September 27, 2023 • 34 mins
We're thrilled to welcome Kathryn van Diemen, a data aficionado turned genetic counsellor, who shares her captivating journey and current role at TrackGene. From discovering her love for data and genetics to exploring rugby fields and engaging in playful tussles with her Cockerspaniel, Pepper, Kathryn lets us in on the world behind the white coat! Tune in as we discuss the seismic shifts in genetic counselling education, with much more comprehensive courses now available compared to our and Kathryn's student days. You'll hear all about the significant contributions of Alison McEwan in introducing the data management aspect to UTS students, and the human elements in effecting new program implementations. Ever wondered why we tend to place the man on the left when designing family trees? We're discussing it all, referencing a paper by Jehannine Austin that challenges such conventions and patriarchy's implications in understanding gender. Lastly, Kathryn offers insights into TrackGene's software evolution, responding to a society that's forever changing. Discover how genetic counsellors' patient-centered approach has become a key driving force for these software changes, from redefining fields to creating relationships among gender-diverse members. So, block out the noise, plug in your earbuds, and get ready for an enlightening conversation. You'll walk away with a fresh perspective on the intertwining worlds of data and genetics. So, are you ready to be inspired? https://www.linkedin.com/in/kathryn-van-diemen-80b48313/
Demystifying Genetics is sponsored by TrakGene https://www.trakgene.com/
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Matt Burgess (00:06):
Hi and welcome to the De Fine Genetics.
I'm your host, matt Burgess,and on today's show I have
Catherine Van Demon.
Catherine and I work togetherat Trackgene.
At Trackgene, Kathryn is theChief Operating Officer,
clinical Data Specialist andSupport and Training Lead, and I
hope over the next half an houror so we can have a good chat
(00:31):
about our software and othergenetic counselling related
things.
Okay, hello, Kathryn, andwelcome to the podcast.
Kathryn van Diemen (00:42):
Thank you very much, matt.
It's a pleasure to be here.
How's it going?
Very good.
We're in Adelaide, where therain has just started.
We did have a taste ofspringtime, but it looks like
we're still having a little bitof winter here.
So yeah, but looking forward tothe summer ahead.
Matt Burgess (01:00):
Oh good, now the listeners can't see, but you've
got a beautiful background onZoom.
Now, is that a winery in thatplace?
It is a winery.
Kathryn van Diemen (01:11):
It is a winery.
It actually belongs to mycousin.
So this is I'll do a littleplug Anderson Hill in Lenswood.
But I live in the inner northin Adelaide, but I'm very
privileged to have the BarossaValley half an hour from my home
, also at the Adelaide Hillswine region is also half an hour
(01:32):
away.
So we live in a beautifullittle part of Adelaide and
Anderson Hill is one of myfavourite places to go.
As you can see from my picturefor the listeners, the view over
the Adelaide Hills isspectacular and lovely
atmosphere, so it's one of myvery favourite places to be.
Matt Burgess (01:54):
Oh beautiful.
I can't wait to come and visit,Like I'm sure we'll get lots of
track gene work done, but theremay be a few glasses slash
bottles of wine that will beopened.
Kathryn van Diemen (02:07):
Well, we may just have to pick a fun venue
for doing our track gene work.
Matt Burgess (02:15):
Excellent.
Now, as I've just suggested, wework together at Track Gene and
when I first started, you werevery kind and friendly and we
had a chat and we caught up andwe sort of spoke about different
things, and I remember you saidthat you identified as a data
nerd and I loved it.
(02:38):
I thought it was hilarious andI just was wondering if you can
tell me more about that.
Kathryn van Diemen (02:44):
Yeah, it's something that I've had to deal
with along the way.
So I started out doing agraduate diploma in genetic
counselling.
So I certainly have thatpassion as well.
But as I've worked as a data, Istarted out as a data entry
person and then became a datamanager and then since working
(03:08):
for Track Gene for a really longtime now and just realised that
the data side of things waswhere my real skill set lay and
just also where it's another oneof my passions as well as
genetics.
So I just love seeing how thedata can hang together.
Getting when you hear people andour users and our client base
(03:32):
ask questions about this is whatI want to be able to get out of
Track Gene.
I'm like, oh, I'm sure that wecan get that and put together
that search and also, I guess,separate from Track Gene.
In my other life I'm involvedheavily in a rugby club, so
that's life outside of TrackGene for me.
But I even do the data side ofthings for the rugby club,
(03:55):
keeping stats and doing how manygames the kids have played and
all of those sorts of things.
So the data side of things.
It rings very true to me, Ithink, and it may be why I never
practised as a geneticcounsellor, because I just love
you.
Know you can always get to thebottom of it with the data and
(04:17):
it's you can explain it.
Everything has a reason, whichmay be why the data was easier
for me than people.
But, yes, certainly we like thepeople side of things as well.
Matt Burgess (04:30):
It's funny because I think when I started in
genetics, like I thought that itwas going to be very black and
white.
You know genetics as a scienceand you know it's black and
white.
There are answers.
You just look things up and youknow the more that I've been
working in genetics, like that'sjust not true.
Like there is gray everywhere.
There's a lot Absolutely.
Kathryn van Diemen (04:51):
Absolutely yeah.
So it's nice to have that blendof, yeah, the genetics and the
data, and I've certainly foundmy niche in the world, I think,
and this is where I want to befor sure.
Matt Burgess (05:04):
Oh good.
And so at the start, like howdid you get into genetic
counselling?
Was that something that yousort of had always thought about
when you were at high school,or was it something that you got
into after you know, like yourundergrad, or yes.
Kathryn van Diemen (05:19):
So at high school I did biology was my
favourite subject and you know,when we had to do a genetics
project, that was certainlyfascinating to me and I loved it
.
So when I went to university Idid a general Bachelor of
Science and majored in genetics,and it was one of those things
that in high school they gaveyou.
You know, they were just tryingto say which screen do you want
(05:42):
to go down?
And it literally said if you doa major in genetics, these are
the things that you might beable to do, and so it also had
you know, laboratory staff anddifferent things that at least a
genetic counselling on that, onthat flyer.
