UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON ARCHIVES
ORAL HISTORY PROJECT

Interview #669
LAXOVA, RENATA

LAXOVA, Renata (1931- )
Professor of Medical Genetics and Pediatrics
At UW: 1975-2000

FIRST INTERVIEW
Interviewed: 	March-April 2004 (two sessions)	
Interviewer: 	Erika Milam
Length: 	4 hours, 51 minutes
Indexed by: 	Stephen A. Pierce
Series:		Campus Voices; Women in Science and Engineering

Abstract: In her two 2004 interviews with Erika Milam, Renata Laxova discusses growing up in pre-WWII Czechoslovakia, her evacuation to and young life in WWII Britain, and schooling, scholarship, and family in both communist Czechoslovakia, Britain, and the US. She discusses in detail the dislocations caused by the Nazi invasion of Czechoslovakia and the efforts of Nicholas Winton to aid Jewish Czech children college. She also describes life under communist rule in contrast to the abundance of post-WWII America; and outlines her medical career from the Institute at Brno to the Kennedy-Galton Center in London to the University of Wisconsin at Madison. Other topics discussed include:  the events of the Prague Spring of 1968 and subsequent suppression; the family’s escape to England; Lionel Penrose; research on twins, mental retardation, and teratogens; and teaching. This interview was conducted for inclusion into the UW-Madison Oral History Program.

Key Words: Brno, Czechoslovakia; World War II; Nazis; Hitler; Kindertransport; Sir Nicholas Winton; languages; communist bloc; Prague Spring; medical school; Institute for Pediatric Research in Brno; genetics; Lionel Penrose; Warsaw Pact; defection; teratogens; Kennedy-Galton Center; University of Wisconsin-Madison; Diagnostic and Training Units (DTU); Genetic Contact Network; Wisconsin Teratogen Project; Perinatal Foundation; genetic counseling; John Opitz; gender discrimination; Meriter Hospital.

First Interview Session; (March 30, 2004): Tape 1 Digital File
Time		Keywords

00:00:00	Start of interview/Interviewer’s introduction [Tape 1, Side 1]

00:00:17	Question: Talk about childhood Answer: Laxova talked about her happy childhood in Brno (now in Czech Republic) lasting 8 years and 15 days—until WWII began, when she was sent to England as part of Kindertransport.1 She then explained the history of Czech Republic, from Austro-Hungary to Czechoslovakia and the cultural heritage of the city where they lived. She talked about W. Wilson’s advocacy of the country’s independence and Tomas Masaryk’s first presidency and his humanism and politics.

00:03:56	[no question] Laxova talked about her parents—her father was an accountant with a good income and her mother was educated. She recalled pleasant childhood memories vacationing, her nursemaid Manya, and being well off. She remembered going to school at 6 years old (1937), but in the next year, children began disappearing from her religion classes. She recalled her father’s birthplace in Slovakia, which has since been taken over by UNESCO.

00:08:49	[no question] Laxova recalled returning to her father’s hometown in fall 1938, where her father was called into the army. She discussed his disappointment that no resistance had been given to the Nazi occupation of Sudetenland (September 1938). She talked about the Munich Agreement and earlier memories of Hitler’s speeches on the radio during the Anschluss (March 1938)

00:12:30	[no question] After the Munich Agreement, she remembered, the family could no longer have the same freedoms to swim, vacation, go out, and play piano. She discussed the numerous decrees being issued. She related how her father began going to synagogue on Friday nights and frequently returned with guests for dinner—she told the story of one couple who’d been evicted by the Gestapo in Vienna and had their children shot. Several months later the Slovak territory was occupied by Hitler also, and she related her reactions to the events of September 15, 1938—being afraid Hitler would murder them all.

00:20:00	[no question] Laxova recalled the next day, Sept. 16, two synagogues being burnt down and things getting much worse—politicians and even her father being imprisoned. She related how her mother wroted to G. Lansbury, a British MP, who took Hitler’s claims to annihilated Jews seriously. Her mother sent a picture of Renata and requested that he get her to safety. Five days later, Grace Beaton responded on behalf of Lansbury pledging to do whatever they could.

00:23:42	[no question] Laxova discussed Beaton’s involvement with the Friends’ (Quakers) international organization War Resister’s International, later awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, and which organized Kindertransport. Before her mother could reject these advances, she received a letter from the Daniels family offering for Renata to come live with them—her photograph had been published in a Friends’ circular. By this time, things were serious enough for her mother to accept, promising Renata that they would try to escape soon thereafter.

00:29:36	[no question] Laxova talked about not being allowed to finish school; the demonstrations of Hitler Jugend threatening the Jews; being questioned one day by a woman in the street; and her father’s arrest. [Tape 1, side 2] She recalled getting paperwork for the Kindertransport train leaving the Wilson station in Prague on July 31, 1939. She explained how few people believed Hitler’s threats because they thought the worst he could do was a mass deportation, and because it was difficult to pick up and move.

00:35:38	[no question] Laxova related how her parents were unable to obtain a permit to leave, though her father tried to learn a trade. She reminisced about her last days in Prague with her parents and visiting the zoo with her father. She recalled realizing in the taxi to the station that she was leaving everything familiar, crying and begging her parents not so send her. At the station, she recalled the organization of the transport. Her mother later related that the children came out of the staging room “changed children,” though no one was unkind to them.

00:41:36	[no question] Laxova told the story of her mother boarding the train to give her a hug goodbye, though she wasn’t one of those who was allowed to do so. She talked about the train journey to London and the Nazi checkpoint at the border. 

00:44:00	[no question] Laxova related the story of Sir Nicholas Winton, who was responsible for the organization of the five Kindertransports, of which Laxova’s was the fifth. Winton formed the British Committee for Children after visiting Prague and realizing none of the aid groups targeted children; and arranged with the Gestapo the release of the children on a guarantee of £50 and a home.

00:50:12	[no question] Laxova remarked that of the 664 Kindertransport children, only 5 had both parents survive and 20 had one parent survive the war. Additionally, a sixth transport was slated to leave on September 1, 1939, but following Hitler’s invasion of Poland and Britain’s declaration of war, the train never left. No one knows what happened to the children. Fifty years later, Winton turned his papers about Kindertransport over to a friend to publish; much publicity followed, including a trip to Israel to meet some of the children, a meeting with Vaclav Havel (Pres. of Czech.), and being knighted—she described a film depicting Winton meeting a room full of people whose lives he saved.

00:56:02	[no question] Laxova discussed adjusting to life with Daniels, who lived near Manchester and worked for Shell. She related moving with Harry (Daniels’ young son) to the Cumberland area of England during the war, due to the danger of bombing—they attended the Manor School and she talked about later reunions of schoolchildren who were moved to the school during the war. The next year, she remembered, the family moved to Morecambe, where Shell UK was based during the war. She liked grammar school, learned English quickly, and forgot Czech.

01:00:13	[no question] Laxova recalled at the end of the war, her mother was the first civilian allowed to go from Prague to England to convince Renata to return to Czechoslovakia. They allowed her to stay until the end of the 1946 school year, and she received an excellent education in England. She speculated that she would have gone on to study languages had she stayed there. In Czechoslovakia, she took her “maturity” exams.

01:04:16	[end tape 1; begin tape 2] [no question] Laxova discussed wanting to go to an English school, but her parents insisting she relearn Czech and go to an ordinary school in Brno; so her mother had to find a school where the headmaster understood the context of her fleeing to England. She talked about subjects she learned, but that her parents didn’t see language as a living—part of this was a result of the way they had to survive the war and the camps—so she agreed to go to medical school.

