second World
Conference in 1999.
As the attached Conference Program illustrates, the Second World Conference On
Breast Cancer Advocacy-Influencing Change will present information and encourage
discussion on a variety of issues and topics of utmost importance to breast cancer
advocates worldwide. NBCCF recognizes that, like the First World Conference, the
Second World Conference will be attended by women from many different countries,
cultures, economies and political systems. To meet their needs, NBCCF designed
plenary sessions to address overriding issues relevant to all conferees and workshops to
address more specific issues and concerns.
I enclose the final announcement for the Conference. If your schedule permits,
we would be honored to have you attend the Conference.
200 S. Broad Street, 8th Floor, Philadelphia, PA 19102 phone: (215) 731-1170 fax: (215) 731-1174 http://www.natlbcc.org
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Fran Frances M. Visco
President
Second World Conference On Breast Cancer Advocacy-
Influencing Change
MARCH 11-14, 1999
SHERATON BRUSSELS HOTEL & TOWERS
BRUSSELS, BELGIUM
CONFERENCE PROGRAM
Confirmed Speakers as of February 10, 1999
THURSDAY, MARCH 11, 1999
20:00 - 21:30
Welcome Reception
FRIDAY, MARCH 12, 1999-DAY ONE: BREAST CANCER ADVOCACY
7:45 - 8:45
Breakfast
8:45 - 9:15
Welcome, Moment of Silence & Overview of the First World Conference
On Breast Cancer Advocacy-Influencing Change
Christine Brunswick, Vice President, National Breast Cancer Coalition,
United States
9:15 - 9:45
Introduction to the National Breast Cancer Coalition & the Goals of
this Conference
Frances M. Visco, JD, President, National Breast Cancer Coalition, United
States
9:45 - 10:00
Working Together to Eradicate Breast Cancer
Lyn Swinburne, Coordinator, Breast Cancer Network Australia, Australia
10:00 - 10:30
The Role of Physicians in the Breast Cancer Movement
Susan Love, MD, Director, Santa Barbara Breast Cancer Institute &
Co-founder and Board Member, National Breast Cancer Coalition, United
States
10:30 - 10:50
Break
10:50 - 11:00
Introduction to the Case Studies Panel
Pat Barr, President, Breast Cancer Network and Member, NBCCF Peer
Review Committee, United States
11:00 - 12:45
Case Studies: Breast Cancer Advocacy Efforts Around the World
Jenny James, Breast Cancer Network Australia, Australia
Josipa Horvatin, Member, Croatian League Against Cancer-"Brussels
Group," Croatia
Ilana Kadmon, RN, PhD, Coordinator, Israeli Breast Cancer Coalition,
Israel
Chief Fidela Etim Ebuk, Chief Executive and National Coordinator,
Women's Health & Economic Development Association, Nigeria
Rosa Meneses, Founding President, Philippine Breast Cancer Network,
Philippines
Moria Adams, Company Secretary, Scottish Breast Cancer Campaign,
Scotland
Arlyne Draper, President, California Breast Cancer Organizations &
Marion Kavanaugh-Lynch, MD, MPH, Director, Breast Cancer Research
Program, United States
12:45 - 13:00
Question & Answer Session
13:00 - 14:15
Lunch
14:30 - 16:00
Workshop Session I (attend one):
Breast Cancer and the Internet
Case Studies: More Breast Cancer Advocacy Efforts around the
World [New!]
Communication Issues in Raising Awareness of Breast Cancer:
Breaking the Taboo [New!]
Conflicts of Interest Issues for Organizations/ Sorting out Priorities
[New!]
Critical Evaluation of Breast Cancer Information [New!]
Development of Advocacy Skills [New!]
The Effectiveness of Breast Self-Exam and Mammography [New!]
Strategies to Build and Mobilize a Network
Working With the Media to Raise Awareness of Breast Cancer
16:00 - 16:30
Break
16:30 - 18:00
Workshop Session II (attend one):
Breast Cancer and the Internet
Case Studies: More Breast Cancer Advocacy Efforts around the
World [New!]
Communication Issues in Raising Awareness of Breast Cancer:
Breaking the Taboo [New!]
Conflicts of Interest Issues for Organizations/ Sorting out Priorities
[New!]
Critical Evaluation of Breast Cancer Information [New!]
Development of Advocacy Skills [New!]
The Effectiveness of Breast Self-Exam and Mammography [New!]