And I had never heard ofgenetic counselling and I'm like
, oh, that sounds interestingthough, and then obviously did a
(06:02):
bunch of research and you knowhow do I study that, what is
this?
And just thought it wasabsolutely fascinating and
perfect for what I wanted to do.
So I have often wondered whatwould have happened if that
flyer didn't say you knowgenetic counselling on that list
which we're talking, you know,a good 25 years ago now.
(06:22):
So it wasn't something that wasthat well known.
So if it hadn't been on thatlist, I don't know where I'd be
today, but yeah, very gratefulthat it was so.
After my undergrad I went on todo the graduate diploma in
genetic counseling.
Oh, wow.
Matt Burgess (06:41):
That sounds like you know the career advisors at
school.
You know they had those listsand like a lot of it.
For me it was kind ofirrelevant or like it was just
not interesting, but it soundslike it really worked.
That's really cool.
Kathryn van Diemen (06:57):
It did, it did.
No, we're very lucky.
Matt Burgess (07:01):
And then so when you were in your genetic
counseling course, like did youkind of think that you would go
into clinical work?
Or had your sort of love ofdata already sort of started
back then, or no, I didn'trealise the data back then.
Kathryn van Diemen (07:18):
It was certainly always my plan to
become a genetic counsellor andso, yeah, that was my initial
job was on.
My first job, I guess once Igraduated, was a data entry
officer in the familial cancerunit in Adelaide.
So, yeah, the classic trying toget a job in the industry just
(07:41):
to start at the bottom and getthat experience.
And that pretty quickly becamethe data manager after that and
I, certainly while I was workingas a data manager, applied for
a few jobs in geneticcounselling but, yeah, wasn't
successful and I think it wasone of the the boss of the
(08:04):
familial cancer unit at the time.
Their philosophy was more wecould teach new staff the
genetics.
The genetic side was really easyto teach, but the counselling
side they wanted people morefrom that background.
So at that time, certainly inSouth Australia, the jobs were
going to former nurses, formersocial workers who had that
(08:27):
interaction with people you knowthat richness of the
counselling background.
And then you know we wouldteach them the genetics, whereas
I came very much from thescience background and was
trying to learn the people sideof things and so wasn't
successful in getting thosegenetic counselling jobs but was
, you know, happy doing what Iwas doing with the data
(08:50):
management.
That was still, you know, avery rich role for me and it was
probably around that time thatI did start doing the extra work
.
So what was Kintrack at the time?
And now you know, we've evolvedinto Tractgene but, yeah,
started doing some extra workwith them and I got to travel
(09:11):
and I was training people inusing the program and so, yeah,
that's probably where the dataside started coming in, where,
you know, I was doing a job thatI loved in the data management.
I was also getting to kind oftravel the world and teach
people how to do this and, yeah,things kind of evolved from
(09:32):
there.
Matt Burgess (09:33):
Wow, it is interesting because we sort of I
think roughly the same age andsort of did genetic counselling,
sort of the same era, and backthen it just was so hard to get
a job Like I remember thinking Iwould take any job anywhere
just to get my job 100%.
(09:54):
Like it was something likeAustralia was producing, like I
don't know, 30 or 40 geneticcounsellors a year and it
definitely were not 30 or 40 newgenetic counselling jobs a year
.
Kathryn van Diemen (10:07):
There was one or two, I think.
Yeah, I do remember those,certainly do remember those
times, but that's been.
One of the wonderful things isto see the evolution of the
industry as well.
And now in there, we startedhaving training, genetic
counselling positions, and bythe time they started popping up
, I was well entrenched in whatI was doing.
(10:29):
So, yeah, didn't want to comeback, but it's been, yeah,
fantastic to see that.
Yeah, though, there are thosetraining positions.
So, you know, for someonefollowing my path, coming from
that science background andthings, now is, I'm hoping that
it's much easier and there's,yeah, certainly a whole lot more
(10:49):
opportunities, which isfantastic.
Matt Burgess (10:51):
Yeah, I mean, maybe it's not as relevant now
because I think that you knowthe tide has changed, like there
are definitely more jobs outthere for genetic counsellors.
It's kind of like we don't haveenough genetic counsellors for
the workforce.
But you know, one of theworries I think in doing genetic
(11:12):
counselling at university isthat you know it's such a niche
field and it's so kind ofspecific.
But do you think or like how,because you're not working as a
genetic counsellor now, how didyour course that you did your
(11:34):
you know, your graduate diplomaof genetic counselling lead you
into or like, equip you with theskills that you needed for your
current role?
Kathryn van Diemen (11:44):
I think, yeah, it certainly.
I mean I've got to where I am,so I guess it's certainly given
me some of those skills.
I like to think that a lot ofwhat I do in my Trak gene role
is the change management side ofthings and setting people up to
(12:08):
change their day to daypractices and things.
So certainly the counsellingand those skills that I earned I
don't think they're going towaste by any means.
It's one of the things my mumhas often said that she goes oh,
catherine, you wasted yourgraduate diploma.
Matt Burgess (12:27):
You've never worked.
Kathryn van Diemen (12:28):
I know I've never worked as a genetic
counsellor, but then I'm like no, no, mum, I use those skills
every day, so I guess there'scertainly a counselling element
to the role that I do now.
So, yeah, my graduate diplomadid set me up for that.
I'm not sure that, for me, mycourse set me up for obviously I
(12:53):
never was able to get a job asa genetic counsellor, but that's
again been great to see.
The evolution of the coursesthat are available now is, I
think, that they are much betterthan the standard that they
were when we were doing it, orcertainly from my perspective,
and yeah it's.
(13:13):
I think the students are comingout these days a whole lot
better equipped to go straightinto genetic counselling roles,
which is fantastic, and the workthat Alison McEwan and various
others have been doing isfantastic.
Matt Burgess (13:29):
So, yeah, it's been great to see that, yes, I
had Alison as a guest on aprevious episode, so fantastic.