01:08:40	[no question] Laxova discussed the coming of the Communist regime—unfavorable to anyone with Western education—after her graduation from high school and the reign of chaos. She related her experience applying to med school—her building janitor was questioned by a delegation from the school to find out her political leanings and supported her, and then she got an interview at the medical school with a professor, a laborer, and a party member. She speculated that had she applied several years later, she wouldn’t have been accepted because of her Western and bourgeois family ties.

01:13:21	[no question] Laxova discussed medical school, where she studied also Russian and Marxism-Leninism. While the school was rigorous, she received good grades, but she related not being able to graduate with honors because of her political background. She remembered not being allowed to study genetics, because it was considered reactionary under communism; nevertheless, the better professors taught groups of four in secret at their home. She also remembered the destruction of a statue of Gregor Mendel.

01:19:28	[no question] Laxova talked about the ludicrous nature of the political climate—people still received blood transfusions with correct blood-typing, but she talked about political criminals disappearing to the uranium mines. During her fourth year, she decided to specialize in pediatrics because it was so broad. Her first child was born in 1955 and she graduated in 1956. She discussed her husband’s work in the veterinary school, but recalled that the communists assigned her to a position 150 miles from her home. She appealed, but was told the committee didn’t care about her situation; so she decided to leave. She related the communist decision to change doctors’ titles to a simple “graduated children’s doctor,” etc.

01:24:22	[no question] Laxova discussed writing to excuse herself from the assignment, and receiving a response that they were glad because they wanted a real doctor, not a “graduated childrens’ doctor.” She talked about volunteering at a local children’s hospital until the hospital offered her a paid position.

01:26:43	Question: Were there people who encouraged you along the way? Answer: She recalled feeling lucky that she went to med school at the beginning, since the communists later purged Western elements from the school; she discussed personal attention paid to each student. She talked about 20 working class and communist party members who were “assigned” to medical school in her class of 300—these people “led” the class politically. She related an anecdote about demonstrations in Brno for better workers pay, and 3 students from her class who the “workers” in the class wanted to expel for participating.

01:34:31	[no question] Laxova related that the students were ordered to vote whether they wanted the students to be expelled. Nearly everyone raised their hand, but several courageous ones objected. That night, the “workers” pressured each member of their class individually. [tape 2 side 2] When the vote was retaken the next day, she refused to raise her hand. She remembered a Western-educated physiology professor and surgery professor who were encouraging to her—the latter encouraged her to take a foreign-standard medical exam (ECFMG).

01:40:43	[no question] Laxova continued to talk about Western-educated instructors being well-rounded gentlemen; and told the story about a Catholic friend who was sent much further away from Brno than her. She talked about enjoying her job, having another child, and not having much money, though everything was paid for by the state—her parents helped financially each month.

01:45:12	[no question] Laxova talked about the state opening an Institute for Pediatric Research (IPRB) in 1963. She discussed members of the institute and their desire to research genetics, which by that time was accepted by the government. Referencing British research, the team began looking at twins, specifically hereditary traits. She discussed advantages of the communist system, not needing patient consent; and how they encouraged rural parents to allow twin children to come to the city for a vacation if they agreed to participate in the study—the study eventually saw 600 pairs of twins.

01:51:28	[no question] Laxova remembered having a great time with these children—activities they did and buying toys for the children. She discussed the vast amount of data they were able to gather—blood types, vision, eye color, foot and palm prints, taste, voice prints, psychology—and conclusions that were able to be drawn from the data. From the study, the parents received a good examination of the children and a family history. Laxova earned her PhD from the study.

01:55:50	[no question] In 1968, she recalled, Czechoslovakia defeated the Russians in hockey and Dubcek took power, which began the Prague Spring—the liberalization of the communist regime and criticism of Soviet influence. She talked about musical influences on Prague Spring, and explained that seeing the Soviet tanks roll in to repress the movement made her realize she needed to go elsewhere—it reminded her too much of the Nazis. The data were never published. 

02:00:28	First Interview Session
 
Second Interview Session (April 6, 2004): Tape 3 Digital File
Time		Keywords

00:00:00	Start of interview/Interviewer’s introduction [Tape 3, Side 1]

00:00:17	[no question] Laxova discussed getting her PhD, reviewing research that the IPRB was doing. She discussed screening the child population of Southern Moravia for metabolic disorders as well as mental retardation. During the year, people brought children with retardation to the Institute to find out why this was happening—she discussed the limitations of genetics knowledge at the time, even in the West, compared to what is known today (referring to McKusick’s MIM).

00:06:46	[no question] Laxova remembered being motivated to learn more about genetics by the heart-breaking questions of these parents. She read Stern’s genetics text, but wanted more information, so decided to get a PhD, based on the data the IPRB had gathered on twins and their parents. She explained her thesis which studied isoamylases in twins—prevalence, forms, inheritance, population incidence, and abnormality—and some specific findings concerning diabetic twins.

00:11:22	Follow up: Who evaluated the thesis? Answer: Laxova remarked that older geneticists existed, just weren’t allowed to teach—she talked about her five examining professors, her defense, and the sacrifices required of writing a thesis while working full-time. She noted that so little was known about genetics that those who worked in the field knew everything that was known. 

00:14:59	[no question] Laxova talked about communism and the incidence of denunciation and spying. She told the story of a lab technician who suspiciously went from complaining about having little money to living luxuriously and having to be careful what you said around him. Also, families of men who were denounced suffered horribly—unable to be employed, etc. She remarked that “communism destroyed everything”—agriculture, nature, the economy—and the “greyness.”

00:19:17	[no question] Talking about the 1967 liberalization, Laxova talked about being able to take a spartan vacation to Yugoslavia in 1966. They visited the Italian border, where they tried to escape to the West (with nothing); but because of their Czech plates, their car was turned back. She talked again about the hopefulness of 1968—Boy Scout movement, Czech flags, etc.

00:23:36	[no question] In the summer of 1968, Laxova’s family received two visitors from the West—renown geneticist Lionel Penrose wanted to visit Mendel’s museum, and Prof. Stamp was a veterinary doctor. As Penrose was leaving, he invited them to London, and as Stamp was leaving, he invited her husband for study leave with him. Her husband was able to get a visa and take their eldest daughter to Scotland. She discussed her plans to vacation with their younger daughter in Slovakia.

00:27:24	[no question] Laxova discussed arriving in Slovakia and the next morning overhearing the radio broadcast announcing the invasion of Czechoslovakia by Warsaw Pact forces. She recalled heading home, where she and Anita had valid visas for England to visit her husband. She talked about the resistance movement diverting trains and pulling up tracks, and being forced to walk 25 km to their station because of the resistance movement’s efforts.

00:31:49	[Tape 3 side 2] [no question] She referred to this as the Czechs’ “finest hour,” them all helping each other; but determining that they needed to leave. She debated whether to sacrifice her children’s or her parent’s happiness, and discussed difficulties making arrangements, but suddenly finding a bus leaving for Vienna. She talked about the buses, the government’s hatred of the Russians, and their charge to tell the world what was really going on. 