Strategies to Build and Mobilize a Network
Working With the Media to Raise Awareness of Breast Cancer
SATURDAY, MARCH 13, 1999-
DAY Two: INFLUENCING GOVERNMENT, MEDICINE, SCIENCE AND INDUSTRY
8:00 - 9:00
Breakfast
9:00 - 9:15
Summary of Day One & Moment of Silence
Speaker To Be Determined
9:15 - 10:00
Building A Scientific Base of Knowledge: What Must We Understand As
Activists
Hema Abeygunawardena, Canada
Margaret King, Cancer Concern, United Kingdom
Rosemary Rosso, Greater Baltimore-Washington Advocacy Group, United
States
Sally Crossing, Chair, Breast Cancer Action Group (NSW), Australia
10:00 - 10:10
Question & Answer Session
10:10 - 10:55
Cochrane Collaboration: Working Towards Evidence-Based Medicine
Hilda Bastian, Cochrane Collaboration, Australia
Christine Brunswick, Vice President, National Breast Cancer Coalition,
United States
Kay Dickersin, PhD, Associate Professor, Department of Community
Health, Brown University & Director, Baltimore Cochrane Center, United
States
Alessandro Liberati, MD, Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche "Mario
Negri, Italy
10:55 - 11:05
Question & Answer Session
11:05 - 11:25
Break
11:25 - 12:45
Establishing Standards of Care and Gaining Access to Care
Gordon McVie, MD, FRCP, Director General, Cancer Research
Campaign, United Kingdom
Daniela Minerva, L 'Espresso, Italy
Jan Platner, JD, Director of Health Access and Policy Projects, JRI
Health/Justice Resource Institute, United States
Martin Tattersall, MD, FRCP, FRACP, Professor, Department of Cancer
Medicine, University of Sydney, Australia
Other Speaker(s) To Be Determined
12:45 - 13:00
Question & Answer Session
13:00 - 14:15
Lunch
14:30 - 15:30
What Are Public Health Programs and How Do We Influence Them?
Carolina Hinestrosa, Coordinator, Programa Nueva Vida & Board
Member, National Breast Cancer Coalition, United States
Josef J. Reum, PhD, Assistant Professor Leadership, Schools of Business,
Medicine and Public Health, George Washington University, United
States
Florence Tumasang, MD, Vice President, Cameroon Medical Women's
Association, Cameroon
Other Panelist(s) To Be Determined
15:30 - 15:45
Question & Answer Session
15:45 - 16:15
Break
16:15 - 17:45
Workshop Session III (attend one):
Cochrane Collaboration: How to Get Involved
The Implications of Genetic Testing [New!]
Informed Consent
International Instruments as Advocacy Tools [New!]
The Internet as a Research Tool [New!]
Model Laws: The Mammography Quality Standards Act [New!]
Scientific Training Programs for Breast Cancer Advocates
Evening
Celebration Dinner (tentative)
SUNDAY, MARCH 14, 1999-DAY THREE: BREAST CANCER SCIENCE, RESEARCH & DATA
7:30 - 8:30
Breakfast
8:30 - 8:45
Summary of Days One & Two & Moment of Silence
Christine Brunswick, Vice President, National Breast Cancer Coalition,
United States
8:45 - 9:35
Global Overview of Breast Cancer
Mary-Claire King, PhD, Professor of Medicine and Genetics, Division of
Medical Genetics, University of Washington, United States
9:35 - 9:45
Question & Answer Session
9:45 - 10:35
Global Overview of Environmental and Lifestyle Impacts on Breast
Cancer
Leslie Bernstein, PhD, Professor, Preventive Medicine, University of
Southern California & Scientific Director, Cancer Surveillance Program,
United States
Mary Wolff, PhD, Professor, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, United
States
10:35 - 10:45
Question & Answer Session
10:45 - 11:05
Break
11:05 - 11:55
Overview of the Psychosocial Impact of Breast Cancer
Speaker(s) To Be Determined
11:55 - 12:05
Question & Answer Session
12:05 - 12: 55
Global Overview of Therapeutic Approaches to Breast Cancer Treatment
Adriane Fugh-Berman, MD, Board Chair, National Women's Health
Network, United States
Liesbeth de Vries, MD, PhD, Professor, Division of Medical Oncology,
University Hospital Groningen, The Netherlands
12:55 - 13:05
Question and Answer
13:05 - 14:20
Lunch
14:20 - 15:50
Breakout Groups by Region: Developing Action Plans by Region
15:50 - 16:20
Break
16:20 - 17:00
Reports from the Breakout Groups
Clinton Presidential Records
Digital Records Marker
This is not a presidential record. This is used as an administrative
marker by the William J. Clinton Presidential Library Staff.
This marker identifies the place of a publication.
Publications have not been scanned in their entirety for the purpose
of digitization. To see the full publication please search online or
visit the Clinton Presidential Library's Research Room.
REGISTER TODAY!
FINAL ANNOUNCEMENT
Second World Conference
On Breast Cancer Advocacy-
Influencing Change
March 11 - 14, 1999
Sheraton Brussels Hotel & Towers
Brussels, Belgium
National Breast Cancer Coalition Fund
1707 L Street, NW, Suite 1060
Washington, DC 20036
http://www.natlbcc.org