Kathryn van Diemen (13:42):
Yes, absolutely.
We've been lucky to actuallywork with Alison from a track
gene perspective as well, wherewe give the our UTS students a
little intro into the data sideof things as well, just as one
of the things they do duringO-Wake just to prep them.
This is one of the things thatyou need to be aware of.
Yeah, in genetic counselling isthe data management and that
(14:07):
side of things for geneticcounsellors.
So, yeah, that's been reallygreat to be involved in that way
.
Matt Burgess (14:15):
I think you're right.
Like you know, like I, like youdid a one year or it was a full
time graduate diploma and nowthe course has sort of evolved
to a two years masters and thestudents that are coming out are
very well trained and you knowlike they're way better than
what we were.
(14:37):
It's kind of funny, because youknow genetics has evolved at the
same time, though, and it'slike we can't fit everything
into the course, like you can'tcome out knowing, and I mean I
guess maybe that's likeeverything, like you can't sort
of know everything, buthopefully it kind of sets you up
so then you can sort of takethat knowledge forward.
(14:59):
But you mentioned changemanagement, and you know it's
kind of like this buzzword orthis term that I've heard people
talk about, like I think I knowwhat it means, but like from
your point of view, like what doyou mean by it?
Or like what did you mean whenyou said it?
Like can you tell me a bitabout that?
Kathryn van Diemen (15:21):
Yeah, for my role.
What we do is, you know, whennew sites take on trap gene, my
job is to obviously come in seewhat they're using in, initially
for data management, and then,you know, take them from using a
system and that usually they'revery comfortable with, they've
(15:41):
been using for a while, and thenchange that and get them to
start start using track gene.
And that's really hard, it'schanges hard and I often have to
remind myself.
You know, when you knowMicrosoft Word do an update and
you know they change a fewthings and you don't click in
(16:02):
the same place for doing whatyou've been doing for the last
10 years.
It's really hard and it'sreally annoying and it's
frustrating.
And so I have that experienceas an end user of other programs
.
When things change, and you knowyou have to remind yourself of
that that even I go in and I'mpresenting them with what I
(16:23):
think is obviously a wonderfulprogram because that's my job,
but it's still it's verydifferent for them and it's hard
.
And so you know you're coachingpeople through that change and
just encouraging them to seethings in a different light.
And what if we try it this wayand all of that side.
(16:43):
So yeah, it is, you know,managing people through what can
be a massive change when youknow they might have a big
history of doing things aparticular way and you're asking
them to change that.
It can be, yeah, it can bereally tricky, but yeah, that's
also the rewarding side ofthings is, you know when you
leave, when we used to dotraining on site that's
(17:07):
obviously changed a little bitin the last few years but you
know when you used to leave asite and everyone's going, oh
yeah, this is great, and youknow you've got them to that
point where they can, you know,see the bigger picture on what
we've tried to achieve for them.
So you know we do love thatside as well.
Matt Burgess (17:24):
Well, I'm a bit embarrassed to say this, but I
didn't really think about thehuman side.
I mean, how you just explained,it makes perfect sense and you
know, I think that we all have,you know, get stuck in
convention and you know it maynot even be the best way to do
something, but we just do itbecause that's how it's always
been done and change can be hard.
(17:47):
But, um, I guess that's reallycool to actually acknowledge
that it can be difficult to makethose changes and to sort of
help people through.
I mean, you know Tractine issuch a great product, but yeah,
that's interesting that I guessit doesn't really matter if it
is a good product.
Like, people can still findthat change hard.
Kathryn van Diemen (18:11):
Definitely Okay.
Matt Burgess (18:14):
You know, recently living in the United States,
the jobs that I've had have beenin industry and I've worked for
large genetic testing companiesand one of the things that
really shocked me was howantiquated their IT kind of
(18:34):
computer stuff is.
Like I know one company,superficially, their test
reports I think look great, likeyou know, the font is good, I
think it's well set out, youknow, the colors are good, like
I think that they've had youknow the graphic designers
design it.
But little did I know likebehind the scenes they are using
(18:59):
like access databases from the90s and it kind of is just
pulling all of this datatogether.
Yeah, I just was reallysurprised that you know, because
in genetics like we have suchgood computer power for things
like actually doing the genetictest, like doing a whole exome
(19:21):
sequence in a whole genomesequence in like the computer
power involved with that side ofthings is amazing.
But then on the other side,like the computer power to
manage our data, it's likedecades old, like it's been
really funny.
Kathryn van Diemen (19:36):
Yeah, it certainly can be the case.
Yeah, when we do go into newsites and we look at what
they've been using historically,and, yeah, sometimes it is
quite shocking and you knowthere are still people trying to
manage things on Excelspreadsheets and things.
So, yeah, this there's justbeen that lack of investment in,
(19:58):
yeah, in the software side ofthings.
It's just like, oh well, peoplewill make do.
But you know, that's one of thethings that we've tried to
achieve with TrackGene is, youknow, just to reduce people's
time that they actually spend ondata entry and those sorts of
things.
So, yeah, it's something thatwe look at.
But yeah, it is reallyinteresting to see what's out
(20:21):
there already.
And yeah, sadly, I'm notsurprised to hear of your
experience of, you know, some ofthe older systems that people
are still using and still theyhave to make it work because
there's been no budget allocatedto improve that.
Matt Burgess (20:38):
So yeah, yeah, yeah yeah, I don't know, Maybe
it happens in other industriesas well, but it was kind of
interesting to see it from theother side.
Now a big part of the softwareis actually being able to draw a
family tree.
How have family trees changedover the time?
(21:00):
Like have you seen?
I mean because, obviously, like, the ability to draw a family
tree hasn't changed, but likehave the way that we have been
doing it, has that changed?
Like, have you seen?
Like an evolution?
Kathryn van Diemen (21:15):
Probably not so much until very recently,
but certainly over the last, youknow, 15 years or so the way
that we've done it from from asoftware perspective and what's
happening in the background.
We've tried to make that sideof things better.