00:35:48	[no question] Arriving in Vienna, Laxova’s family found centers that had been set up for Czech citizens. They were able to receive money for a trip to London and meet Daniela and her husband; and trying to set up a new life. She quipped about a customs agent who had no clue Czechoslovakia had been invaded. The next week, they called Prof. Penrose, who was waiting for them. She discussed Penrose’s intellect, their hospitality to them—allowing them to stay for three months—and his offer to her of a job.

00:42:15	[no question] Laxova told anecdotes about the Penroses’ “Englishness”—their old broken down car, which died in rush hour in Regent Street. While retired, Penrose gave her a job at the Kennedy-Galton Center at Harperbury Hospital, which was funded from a Kennedy Award for his work (the other recipient was Henry Waisman). She discussed Penrose’s modesty.

00:47:02	[no question] Laxova worked at Kennedy-Galton for seven years. She talked about two significant contributions from those days: one studied all women at the facility who’d born children and their children, studying inheritance of non-specific mental retardation; and the other was an etiological study of mental retardation in school-age children.

00:51:25	[no question] Laxova remembered that in 1972, Prof. Penrose died suddenly. Upon his death, a consultant clinical geneticist position was created, and she explained what a consultant was in British medicine—she became the first person in Britain to hold this position. She talked about enjoying building clinical genetics in her region and hiring new scholars.

00:55:32	[no question] She recalled her husband not fitting in with the wealthy British veterinary establishment; so he took a job at Ft. Collins Medical School in Colorado, where he taught for two years, but didn’t receive tenure. At a veterinary conference, he learned about Wisconsin and was offered a job which he took sight-unseen. At this point, John Opitz offered her a job at UW-Madison through one of Laxova’s British colleagues. She talked about her husband’s agreement to come back to Britain if her daughter was accepted to Oxford or Cambridge, but she was only offered a position in Slavic languages, not in medicine.

01:04:12	[Tape 4, Side 1] [no question] Laxova discussed enjoying working with Opitz, who left UW in 1979 and was a leader in delineating syndromes in genetics. She described her office in the Waisman Center, built partly with Kennedy money; about Waisman; about “university-affiliated facilities”; and about Kennedy’s desire to eradicate mental retardation within his lifetime. Kennedy’s sister was a resident of a facility in Wisconsin.

01:08:31	[no question] Laxova described work when she came to Waisman; some research was done and it was also a DTU (Diagnostic and Training Units) for people in pediatrics, occ. therapy, phys. therapy, speech/language, social work, dentistry, genetics, etc. When a child was brought in, they were evaluated by each of these disciplines, which Laxova hated because it was overwhelming for the parents and the children and because she only saw a couple patients a week.

01:12:00	[no question] She talked about being involved in England with early prenatal diagnosis through amniocentesis (which interested Penrose) and work with alpha fetoprotein. After continuing this work, she decided (1976) to start the Genetic Contact Network, people trained at UW who knew their communities and would refer cases for genetic testing. She discussed the growth of this, and her conviction that many genetic disorders were going unnoticed.

01:17:01	[no question] Laxova also discussed the establishment of the Prenatal Genetics clinic at Meriter Hospital (where most babies were delivered), to which cases were referred from around the state. She described the increase of tools available—amniocentesis, alpha fetoprotein, and ultrasound, which has grown more and more sophisticated. She explained that the purpose of these was to maximize the outcome of pregnancy, which she outlined in “Pathology of the Fetus,” a textbook chapter published in 1992.

01:21:35	[no question] Laxova described work at the clinic—counselors took family histories and educated families; help for people who decided to terminate pregnancies, diagnosing in advance things that could be dealt with immediately after birth, etc. Around 1990, however, things changed with the hiring of someone who said she was a high-risk obstetrician, but wanted to be independent and refused assistance from UW’s clinical geneticists. She was later fired but UW had been separated from Meriter by then.

01:25:02	[no question] In 1992, Laxova recalled moving on to study genes involved with cancer, from which a genetics clinic was established at the Comprehensive Cancer Center. Follow up: What happened to genetic counseling at Meriter? Answer: She talked about Meriter initially hiring two genetic counselors of their own, and some cooperation between UW and Meriter since then in complicated cases. From 1976 on, she had been involved in a MS degree genetics counseling training program with Joan Burns, one of the first of its kind in the US.

01:30:14	[no question] Laxova talked about her staff, many of which were trained in her program, liking each other and having very little turnover. The staff later became involved in accreditation of programs, training postdocs, and having every area involved in genetic education. She outlined the staff, from herself and Joan to secretarial work. Follow up: Was it a particularly friendly scientific environment for women? Answer: Laxova responded that women comprised a majority of the staff and added that early on, the genetics department didn’t really didn’t value genetic counseling (in lieu of hard research).

01:35:45	[Begin Side 2] Question: So you felt people needed to know. Answer: Laxova talked about her conviction that there isn’t a family that exists anymore that hasn’t experienced a genetically-implicated loss. Follow up: Talk about the Wisconsin Teratogen Project. Answer: Laxova explained the origins of the project in her research in England, where all factors of a child’s medical condition needed to be accounted for; so they considered environmental factors that cause fetal abnormalities (teratogens)—infectious diseases, thalidomide, alcohol (most common).

01:40:31	[no question] Laxova recounted how her clinical studies began documenting various kinds of teratogens; this later became a special clinic because people were inquiring what kinds of things could affect their pregnancies, and they kept records, hired genetic counselors, etc. They went on to publish a teratogen training manual for genetic counselors. 

01:43:08	Question: How do people react to genetic information? Answer: Laxova responded that this was where the counseling was implicated. She outlined a project they’d conducted studying diagnoses in the 1970s—2/3 of people given a diagnosis of severe abnormality requested to terminate the pregnancy. She then discussed how genetic counselors dealt with people—always face to face, always giving them all the information, sending them home to think about it.

01:47:32	[no question] Laxova also described how, as ultrasound became more common, misdiagnosis became more common and it was difficult to convince parents that the baby was healthy and that they shouldn’t terminate—especially the men. She described the process of counseling fathers as an invigorating challenge and recalled teaching students of the power and the honor of their counseling—one wrong word could cause great damage. She enjoyed everything she did, but talked about unhelpful sayings that often arose in these situations.

01:53:21	[no question] Laxova observed that she never felt different from her male colleagues. She remembered being struck by it when she was informed she was the lowest paid professor in the department; but she had earned so little under communism and in England that she thought her US salary was a kingly wage, and she felt very privileged, and she didn’t care about the money.

01:57:50	Question: What important changes have happened in medical genetics? Answer: Laxova responded that everything has changed. She noted that when she started, the number of chromosomes had just been discovered, and no one knew what a gene was; and now, our genetic diagram can tell us to what drugs we’ll be susceptible. She described this as the change from looking at the body as a whole to looking at the molecules.

02:01:00	Follow up: And this information is much more accessible? Answer: Laxova distinguished between the information being available and it being understood. She noted that it worried her that while they can test for susceptibility, people often react strongly to risks that may not become reality. She remarked that genetics is extremely complicated, and that one of the difficulties is to explain this to people—she used the example of mothers of boys with muscular dystrophy who refused to let their daughters date, etc. While tests can reassure people, they are often not performed. She discussed Human Subjects Committee work as well.

02:07:30	[Tape 5, Side 1] Question: Were you involved in any women’s organizations? Answer: Laxova mentioned that she never went to meetings, though they were often held at Waisman Center, because she felt she didn’t need an excuse (that she was a woman) to do the best she could—though she did feel women were discriminated—and gender discrimination wasn’t as noticeable in Europe. She felt she never really thought about it, and felt she was wrong to not care.

02:13:22	Question: Talk about teaching your courses. Answer: Laxova remembered loving teaching, and endeavoring to make it personal, even in large classes. She taught medical genetics to med students and clinical genetics to genetic counseling students—she recalled being bothered that med students knew a lot of genetic theory, but no practical knowledge, and thought she was the first to invite patients to speak in class—these were some of the most powerful moments in teaching.

02:17:23	[no question] Laxova related the story about a former chairman who attended a lecture by a Huntington’s patient and said he’d never forget the experience. She talked about other types of cases who were willing to come to class—especially Downs—and also talked about the flexibility of her exams. She felt more gratified by teaching genetic counseling students, who loved hearing her stories of real cases she was working on, which she opened sometimes to students.

02:22:18	[no question] She related easing genetic counseling students into real-life counseling situations. She also taught courses in cancer genetics, teratogens, and human genetics; and presented many times at meetings or guest lectures. Follow up: Have students changed over the years? Answer: Laxova thought not, but that the abundance of information out there has caused students to be less excited by genetics. She told the anecdote of students congratulating her on her citizenship in 1976, and speculated that 10 years later, classes wouldn’t be that interested.

02:27:31	[no question] Laxova talked about how she taught, by constantly asking questions to all the students, using slides, and telling stories. She noted always being worried and therefore always being prepared. She quipped about a colleague being honored at a ceremony who noted “when you stop being scared, you’re not worth being listened to.” 

02:31:11	Question: Any remarkable students? Answer: Laxova called these “professional sons and daughters,” geneticists and counselors who she sometimes encounters out of the blue. She talked about discovering a rare horrible disease in 1980 from a Rockford, IL family—she talked about the Huntington’s-like disease and about what little help they could provide for them—and about reuniting with one of her students, now in Utah, through the family. She also related another anecdote of a high-school girl whose father was a MD in Appleton who did a project about genetics, went through med school, eventually became head of a medical department, and applied for Laxova’s job.

02:38:49	[Begin Side 2] Question: Talk about your service activities? Answer: Laxova thought the most meaningful one was involvement in the Genetic Contact Network—she talked about county coordinators who loved the people in their area with whom she’d become close friends. She also talked about the Perinatal Foundation (PF), founded by Dr. Leonard, who was always helping students—she was the head of the committee that decided on grants for perinatal research.

02:43:24	[no question] Laxova talked about this activity being gratifying, and used the example of establishing clinics among all the Indian tribes of the state (one of which was funded by the PF). She went on to discuss a fund founded in Mrs. Leonard’s name which pays for child-care for students with small children to go to school.

02:45:07	Question: What have you done since retirement? Answer: She noted that she was busier than ever, but that because her work is no longer within the boundaries of a job, she feels more tired from the diverse projects she’s involved in. Question: Closing comments? Answer: Laxova commented on being privileged to enjoy everything she did, including writing grants and work at the national level—writing guidelines for genetic services. Wisconsin, she noted, was at the cutting edge of clinical genetic services, though not the science of it.

02:51:18	End of Second Interview Session.

End of First Interview

SECOND INTERVIEW
Interviewed: 	2008 (3 sessions)
Interviewer: 	Robert Lange
Length: 	7 hours, 37 minutes
Indexed by: 	Stephen A. Pierce
Series: 	Campus Voices; Women in Science and Engineering

Abstract: In her three September/October 2008 interviews with Robert Lange, Renata Laxova reviews the material from her first interview and gives additional detail and perspective on her childhood in WWII Czechoslovakia and England, her professional development in communist Czechoslovakia and post-war Britain, and her scientific contributions to the University of Wisconsin and the state of Wisconsin. She discusses the concept of “survivor guilt,” evaluates the communist system, and speaks frankly about her family, the US and British systems of education, and scientific, political, and moral issues related to her research and counseling in genetics. This interview was conducted for inclusion into the UW-Madison Oral History Program.

Key Words: Kindertransport; Sir Nicholas Winton; survivor guilt; interrogation; lettergrams; the lost generation; medical school; communism; genetics; IPRB; twin research; Brno, Czechoslovakia; “Prague Spring”; Lionel Penrose; Kennedy-Galton Center; consultantship; John Opitz; Diagnostic and Training Unit (DTU); University Affiliated Facilities; Genetic Contact Network; James Crow; Great Lakes Regional Genetics Group (GLaRGG); Council on Regional Networks (CORN); abortion; Meriter Hospital; genetic counseling; teratogen committee; cancer research; Waisman Center; gender discrimination.

First Interview Session (September 29, 2008): Digital File
Time		Keywords

00:00:00	Start of interview/Interviewer’s introduction

00:00:51	Question: Do you have other thoughts about your childhood? Answer: Laxova remarked that children are aware of more than people think; and that she was aware for years before Kindertransport that her parents and community members were nervous because they were Jewish and therefore different. She noted an occasion when a fellow student blamed “you Jews” for Czechoslovakia’s problems and wondering about why she was different. Her mother, though, was shocked that she understood who Hitler was and what he was doing.

00:05:37	[no question] A second thing Laxova wanted to add was that she never felt rejected by her parents—the explained that they would try to follow her and that they were saving her life. Follow up: How did your parents get you to go on the train? Answer: Laxova told the story of her mother hearing about PM Lansbury, hearing from Grace Beaton, the letter from the Daniels and the British Committee for Children giving details of her transport.

00:10:28	[no question] Laxova explained that they didn’t really know about the work of Nicholas Winton until much later—she again told the story of Winton’s trip to Prague, observing that children weren’t being helped, and establishing the British  Committee for Children. She explained Winton’s networking process and his connection with the Quakers, who published the newsletter that interested the Daniels in helping Laxova. She discussed Winton’s efforts to “barter” with families to find homes for children.

00:17:58	Question: Your mother was the determining factor for you getting on the train? Answer: Yes, but Laxova said Winton also traveled to Prague, where parents begged him to help their children. Follow up: How was the train able to get to England, across Europe? Answer: Laxova recalled Winton’s negotiations with the Gestapo and the Home Office that each child had to have a visa and £50 support from someone in order that they not burden the state.

00:21:57	[no question] Laxova also recalled that the transports could only leave so long as Britain wasn’t at war with Germany. She discussed the final transport, of approx. 250 children, which no one knows anything about. Follow up: How has the fact that you were selected for the transport affected you? Answer: Laxova said that this was her third observation—that many Holocaust survivors were silent about their experiences, so she didn’t have “survivor-guilt.” But when she returned to Czechoslovakia, her whole generation of peers were lost. She said in some sense that her children grew up with her parents’ children from after the Holocaust.

00:28:34	Question: Were you and your parents in touch during the war? Answer: Yes, she mentioned having the letters which make obvious that she was forgetting Czech by Christmas. She talked about learning English and the letters stopping in 1941, except 25-word lettergrams, which had to go through unoccupied countries.

00:32:20	[no question] Laxova related that her parents were later arrested and interrogated (and maybe tortured) for the lettergrams, asking what “Renata” meant in terms of spy code. Her parents were released eventually because her father was Slovakian; they both had to find their way back to Slovakia and survived there, where her father survived in camps, and her mother took on a false identity. During that period she didn’t hear from her parents. But years later she received a package and letter from her parents relayed from a family in Denmark who’d held onto it until the Nazis left Denmark.