But in terms of what youactually see once you produce a
(21:39):
pedigree, that side of thingsprobably hasn't changed all that
much over the last 15 years.
The way that the pedigree needsto hang together has been
fairly similar.
That obviously changed quiterecently with the new Bennett
paper coming out last year.
So yeah, we are in a period ofbig change now but certainly
(22:05):
prior to that things had beenpretty stable on that front.
Matt Burgess (22:11):
Yeah, yeah, I know sort of talking about
convention and getting stuck inour ways, like I think I learnt
to draw a family tree way backwhen and I've been doing it the
same way for two decades now andit's funny.
It's like I like to think I'mlike this cool sort of laid back
guy that yeah, yeah, go withthe flow, but like one of my
(22:35):
rules that I like to, it's likeoh, I like to have rules, I like
to follow them, and when I'mdrawing a family tree, like one
of my rules is that I just putthe man on the left and you know
, you put the man on the left,you put the wife, his wife on
the right, and that's just howI've drawn them.
But I guess my other rule thatkind of overrides that is, if
(22:59):
it's neater to put it the otherway, like if there are like kind
of step children or otherrelationships, I will swap it
around then, but only then.
And like there's nothing,because I know that there was,
because I will talk to you aboutthe recent Bennett paper.
But there's another paper and Ihaven't, I think I've only read
the abstract, but it wasinteresting because I think
(23:21):
Janine Austin was a co-authorand they're actually talking
about, I think, maybe thepatriarchy or like putting the
man on the left and what thatmeans, and it's like, oh God,
like I don't.
From my point of view, it's notpolitical, like I think it's
just, that was my rule.
Kathryn van Diemen (23:40):
Just the way that we were taught.
Yeah, I think now I want to goback to the old genetic
counseling books and check it,because I'm sure that we were
taught that way about it.
It's not just something thatwas a particular thing for you,
I'm sure it was.
That was the convention, wasyeah, man on the left and all
that's fascinating that there'syeah, now there's a bit of
(24:02):
history behind that.
Matt Burgess (24:04):
So yeah, I mean, yeah, there is an article, and I
was like, oh, I need to putthat on my reading list.
And it's like, oh God, I'm withall of the other things in our
life.
I haven't quite got to that yet, but yeah, so, getting back to,
or let's discuss the recentBennett paper, and I'll put a
link to this in the show notes.
(24:25):
But you know, I think in themore recent time, the
conversation around you know,transgendered people has
increased in our sort of, youknow, just in general life.
Transgender is around us andpeople talk about it and you
(24:50):
know it is in the news and it'sin the media.
And I mean it's kind of hardbecause I don't want to get
super political, but you know, Ifeel like as we get older, or
as I get older and time goes on,you know there is kind of this
kind of woke up component, butit's like something that I
(25:14):
haven't really like.
It's like, oh, I don't want tothink about it, I don't want to
get into it.
But when you draw a family tree, it's something that you need
to kind of understand and,without thinking too much about
it or thinking superficially, Ikind of thought when I was
drawing a family tree I wasdrawing sex and it wasn't until
(25:41):
I actually really thought aboutit.
It's like no, we don't writesex on the pedigree, it's gender
, like yeah, and for that it waslike a bit of an insightful
thing.
Like how has track gene sort ofcoped with being able to show
transgendered people on apedigree?
(26:02):
Like was there software changesthat need to happen or what was
that process like?
Kathryn van Diemen (26:09):
Yeah, there certainly have been software
changes that had to happen withthat.
That's been a big part of ourdevelopment over probably over
the last 12 months actually, andwe're just about to release the
version that will include that.
So what we had in TrackGene,which was the same as probably
most, not just pedigree drawingsystems but other general
(26:34):
medical and patient managementsystems throughout the world,
and there was a single field,and it was interesting because
we have the ability to relabelour fields and so different
sites would actually call it sexand different sites would call
it gender.
So it was interesting that evenwhen we still had the one field
, that different people wouldpotentially interpret that in
(26:57):
different ways, which justhighlighted the need that we did
have for change.
And so with our new softwarewe've separately separated out
those fields so that now we dohave a field for gender and a
field for sex at sign at birth,so we give it the full title,
just to ease any ambiguityaround that, excuse me.
(27:21):
And again with separate fields,also then for gender identity,
which can be different again,and then also allowing for
pronouns.
And so with TrackGene, becausethe gender or the sex is so
ingrained with the pedigreesymbol, it wasn't as simple as
just being able to add extravalues to that list and away we
(27:43):
go, it just.
Yeah, it wasn't that simple,and so that's why we would
receive that the question overthe last few years from our
existing users, from ourpotential new users, when we're
doing demonstrations and things,they go why haven't you put
extra fields in gender?
Or why haven't you put extravalues in the gender field?
(28:05):
And like, well, we can't,because we don't know how that
works with the symbols, likeit's just so ingrained in the
background.
So it's been great to be ableto change that now so that we
have got those inclusive valuesin the gender list and how that
sits with sex assigned at birth.
And, yeah, we've been able tobring that all together with the
(28:28):
new pedigree drawing.
But then, yeah, it's the changesthat also came with that, which
is, you know, how do you then?
So, yes, we can represent thosedifferent genders, which is
fantastic, but then being ableto create relationships to those
people.
So what we've always had is,just, when you add a spouse,
it's always automatically theopposite sex, and that's been
(28:51):
something that you do reallyeasily and it's like, well,
that's not always the case.
So now, yeah, having theability to yes, if someone wants
a spouse, you can, yeah, pickany gender for that person, for
the spouse.
So, and also trying to balancewhat was one click to add a
(29:11):
spouse because you didn't haveto think about it, but then
obviously it's extra clicks ifwe have to then select which
gender for that spouse.
So we do try and balance theease of doing the data entry and
building that pedigree withthat, then having the
flexibility to represent thereal relationships that are out
(29:33):
there, that aren't just, yeah,man on the left and woman on the
right.
So, yeah, it's been interesting.
Matt Burgess (29:41):
I think that it's fascinating because you know, as
a genetic counselor, we drawfamily trees and I think the
main aim I think this isprobably correct in saying is to
just see what's going on in thefamily from a genetics point of
view.
However, looking at a familytree, it tells so much more than
(30:04):
that and even though we kind ofsay we're not as interested in
familial relations, being ableto accurately represent what's
going on in the family in aninclusive way is really powerful
.
And you know, like for a lot ofconditions it doesn't really
matter what your sex is, butthen for some conditions that it
(30:28):
is really really reallyimportant.
And it's like you know we'renot just asking for fun or
because we're being nosy, butlike it's good to get accurate
information and then it's goodto be able to record that.
So I like that Trackdream kindof has that functionality.
Kathryn van Diemen (30:48):
Yeah, it's been.
It's, but the genetic counselorsis basically, you know, who's
driven this process.
So it's been interesting thatit's not been something you know
when you know we we apply for,you know new tenders and things,
it's certainly not arequirement that's set out by
any IT departments or you knowanything like that that we've
(31:08):
seen so far.
So it's very much been thegenetic counselors that have
driven this process, becausethey want to be able to
represent the people thatthey're seeing, and so, you know
, they want to be able to put apedigree in front of their
client to say, you know, this iswhat's going on in your family,
and so if they can't representthat accurately or if they're,
(31:31):
you know, having to hand, drawyou know different things onto
the pedigree, you know that'sjust not sufficient for them.
And so, yeah, it's very muchbeen.
You know the the want to dothat for their clients, which
has has driven this, which Ithink is a, you know, fantastic
thing for the genetic counselorsthat you know.
That is what's driving thiscare of, of care of their
(31:52):
patient and their client, andwhy I love working with this
community.
So, yeah, it's been great.
Matt Burgess (31:59):
We are patient centred.
It is good.
Yes, now our time together isnearly over, unfortunately.
I've had a really fun timechatting with you, but one last
question.
I know that you recently movedhouse.
How's your doggy going in hisnew environment?
Kathryn van Diemen (32:21):
She's loving it.
So sorry, my girl dog, I think,yes, pepper is absolutely
loving it.
So we've gone from a littletownhouse with almost no
backyard to now being, yeah, ina house which has a very big
backyard, and so pepper is mylittle cocker spaniel, who's now
two, and so, yeah, with my newhouse it was a long building
(32:44):
process over two and a halfyears.
So my dog is now two and we gother to move into the new house
and so, sadly for her, she's hadto live in the townhouse
environment for much longer thanwe expected, but she's
certainly blossomed in her newbig backyard and, yeah,
absolutely loving it.
(33:05):
So, yeah, she's done very well.
Matt Burgess (33:08):
Good little pepper .
I'm sure there's lots of goodsmells out there for her.
Kathryn van Diemen (33:12):
Yeah, definitely.
Matt Burgess (33:14):
And my banjo is a quarter cocker spaniel, so I
wonder if they'll get to meetsometime soon.
Kathryn van Diemen (33:22):
That would be amazing.
Pepper is wonderful with otherdogs, so yeah, automatic best
friends.
Matt Burgess (33:28):
Lovely Well.
Thank you so much and I'll Ithink I'll let you go.
Kathryn van Diemen (33:36):
No, that's wonderful.
Thanks, hates Matt.
Matt Burgess (33:39):
Okay, I'll talk to you soon, thanks, bye.
Thank you Bye.
So thank you everybody forlistening.
That was the Mr Fine geneticsand I'd like to say a big thank
you to Catherine for being mylovely guest on today's episode.
I'd also like to say thank youto Trackgene for sponsoring the
(34:02):
Mr Fine genetics and I hope thatyou listen into other episodes
in the future.
Hi and welcome to the De Fine Genetics.
I'm your host, matt Burgess,and on today's show I have
Catherine Van Demon.
Catherine and I work togetherat Trackgene.
At Trackgene, Kathryn is theChief Operating Officer,
clinical Data Specialist andSupport and Training Lead, and I
hope over the next half an houror so we can have a good chat
(00:31):
about our software and othergenetic counselling related
things.
Okay, hello, Kathryn, andwelcome to the podcast.
Kathryn van Diemen (00:42):
Thank you very much, matt.
It's a pleasure to be here.
How's it going?
Very good.
We're in Adelaide, where therain has just started.
We did have a taste ofspringtime, but it looks like
we're still having a little bitof winter here.
So yeah, but looking forward tothe summer ahead.
Matt Burgess (01:00):
Oh good, now the listeners can't see, but you've
got a beautiful background onZoom.
Now, is that a winery in thatplace?
It is a winery.
Kathryn van Diemen (01:11):
It is a winery.
It actually belongs to mycousin.
So this is I'll do a littleplug Anderson Hill in Lenswood.
But I live in the inner northin Adelaide, but I'm very
privileged to have the BarossaValley half an hour from my home
, also at the Adelaide Hillswine region is also half an hour
(01:32):
away.
So we live in a beautifullittle part of Adelaide and
Anderson Hill is one of myfavourite places to go.
As you can see from my picturefor the listeners, the view over
the Adelaide Hills isspectacular and lovely
atmosphere, so it's one of myvery favourite places to be.
Matt Burgess (01:54):
Oh beautiful.
I can't wait to come and visit,Like I'm sure we'll get lots of
track gene work done, but theremay be a few glasses slash
bottles of wine that will beopened.
Kathryn van Diemen (02:07):
Well, we may just have to pick a fun venue
for doing our track gene work.
Matt Burgess (02:15):
Excellent.
Now, as I've just suggested, wework together at Track Gene and
when I first started, you werevery kind and friendly and we
had a chat and we caught up andwe sort of spoke about different
things, and I remember you saidthat you identified as a data
nerd and I loved it.
(02:38):
I thought it was hilarious andI just was wondering if you can
tell me more about that.
Kathryn van Diemen (02:44):
Yeah, it's something that I've had to deal
with along the way.
So I started out doing agraduate diploma in genetic
counselling.
So I certainly have thatpassion as well.