00:38:25	[no question] Laxova talked about the decades of silence, during which people forgot about the events of those years, including Winton himself. She related again the story of his activities becoming public and gaining renown. Follow up: Have you maintained contact with other children on the train? Answer: Laxova talked about one boy from Brno who happened to return to the same high school as her, who helped her relearn Czech and became a prominent engineer in later years in Israel. He is featured in The Power of Good, a film about Winton.

00:42:17	[no question] Laxova referred to a Kindertransport Association, most of whose members were German and Austrian children evacuated to Britain after Kristallnacht—she explained Britain’s efforts to help Jewish children. She mentioned her dislike of the politicking that happens in the organization.

00:44:10	Question: Talk about your experience in England as a child. Answer: Laxova remembered meeting her foster family and “little brother” (Harry) in Manchester after meeting her father’s employer at Liverpool St. Station. She recalled being surprised that they could pronounce her name; that they were only in Flixston for one month before war broke out; and that Daniels had arranged for other Czech Jews to visit so she could hear her language (these were later interred on Man).

00:50:34	[no question] Laxova again talked about being evacuated to Cumberland to the Friends’ Manor School, which has since become well-known. She remembered the school grounds being beautiful, but breaking down when she figured out that only the children were staying. Daniels relented and allowed Mrs. Daniels to stay in town with the children, who acquainted each other by walking to school. The school hosted evacuees and refugees, many of whom didn’t like one another.

00:55:27	[no question] She reviewed the April move from Manor School to Shell’s Morecambe headquarters, near Lancaster. She marveled that the Germans never bombed the oil refinery, and found out later that the Nazis were saving it as a resource when they defeated Britain. She remembered doing well in school, getting a scholarship to a grammar school and doing well on the O levels. She felt grateful to have gotten such a good education.

01:00:40	Question: Were you well treated? Answer: She responded that school and reading was her refuge, and she loved it and was conscientious. She talked about going to concerts for the headmaster’s class. Follow up: Were you homesick? Answer: She said at the beginning, very much so, and discussed the Czech book her parents had given her called Happy Childhood, but later she said she lived for school. She discussed Edna Daniels’ poor treatment and speculated why that was so.

01:04:54	Question: Favorite subject? Answer: She mentioned liking math and languages—Latin, English, German, French—more than the sciences. Follow up: Do you consider yourself part English? Answer: Laxova laughed and said she considered herself who she was—she told an anecdote about not knowing which country she belonged to and talked about loving Britain, America, and Israel. 

01:07:51	Question: Talk about your return to Czechoslovakia. Answer: Laxova remarked about not wanting to return and loving Britain. She discussed her naiveté and her mother’s astuteness in trying to reacquaint with Renata. She told the story of her mother coming to visit England and hating it because of the foreignness and Edna Daniels’ poor treatment. She remarked about having “a fortune in my hands” with great university entrance scores and a British passport, but moving back.

01:13:04	[no question] Laxova reviewed her mother’s efforts to find a Czech school where Renata could go, and the two administrators who understood the situation. She talked about the excellent education she’d received both in Britain and Czechoslovakia. Follow up: After this, what about career? Answer: Laxova discussed the differences between the American and European systems of university education.

01:17:46	[no question] She recalled her father wanting her to study something “practical” because it had saved Jews lives in the Holocaust, though she wanted to study language. So she applied to medical school. Follow up: Had the Communists taken over? Answer: Yes, they took over in 1948, during her 6th year of grammar school. She remembered the experience, and being surprised and disappointment, and reviewed the political maneuvering involved.

01:22:21	Question: Why did your parents return to Czechoslovakia, rather than Israel or America? Answer: She said that “the world was open” and while some understood the implications of Soviet liberation during WWII, most people expected Czecho-slovakia to continue on its pre-WWII democratic, wealthy, industrial, culturally rich path. She talked about her father’s arrest by the Nazis and then arrest by the Communists for working for the same family. Follow up: Was Czechoslovakia not as anti-Semitic as Austria, etc.? Answer: Laxova thought this was a fair assessment, because of how integrated the Jewish community was. She described the Czechs as opportunistic, and spoke of her parents being comfortable.

01:28:31	Question: Talk about influences medical school. Answer: Laxova quipped about failing her first “rigorosa” for anatomy class, because she was used to studying coming easily. She retold the story of her interview by the Communists, and her future anatomy professor saving her.

01:33:17	[no question] Laxova talked about how she got into genetics—and retold the story of seeing the destruction of Mendel’s statue. From this incident she learned about the philosophy of communists on “Morganism/Mendelism” and environment. When she arrived at medical school, she questioned the wisdom of not learning genetics, and later went to secret lectures on it. She reviewed being forced to learn Russian and Marxism-Leninism, and professors having to report on this.

01:39:38	[no question] Laxova talked about denunciation and the broadcast of mock trials; about having to work in factories or farms on break. She discussed how she decided to pursue pediatrics and reviewed the story of not being allowed to get a red diploma (highest honors) for political reasons. She talked about Western affiliations—her education, Harry visiting, and the Daniels’ gift of The Lancet.

01:44:15	[no question] Laxova reviewed how after graduation she was given an assignment far away from Brno for political reasons, as well as the change of title “graduated children’s physician” rather than “doctor.” She discussed volunteering in Brno and later being offered a job at the children’s hospital there. She critiqued the mentality of communism, forcing everyone to be manual laborers. Follow up: Were you thinking about leaving? Answer: Not at this time—it was unrealistic and they were raising a family there, but they were in touch with the West.

01:49:21	[no question] Laxova discussed the conversion of part of the hospital to a research facility, and she suggested doing genetics, which was unpopular at the time. She recalled reading in Western journals and feeling they didn’t need to reinvent the wheel. Follow up: How was this possible? Answer: She remarked that “nice people agreed with me” and that the atmosphere among doctors at the hospital was wonderful. [Dog barking loudly at 1:56:13 to 1:56:30.] 

01:56:32	[no question] Laxova reviewed the research carried on by the IPRB, which she described as simple, but productive—surveying all of the pediatric population of southern Moravia for incidence and prevalence of common genetic diseases, and inviting pairs of twins to the city to be involved in research testing and also cultural activities. The parents would then get a full report of their children’s health and psychology.

02:01:55	[no question] Laxova discussed the overwhelming response from parents to their invitation—many wanted their kids to have a trip to the city. She also reviewed how the institute personnel worked together to prepare for the six weeks of 20 pairs of twins each—over 5 years, 600+ pairs of twins. She recalled being ready in 1968 to analyze and publish the material, but the Communists invaded and the material was lost; though her PhD resulted from the material.

02:07:08	[no question] She went on to discuss other projects that were part of the research—blood type, hand and footprints, voice recordings, colored vision. Follow up: And the state didn’t interfere? Answer: No, she recalled the academy of sciences actually giving them an award; and she talked about the people in Prague being jealous of them, though they’re now the leaders in genetics. She also discussed research on incidence and development of diabetes, though the research didn’t track long enough to see real results.

02:13:58	End of First Interview Session

Second Interview Session (October 6, 2008): Digital File
Time		Keywords

00:00:00	Start of interview/Interviewer’s introduction

00:00:16	Question: How did it feel as a scholar to have your data lost? Answer: Laxova said that in the grand scheme, it wasn’t a huge issue for her. She talked about writing a pamphlet before she left about the research, so the word was out about the work; but when they left they were more concerned about making a basic living. When she returned in 1984, she made a cursory look, but was told it was gone. She talked about returning to see her parents and being interrogated every day—the point being that science was not uppermost on her mind.

00:07:16	Question: So your personal victory was at the cost of the data? Answer: Laxova mentioned again that her PhD was also a result of that data, and that this research had been publicized even in the West. She here reviewed the substance of her PhD (amylases in twins); and noted that her mentor in England [Penrose] encouraged her to continue working with children with retardation.

00:12:27	Question: Talk about moving to England. Answer: Laxova remarked that she loved what she was doing in Brno, and talked about how the Communists had since allowed scientists to work on genetics. She retold the story of the lab technician who she believed was an informer because of his economic status; and discussed being asked to join the Communist Party, and refusing to do so. She speculated she wasn’t punished because they didn’t desire her membership.

00:17:50	[no question] Laxova remembered the Communists knowing of the Daniels’ family, and people mistrusting her when she was allowed to go to England in 1966. She discussed the “Prague Spring” of 1968, Dubcek, student protests, and it being a happy time for her.

00:21:42	[no question] She recalled being on vacation in August 1968 and entertaining the Penroses (to see Mendel) and Stamps (working on sheep disease). She talked about her husband Tibor being invited by Prof. Stamp to visit England in July 1968 and taking their daughter Daniela with him. She reviewed her and Anita having visas to go as well, but staying home to vacation; and how she overheard on the radio that the Warsaw Pact had invaded Czechoslovakia.

00:28:24	[no question] Laxova reviewed taking Anita and trying to get tickets to Brno to get their passports; discussed the politics leading up to the invasion; and reviewed the efforts of Czech resistance to Soviet trains.  She remembered having to walk 25 km to Brno due to torn up train tracks, people helping one another, and staying with her parents for 4 days before she could get out—she also discussed the difficulty getting out of the country

00:33:34	[no question] She talked about the presence of the Warsaw Pact in the city; the confusion of the troops; and hearing about a bus leaving for Vienna on Sunday morning. She remembered making the decision to sacrifice her parent’s generation in favor of her children. Follow up: Did your parents know? Answer: Generally yes. She described saying goodbye to her parents, the experience of leaving, and the Czech government’s sponsorship of the buses leaving the country because of their hatred of the Russians.

00:39:42	Question: Was Anita frightened? Answer: Yes, she cried bitterly and was very afraid of leaving. Follow up: Were you resentful you had to leave? Answer: She didn’t know; she was just resolved—she talked about fixing on the image of her passport. She described the trip to Vienna and the hospitality of the Austrians—the Czech refugee centers. She talked about calling Harry Daniels and her husband and about borrowing money for a train trip to London.

00:45:08	[no question] Laxova described arriving in England and reviewed the reaction of the customs agent when she said she wanted to stay. She told about her husband waiting for her at Heathrow until he found out they were arriving by train; and talked about the hospitality of the Daniels, who put their children in a school. She also told the story of calling Dr. Penrose, against Tibor’s advice, and the Penrose’s hospitality to them.

00:50:34	[no question] She recalled Penrose’s giving her a job immediately, as well as his advocacy for Tibor in his veterinary career. She talked about her job at the Kennedy-Galton Center; she discussed Penrose’s highly distinguished career, begun as a mathematician and medical geneticist. Although retired, he continued work on mental retardation and received the Kennedy Award (along with Harry Waisman), which funded the Center.

00:56:43	[no question] Laxova went on to discuss Penrose’s foundation of the Kennedy-Galton Center at Harperbury, which stemmed from his love of working with patients. She also remembered the Penroses leaving a list of telephone numbers while they vacationed—all the offices Laxova needed to contact to get their visas in order. She talked about her first days on the job with Penrose. Question: Were you suffering from disorientation? Answer: She talked about being very homesick when alone, but said going from England to the US was harder than from Czechoslovakia to England. She hadn’t forgotten her English—she also recalled having read professional English in Czechoslovakia. 

01:02:38	Follow up: How did you develop professionally in your 7 years in England? Answer: Laxova thought working with Penrose gave her a huge advantage and described his lab as “a crossroads for the world.” She spoke of Penrose visiting her parents while at a conference in Brno, returning and giving Renata a hug from her parents, though he was a world-famous scholar.

01:07:31	Question: Did any of his work precede yours as a genetic counselor? Answer: Yes, she remembered people with genetic disorders seeking out Penrose, sometimes very famous people. Follow up: What were you doing there? Answer: Laxova responded that the two most significant parts of her work were 1) surveying every woman who’d been at Harperbury who had become pregnant to gather empiric data on the genetics of non-specific mental retardation.

01:14:01	[no question] She continued to relate the other significant project: 2) looking at the etiology of mental retardation in the childhood population by surveying schools to the northwest of London. Follow up: When did Penrose die? Answer: She thought March 1972—she remembered it being very sudden. Follow up: Was that a blow? Answer: Yes, she talked about her parents being in England and breaking the news to her.

01:18:02	[no question] Laxova discussed applying for the job of leading the Center, as well as another colleague who’d moved to Canada, but returned to apply. She got the job and again explained what “consultant in clinical genetics” meant—the highest rank for a clinician—and that she was the first in her area. She reviewed her two important projects at Kennedy-Galton.

01:23:43	Question: Was your family happy in Britain? Answer: Laxova recalled her husband not being happy, and thought she was the most happy there. She talked about her daughter’s musical and social activities, though they were unhappy at the beginning. She thought she and Tibor may have not attended to their daughters’ feelings enough, but recalled just trying to survive.

01:26:49	Question: Talk about leaving England. Answer: She talked about a colleague of Tibor’s calling to inform him of a job in the US in 1972, and about Tibor never feeling like he fit in with the elite country-gentleman cadre of veterinarians in Britain. She related the abruptness of his acceptance of the Ft. Collins job and their emotions at the time. 

01:32:20	[no question] She recalled that two years later, Tibor didn’t get tenure because students complained about his English. She remembered his admiration of WI because of the dairy industry and his being offered a job there by a colleague. She talked about his opening a veterinary practice in Darlington, WI, coming to England for visits, but loving the US. She retold the story of Daniela turning down an Oxford appointment because it wasn’t in medicine, but Slavic studies.

01:39:00	[no question] Laxova talked about the difference between the European and American systems of medical school. In Europe, one didn’t need a bachelor’s to go to med school, but can essentially go from HS. She talked about Daniela coming to UW as a sophomore, talked about their naiveté, and described the living arrangements for that first year.

01:43:00	Follow up: You at this point realized you’d come to the US? Answer: Yes, and she described being offered a job in clinical genetics by John Opitz at the Waisman Center through Cedric Carter. Follow up: What were you thinking at the time? Answer: Laxova recalled liking the campus and having read Jim Crow’s work, but hoping that she wouldn’t have to leave England. She left for UW on September 20, 1975.

01:47:58	Question: Talk about your position here. Answer: She said she initially started on a Brittingham grant formerly occupied by a German geneticist. She described some of the faculty and facilities at the Waisman Center. Follow up: Was it a teaching position? Answer: She didn’t know because she wasn’t familiar with the US system—she was initially an asst. professor. She also discussed the difficulty of commuting—when winter came, they decided to buy a house in Madison. She described the process of buying a house near UW and near the lake.