But as I've worked as a data, Istarted out as a data entry
person and then became a datamanager and then since working
(03:08):
for Track Gene for a really longtime now and just realised that
the data side of things waswhere my real skill set lay and
just also where it's another oneof my passions as well as
genetics.
So I just love seeing how thedata can hang together.
Getting when you hear people andour users and our client base
(03:32):
ask questions about this is whatI want to be able to get out of
Track Gene.
I'm like, oh, I'm sure that wecan get that and put together
that search and also, I guess,separate from Track Gene.
In my other life I'm involvedheavily in a rugby club, so
that's life outside of TrackGene for me.
But I even do the data side ofthings for the rugby club,
(03:55):
keeping stats and doing how manygames the kids have played and
all of those sorts of things.
So the data side of things.
It rings very true to me, Ithink, and it may be why I never
practised as a geneticcounsellor, because I just love
you.
Know you can always get to thebottom of it with the data and
(04:17):
it's you can explain it.
Everything has a reason, whichmay be why the data was easier
for me than people.
But, yes, certainly we like thepeople side of things as well.
Matt Burgess (04:30):
It's funny because I think when I started in
genetics, like I thought that itwas going to be very black and
white.
You know genetics as a scienceand you know it's black and
white.
There are answers.
You just look things up and youknow the more that I've been
working in genetics, like that'sjust not true.
Like there is gray everywhere.
There's a lot Absolutely.
Kathryn van Diemen (04:51):
Absolutely yeah.
So it's nice to have that blendof, yeah, the genetics and the
data, and I've certainly foundmy niche in the world, I think,
and this is where I want to befor sure.
Matt Burgess (05:04):
Oh good.
And so at the start, like howdid you get into genetic
counselling?
Was that something that yousort of had always thought about
when you were at high school,or was it something that you got
into after you know, like yourundergrad, or yes.
Kathryn van Diemen (05:19):
So at high school I did biology was my
favourite subject and you know,when we had to do a genetics
project, that was certainlyfascinating to me and I loved it
.
So when I went to university Idid a general Bachelor of
Science and majored in genetics,and it was one of those things
that in high school they gaveyou.
You know, they were just tryingto say which screen do you want
(05:42):
to go down?
And it literally said if you doa major in genetics, these are
the things that you might beable to do, and so it also had
you know, laboratory staff anddifferent things that at least a
genetic counselling on that, onthat flyer.
And I had never heard ofgenetic counselling and I'm like
, oh, that sounds interestingthough, and then obviously did a
(06:02):
bunch of research and you knowhow do I study that, what is
this?
And just thought it wasabsolutely fascinating and
perfect for what I wanted to do.
So I have often wondered whatwould have happened if that
flyer didn't say you knowgenetic counselling on that list
which we're talking, you know,a good 25 years ago now.
(06:22):
So it wasn't something that wasthat well known.
So if it hadn't been on thatlist, I don't know where I'd be
today, but yeah, very gratefulthat it was so.
After my undergrad I went on todo the graduate diploma in
genetic counseling.
Oh, wow.
Matt Burgess (06:41):
That sounds like you know the career advisors at
school.
You know they had those listsand like a lot of it.
For me it was kind ofirrelevant or like it was just
not interesting, but it soundslike it really worked.
That's really cool.
Kathryn van Diemen (06:57):
It did, it did.
No, we're very lucky.
Matt Burgess (07:01):
And then so when you were in your genetic
counseling course, like did youkind of think that you would go
into clinical work?
Or had your sort of love ofdata already sort of started
back then, or no, I didn'trealise the data back then.
Kathryn van Diemen (07:18):
It was certainly always my plan to
become a genetic counsellor andso, yeah, that was my initial
job was on.
My first job, I guess once Igraduated, was a data entry
officer in the familial cancerunit in Adelaide.
So, yeah, the classic trying toget a job in the industry just
(07:41):
to start at the bottom and getthat experience.
And that pretty quickly becamethe data manager after that and
I, certainly while I was workingas a data manager, applied for
a few jobs in geneticcounselling but, yeah, wasn't
successful and I think it wasone of the the boss of the
(08:04):
familial cancer unit at the time.
Their philosophy was more wecould teach new staff the
genetics.
The genetic side was really easyto teach, but the counselling
side they wanted people morefrom that background.
So at that time, certainly inSouth Australia, the jobs were
going to former nurses, formersocial workers who had that
(08:27):
interaction with people you knowthat richness of the
counselling background.
And then you know we wouldteach them the genetics, whereas
I came very much from thescience background and was
trying to learn the people sideof things and so wasn't
successful in getting thosegenetic counselling jobs but was
, you know, happy doing what Iwas doing with the data
(08:50):
management.
That was still, you know, avery rich role for me and it was
probably around that time thatI did start doing the extra work
.
So what was Kintrack at the time?
And now you know, we've evolvedinto Tractgene but, yeah,
started doing some extra workwith them and I got to travel
(09:11):
and I was training people inusing the program and so, yeah,
that's probably where the dataside started coming in, where,
you know, I was doing a job thatI loved in the data management.
I was also getting to kind oftravel the world and teach
people how to do this and, yeah,things kind of evolved from
(09:32):
there.
Matt Burgess (09:33):
Wow, it is interesting because we sort of I
think roughly the same age andsort of did genetic counselling,
sort of the same era, and backthen it just was so hard to get
a job Like I remember thinking Iwould take any job anywhere
just to get my job 100%.
(09:54):
Like it was something likeAustralia was producing, like I
don't know, 30 or 40 geneticcounsellors a year and it
definitely were not 30 or 40 newgenetic counselling jobs a year
.
Kathryn van Diemen (10:07):
There was one or two, I think.
Yeah, I do remember those,certainly do remember those
times, but that's been.
One of the wonderful things isto see the evolution of the
industry as well.
And now in there, we startedhaving training, genetic
counselling positions, and bythe time they started popping up
, I was well entrenched in whatI was doing.
(10:29):
So, yeah, didn't want to comeback, but it's been, yeah,
fantastic to see that.
Yeah, though, there are thosetraining positions.
So, you know, for someonefollowing my path, coming from
that science background andthings, now is, I'm hoping that
it's much easier and there's,yeah, certainly a whole lot more
(10:49):
opportunities, which isfantastic.
Matt Burgess (10:51):
Yeah, I mean, maybe it's not as relevant now
because I think that you knowthe tide has changed, like there
are definitely more jobs outthere for genetic counsellors.
It's kind of like we don't haveenough genetic counsellors for
the workforce.
But you know, one of theworries I think in doing genetic
(11:12):
counselling at university isthat you know it's such a niche
field and it's so kind ofspecific.
But do you think or like how,because you're not working as a
genetic counsellor now, how didyour course that you did your
(11:34):
you know, your graduate diplomaof genetic counselling lead you
into or like, equip you with theskills that you needed for your
current role?
Kathryn van Diemen (11:44):
I think, yeah, it certainly.
I mean I've got to where I am,so I guess it's certainly given
me some of those skills.
I like to think that a lot ofwhat I do in my Trak gene role
is the change management side ofthings and setting people up to
(12:08):
change their day to daypractices and things.
So certainly the counsellingand those skills that I earned I
don't think they're going towaste by any means.
It's one of the things my mumhas often said that she goes oh,
catherine, you wasted yourgraduate diploma.
Matt Burgess (12:27):
You've never worked.
Kathryn van Diemen (12:28):
I know I've never worked as a genetic
counsellor, but then I'm like no, no, mum, I use those skills
every day, so I guess there'scertainly a counselling element
to the role that I do now.
So, yeah, my graduate diplomadid set me up for that.
I'm not sure that, for me, mycourse set me up for obviously I
(12:53):
never was able to get a job asa genetic counsellor, but that's
again been great to see.
The evolution of the coursesthat are available now is, I
think, that they are much betterthan the standard that they
were when we were doing it, orcertainly from my perspective,
and yeah it's.
(13:13):
I think the students are comingout these days a whole lot
better equipped to go straightinto genetic counselling roles,
which is fantastic, and the workthat Alison McEwan and various
others have been doing isfantastic.
Matt Burgess (13:29):
So, yeah, it's been great to see that, yes, I
had Alison as a guest on aprevious episode, so fantastic.
Kathryn van Diemen (13:42):
Yes, absolutely.
We've been lucky to actuallywork with Alison from a track
gene perspective as well, wherewe give the our UTS students a
little intro into the data sideof things as well, just as one
of the things they do duringO-Wake just to prep them.
This is one of the things thatyou need to be aware of.
Yeah, in genetic counselling isthe data management and that
(14:07):
side of things for geneticcounsellors.
So, yeah, that's been reallygreat to be involved in that way
.
Matt Burgess (14:15):
I think you're right.
Like you know, like I, like youdid a one year or it was a full
time graduate diploma and nowthe course has sort of evolved
to a two years masters and thestudents that are coming out are
very well trained and you knowlike they're way better than
what we were.
(14:37):
It's kind of funny, because youknow genetics has evolved at the
same time, though, and it'slike we can't fit everything
into the course, like you can'tcome out knowing, and I mean I
guess maybe that's likeeverything, like you can't sort
of know everything, buthopefully it kind of sets you up
so then you can sort of takethat knowledge forward.
(14:59):
But you mentioned changemanagement, and you know it's
kind of like this buzzword orthis term that I've heard people
talk about, like I think I knowwhat it means, but like from
your point of view, like what doyou mean by it?
Or like what did you mean whenyou said it?
Like can you tell me a bitabout that?
Kathryn van Diemen (15:21):
Yeah, for my role.
What we do is, you know, whennew sites take on trap gene, my
job is to obviously come in seewhat they're using in, initially
for data management, and then,you know, take them from using a
system and that usually they'revery comfortable with, they've
(15:41):
been using for a while, and thenchange that and get them to
start start using track gene.
And that's really hard, it'schanges hard and I often have to
remind myself.
You know, when you knowMicrosoft Word do an update and
you know they change a fewthings and you don't click in
(16:02):
the same place for doing whatyou've been doing for the last
10 years.
It's really hard and it'sreally annoying and it's
frustrating.
And so I have that experienceas an end user of other programs
.
When things change, and you knowyou have to remind yourself of
that that even I go in and I'mpresenting them with what I
(16:23):
think is obviously a wonderfulprogram because that's my job,
but it's still it's verydifferent for them and it's hard
.
And so you know you're coachingpeople through that change and
just encouraging them to seethings in a different light.
And what if we try it this wayand all of that side.
(16:43):
So yeah, it is, you know,managing people through what can
be a massive change when youknow they might have a big
history of doing things aparticular way and you're asking
them to change that.
It can be, yeah, it can bereally tricky, but yeah, that's
also the rewarding side ofthings is, you know when you
leave, when we used to dotraining on site that's
(17:07):
obviously changed a little bitin the last few years but you
know when you used to leave asite and everyone's going, oh
yeah, this is great, and youknow you've got them to that
point where they can, you know,see the bigger picture on what
we've tried to achieve for them.
So you know we do love thatside as well.
Matt Burgess (17:24):
Well, I'm a bit embarrassed to say this, but I
didn't really think about thehuman side.
I mean, how you just explained,it makes perfect sense and you
know, I think that we all have,you know, get stuck in
convention and you know it maynot even be the best way to do
something, but we just do itbecause that's how it's always
been done and change can be hard.
(17:47):
But, um, I guess that's reallycool to actually acknowledge
that it can be difficult to makethose changes and to sort of
help people through.
I mean, you know Tractine issuch a great product, but yeah,
that's interesting that I guessit doesn't really matter if it
is a good product.
Like, people can still findthat change hard.
Kathryn van Diemen (18:11):
Definitely Okay.
Matt Burgess (18:14):
You know, recently living in the United States,
the jobs that I've had have beenin industry and I've worked for
large genetic testing companiesand one of the things that
really shocked me was howantiquated their IT kind of
(18:34):
computer stuff is.