01:53:14	Question: Talk about the first year. Answer: Laxova described her appointment in pediatrics and genetics, and reviewed her pioneering work in prenatal diagnosis—all outpatient at the Waisman Center. She discussed the federally funded DTU as a University Affiliated Facility and the teaching, training, and evaluating functions of the DTU. The facility had nine components, one of which was pediatrics, all of which evaluated a patient who came in with mental retardation.

01:58:02	[no question] She discussed how evaluation of patients worked in the DTU and her (and Joan Burns’) component in the evaluation; and also going with John Opitz to evaluate children at Central Colony (for mental retardation), where he delineated and named syndromes. Follow up: Was Central Colony similar to Harperbury? Answer: There were more children at CC.

02:02:55	[no question] Laxova discussed also spending time in the genetics department, where they were doing testing and description of genetic disorders. Follow up: Did you have a lab? Answer: No, but she did work in various labs. Follow up: Did you meet Crow and Susman? Answer: She quipped about meeting Crow and saying “Do you know Crow?” But she didn’t meet Susman until he became chair.

02:05:00	Question: Talk about the cultural adjustment coming to the US. Answer: Laxova told anecdotes about the lack of decorum, the differences in ways of speech, the bigness of things, and superficial friendliness.

02:10:01	Question: Was the quality of clinical work as good as in England? Answer: Some was better; some worse. She talked about fads in American medicine and the privatization of medicine. She then returned to discussing the way patients were evaluated at Waisman, which she hated because she felt it was overly administrative. So she requested to start doing prenatal diagnosis (amniocentesis and alphafetoprotein, later ultrasound).

02:15:42	[no question] Laxova discussed how she organized prenatal diagnostics—first she organized the Genetic Contact Network, using a grant from the Developmental Disabilities Council to establish contact people in each WI county who would be able to a) recognize people who were in need of genetic counseling and b) refer these to their offices. From this, an outpatient clinic evolved and regional contacts requested outreach clinics, from which Genetic Services Network arose.

02:20:56	[no question] When her grant was extended to providing prenatal diagnosis, she also made amniocentesis analysis available at Meriter. Follow up: Was the response positive? Answer: Some were very positive, but there were others who equated prenatal diagnosis with abortion. She discussed fighting this misconception with education. She talked about offering services initially to the 6 perinatal centers; and receiving some nasty letters back accusing the Network of Nazi-like operations on children.

02:27:04	[no question] Laxova claimed, against the naysayers, that prenatal diagnosis increased the likelihood of people having babies. She talked about risks with Down’s syndrome, older mothers, and anencephaly (which was treatable with a reagent that wasn’t available in WI). She talked about allowing parents to see babies with birth defects so they could see what was normal about it.

02:32:48	Question: Did you speak to lay groups, or just medical? Answer: She said initially it was just physicians, but eventually nurses, social workers, and even parents began coming. She remembered telling students that there is always someone in the audience to whom this is a personal issue; but she noted that no one knew about genetics, so she had an open field. She quipped about getting an angry call from Ben Peckham who thought Laxova was usurping his authority.

02:37:30	[no question] Laxova talked about gradually looking at incidence of mental retardation in the population, using Central Colony, and realizing that hundreds of thousands of people needed genetic services. So they established a network of clinics—she talked about the implications of this in various places because Catholic hospitals didn’t endorse abortion. She talked about Opitz leaving and Jurgen Hermann establishing his own private genetics practice in Milwaukee.

02:41:56	Question: Were you ever called to testify at the state legislature? Answer: Yes, she remembered it starting in the mid-1970s, showing statistics that reassurance increased healthy pregnancy, and educating the legislature that this was not like Nazi science. She recalled one day being told that the clinic would close because Meriter would no longer perform abortions, and later that day meeting with NOW leaders to cancel the regulations.

02:48:01	Question: Were you ever challenged on moral grounds? Answer: Laxova claimed that these kinds of people were fanatics. Follow up: Was the bulk of your work in the 1980s prenatal diagnosis? Answer: No, that was only part of it; she taught, did research, administered, and organized—she talked about receiving a grant to administer the Great Lakes Regional Genetics Group, part of the Council of Regional Networks (CORN). She discussed how she developed committees for facets of clinical genetics services, which communicated among states. 

02:54:13	[no question] She talked about the pathbreaking work of GLaRGG in assessing metabolic labs—prior to this CLIA, which was a federal assessment and certification organization, certified all labs, but had no expertise in this area, so GLaRGG pioneered this regulatory role. She talked again about the Teratogen committee under this umbrella group, explaining what teratogens were.

02:59:04	[no question] Laxova went into further detail about the teratogen committee; she discussed responding to patients questions about what might harm the fetus, and eventually documenting this. She talked about also writing guidelines for the country for genetic services. Follow up: Was that your most significant legacy to healthcare? Answer: Perhaps, but she noted that funding was withdrawn and all the organization they’d achieved was lost, and thought her most important legacy was that there were many people in WI who knew something about genetics.

03:03:50	Question: You liked teaching? Answer: Yes, she enjoyed teaching courses and having students observe sessions. Follow up: How did you break bad news? Answer: Laxova said “that’s when I earned my money”; two scenarios dictated this—when the ultrasound revealed something and when she’d diagnose a newborn suspected of a genetic condition. She always reassured couples that it was nothing they did to cause this.

03:08:14	Follow up: Did you always do this alone? Answer: Most of the time, but sometimes she’d take a med student or genetic counselor with her; and she instilled the importance of how to talk to families in her students. She again talked about how much her students in medical genetics and clinical genetics enjoyed her bringing her patient-families in to talk to class.

03:12:18	[no question] Laxova described how she would conduct her initial 2-hour session with a family: asking how the family saw the problem, looking at the child, explaining what they would do, and discussing how the family would cope. Follow up: Did you see people with a history of developmental disorder contemplating pregnancy? Answer: Yes, she talked about having to answer the question “What would you do if you were me?” She always tried to give the family as much information as possible.

03:16:05	[no question] Laxova again explained hating when doctors would misdiagnose a genetic disorder and having to try to convince parents their baby would be okay. She also discussed trying to engage fathers and grandparents in the interviews.

03:19:11	[no question] She returned to telling the anecdote of a Downs’ syndrome family visiting her medical genetics class; the mother’s response to one question made it obvious that she’d blocked out all the time Laxova had spent working with her when her baby was born. Follow up: Is it satisfying to have touched lives? Answer: Sometimes—she discussed having to fight early on to have children with disorders operated on by surgeons.

03:25:08	End of Second Interview Session

Third Interview Session (October 21, 2008): Digital File
Time		Keywords

00:00:00	Start of interview/Interviewer’s introduction

00:00:24	Question: Talk about your work in genetic counseling with cancer patients. Answer: Laxova talked about cancer work as a “replacement baby,” because of the story of how Meriter decided to no longer have the prenatal clinic through UW. She recalled not being part of the Meriter-St.Mary’s controversy, and talked about the woman brought in by Meriter to work in the genetics clinic.

00:08:25	[no question] Laxova talked about “needing something new,” since they were no longer involved in prenatal genetics and high-risk OB/GYN. At the same time, the first genes linked to cancer were being diagnosed. She talked about establishing a clinic to take family histories and about the incidence of breast cancer in women. She talked about both genetic and random forms of cancer and trying to reassure women who were worried they were at risk.

00:13:14	Question: Is the hereditary form more serious? Answer: Not always; she talked about two genes implicated in breast cancer risk, but mutations can take many forms. She discussed how the tumor suppressing genes must be absent from both parents for the cancer to occur.

00:17:16	Question: Were your patients women with cancer or simply worried? Answer: Both. Generally women would come with a lump or suspicion. She talked about oncology specialization and the eventual branching out of the clinic into other genetic cancers. Follow up: How did you deal with these patients? Answer: Laxova discussed letters they sent out to both patients and physicians, and talked about ethical issues that arose from researchers not revealing results of their research to patients involved.

00:23:46	Follow up: What would you have done? Answer:  Because it was research and the implications of the data were unknown, she probably wouldn’t have been able to tell the families, but said this was not an issue anymore with advances in science. She then returned to talking about dealing with breast cancer patients, discussing risks versus reality; heightened surveillance through mammograms; early family planning. Follow up: Do some women get hysterical at family history of cancer? Answer: Yes, sometimes, but individual psychology is very important; she talked, however, about teaching probabilities.

00:30:32	Question: Were you as engaged with this as with prenatal genetics? Answer: Initially yes, but she talked about the differences between the two; in prenatal, geneticists were doing the diagnosing, where with cancer counseling was the most important component. Follow up: Are you in favor of full-scale genetic screening at birth? Answer: Laxova talked about a screening that identifies 30+ disorders that is mandated; but many parents don’t know what the screening is.

00:37:15	[no question] Laxova answered Lange’s question about prenatal screening, which raises ethical issues and is not generally done—people are screened for what they’re at risk for and then genetic testing is done if ultrasounds flag something abnormal. Follow up: How would you advise mothers who ask you what they should do? Answer: She again responded she didn’t know what she would do in their situation. But she recalled pledging with parents that they would spend as much time as it took to make the right decision for them.

00:43:14	Follow up: Was it sometimes obvious what the couple should do? Answer: She said in some situations she was confident what she would do; and discussed always showing the parents their severely malformed baby. She talked about making parents who wanted an abortion go home for 3 weeks to think over their decision. She never wanted a parent to regret a decision they made, so they gave parents as much information as they had.

00:47:03	[no question] Laxova remarked that now, with much more sophisticated testing available, some advocate more directive counseling. Follow up: Do you think that’s a good development? Answer: She didn’t know, though she knew a colleague who was getting a PhD based on this subject. But she talked about the tendency of people at risk for Huntington’s (which is 100% fatal) not to be tested genetically. Lange then asked what she thought about assisting in suicide for a Huntington’s patient, to which she responded that there are ways a physician can help, but not by assisting in suicide.

00:52:16	[no question] Laxova talked about discussing the same issue with med students, whether they’d want to be tested for Huntington’s. She also talked about cases in which she could tell patients had Huntington’s before she even ran tests. Follow up: Were you ever depressed with the amount of sad news? Answer: No, she was depressed one night as an intern when 4 children died, but her boss was very nice about it. Reflecting on the question, she mentioned that if you can break bad news in a kind, understanding way, it is even rewarding to have this job. 

00:58:36	Question: Talk more about explaining to people that it wasn’t anything they’d done to cause genetic abnormality. Answer: Yes, she remarked that this was often comforting; she told the story of an alcoholic mother who bore a fetal-alcohol syndrome child (and all the counselors wondered what Laxova would say to her), and even trying to comfort that mother. Follow up: Where does that kindness come from? Answer: She said that the woman deserved kindness because it was her baby, and she didn’t want the mother to reject the baby.

01:03:17	Question: How did you deal with the “it’s not fair” response? Answer: Laxova commented that it’s not fair; we simply don’t know why many of these cases happen. She speculated that one of the best pieces of research she’d done was about 72 couples who’d terminated a wanted pregnancy—why they’d not divorced; how they coped; how it affected subsequent pregnancies, etc. Follow up: Why did you not think it was good enough? Answer: She thought she didn’t have enough time or energy to polish the piece; but she remarked that however sad, she like that part of her work, even the challenge of engaging the male. She lamented that this kind of counseling didn’t happen enough anymore, because there is so much more information and there is little time for real counseling. Follow up: Is this increase in information good? Answer: She said she didn’t think so, because the patient fell by the wayside.

01:10:45	Question: Talk about the Waisman Center. Answer: Laxova responded that Waisman was built as a UAF, funded from the Developmental Disabilities Act, family funds, and a Kennedy Award, for training professionals in caring for mental retardation. Other UAFs had different purposes. She talked about the buildings, 6th and 7th floor labs, and research being conducted in the building in 1975.

01:15:52	[no question] She talked about the staff organization of Waisman—it was under the Graduate School, with appointments responsible to various departments. Her group was the genetics component of the DTU (which she explained again). She talked about Rich Heber, director of the Center, who she described as “a crook” who did little work, but was embezzling money. After Heber’s death, his successor Doland wanted to turn the Center into a research facility.

01:20:06	[no question] Laxova said that, despite Doland’s efforts, she thought that the Center’s efforts were top-heavy and not productive. Because she didn’t have enough to do, she looked for other outlets like doing prenatal diagnosis. She again explained how her appointment worked, in both pediatrics and genetics. She talked about the trauma of having her license questioned, going to a hearing, being questioned about doing abortions, and being required to take the boards again. She failed the first time, her colleagues wrote the board saying it was a waste of time, and she took a course on passing the boards, though it was useless.

01:28:05	[no question] Laxova talked about starting the genetics counseling training program, and talked about the diversity of sources of funding through grants for genetic counselors. She discussed the growth of genetics counseling, working in prenatal and general clinics, to at one time 35 staff. Follow up: How was the Waisman Center doing in the 1990s? Answer: She noted that the first person to be financially independent was John Wolf, who worked on metabolic disorders. This was the beginning of genetics being profitable.

01:35:15	[no question] Laxova talked about the growth of the Waisman Center, where research is being conducted into stem cells, MRIs, and brain function. She talked again about the three directors of the Waisman Center, specifically Marcia Seltzer, the current director, who she thought ran it well; and discussed the board of the Center, many of whom are very good at raising money.

01:39:17	Question: Talk about your views on money and science. Answer: Laxova noted that when she began scientists weren’t making money, but rather applying for enough to pursue their research. Follow up: Is recruiting big money bad for science? Answer: Laxova didn’t feel qualified to answer the question, but noted that some scientific equipment needed to research were enormously expensive. She remarked on the motivation of some scientists being different from the past, and talked about her support of James Thomson’s research in stem cells. She commented on the selflessness of Crow and talked about his last slide in his presentations.

01:45:27	Question: Were you discriminated as a woman scientist? Answer: She didn’t feel discriminated, but thought that her background caused this—first under the Communists, then as a refugee. She recalled dismissing getting involved in women’s groups on campus; and thought this was wrong. She retold the story of being informed how poorly paid she was. She didn’t care because she was used to the Communist system and the British system.

01:51:04	Follow up: You brought this mentality with you? Answer: Yes, and she didn’t have time to get involved in these kinds of groups. Follow up: Do you think there continues to be problems for women scientists? Answer: She thought that overt discrimination was gone, but didn’t know if problems still exist. She talked about her daughters’ careers, one in pediatric cardiology and the other with cystic fibrosis. Question: Reflect on the circumstances over which you’ve triumphed. Answer: She thought that her challenges have made her richer, and she felt good about who she was, though she thought she should do more. 

01:57:36	End of Third Interview Session

End of Second Interview

End of Oral History #669