Like I know one company,superficially, their test
reports I think look great, likeyou know, the font is good, I
think it's well set out, youknow, the colors are good, like
I think that they've had youknow the graphic designers
design it.
But little did I know likebehind the scenes they are using
(18:59):
like access databases from the90s and it kind of is just
pulling all of this datatogether.
Yeah, I just was reallysurprised that you know, because
in genetics like we have suchgood computer power for things
like actually doing the genetictest, like doing a whole exome
(19:21):
sequence in a whole genomesequence in like the computer
power involved with that side ofthings is amazing.
But then on the other side,like the computer power to
manage our data, it's likedecades old, like it's been
really funny.
Kathryn van Diemen (19:36):
Yeah, it certainly can be the case.
Yeah, when we do go into newsites and we look at what
they've been using historically,and, yeah, sometimes it is
quite shocking and you knowthere are still people trying to
manage things on Excelspreadsheets and things.
So, yeah, this there's justbeen that lack of investment in,
(19:58):
yeah, in the software side ofthings.
It's just like, oh well, peoplewill make do.
But you know, that's one of thethings that we've tried to
achieve with TrackGene is, youknow, just to reduce people's
time that they actually spend ondata entry and those sorts of
things.
So, yeah, it's something thatwe look at.
But yeah, it is reallyinteresting to see what's out
(20:21):
there already.
And yeah, sadly, I'm notsurprised to hear of your
experience of, you know, some ofthe older systems that people
are still using and still theyhave to make it work because
there's been no budget allocatedto improve that.
Matt Burgess (20:38):
So yeah, yeah, yeah yeah, I don't know, Maybe
it happens in other industriesas well, but it was kind of
interesting to see it from theother side.
Now a big part of the softwareis actually being able to draw a
family tree.
How have family trees changedover the time?
(21:00):
Like have you seen?
I mean because, obviously, like, the ability to draw a family
tree hasn't changed, but likehave the way that we have been
doing it, has that changed?
Like, have you seen?
Like an evolution?
Kathryn van Diemen (21:15):
Probably not so much until very recently,
but certainly over the last, youknow, 15 years or so the way
that we've done it from from asoftware perspective and what's
happening in the background.
We've tried to make that sideof things better.
But in terms of what youactually see once you produce a
(21:39):
pedigree, that side of thingsprobably hasn't changed all that
much over the last 15 years.
The way that the pedigree needsto hang together has been
fairly similar.
That obviously changed quiterecently with the new Bennett
paper coming out last year.
So yeah, we are in a period ofbig change now but certainly
(22:05):
prior to that things had beenpretty stable on that front.
Matt Burgess (22:11):
Yeah, yeah, I know sort of talking about
convention and getting stuck inour ways, like I think I learnt
to draw a family tree way backwhen and I've been doing it the
same way for two decades now andit's funny.
It's like I like to think I'mlike this cool sort of laid back
guy that yeah, yeah, go withthe flow, but like one of my
(22:35):
rules that I like to, it's likeoh, I like to have rules, I like
to follow them, and when I'mdrawing a family tree, like one
of my rules is that I just putthe man on the left and you know
, you put the man on the left,you put the wife, his wife on
the right, and that's just howI've drawn them.
But I guess my other rule thatkind of overrides that is, if
(22:59):
it's neater to put it the otherway, like if there are like kind
of step children or otherrelationships, I will swap it
around then, but only then.
And like there's nothing,because I know that there was,
because I will talk to you aboutthe recent Bennett paper.
But there's another paper and Ihaven't, I think I've only read
the abstract, but it wasinteresting because I think
(23:21):
Janine Austin was a co-authorand they're actually talking
about, I think, maybe thepatriarchy or like putting the
man on the left and what thatmeans, and it's like, oh God,
like I don't.
From my point of view, it's notpolitical, like I think it's
just, that was my rule.
Kathryn van Diemen (23:40):
Just the way that we were taught.
Yeah, I think now I want to goback to the old genetic
counseling books and check it,because I'm sure that we were
taught that way about it.
It's not just something thatwas a particular thing for you,
I'm sure it was.
That was the convention, wasyeah, man on the left and all
that's fascinating that there'syeah, now there's a bit of
(24:02):
history behind that.
Matt Burgess (24:04):
So yeah, I mean, yeah, there is an article, and I
was like, oh, I need to putthat on my reading list.
And it's like, oh God, I'm withall of the other things in our
life.
I haven't quite got to that yet, but yeah, so, getting back to,
or let's discuss the recentBennett paper, and I'll put a
link to this in the show notes.
(24:25):
But you know, I think in themore recent time, the
conversation around you know,transgendered people has
increased in our sort of, youknow, just in general life.
Transgender is around us andpeople talk about it and you
(24:50):
know it is in the news and it'sin the media.
And I mean it's kind of hardbecause I don't want to get
super political, but you know, Ifeel like as we get older, or
as I get older and time goes on,you know there is kind of this
kind of woke up component, butit's like something that I
(25:14):
haven't really like.
It's like, oh, I don't want tothink about it, I don't want to
get into it.
But when you draw a family tree, it's something that you need
to kind of understand and,without thinking too much about
it or thinking superficially, Ikind of thought when I was
drawing a family tree I wasdrawing sex and it wasn't until
(25:41):
I actually really thought aboutit.
It's like no, we don't writesex on the pedigree, it's gender
, like yeah, and for that it waslike a bit of an insightful
thing.
Like how has track gene sort ofcoped with being able to show
transgendered people on apedigree?
(26:02):
Like was there software changesthat need to happen or what was
that process like?
Kathryn van Diemen (26:09):
Yeah, there certainly have been software
changes that had to happen withthat.
That's been a big part of ourdevelopment over probably over
the last 12 months actually, andwe're just about to release the
version that will include that.
So what we had in TrackGene,which was the same as probably
most, not just pedigree drawingsystems but other general
(26:34):
medical and patient managementsystems throughout the world,
and there was a single field,and it was interesting because
we have the ability to relabelour fields and so different
sites would actually call it sexand different sites would call
it gender.
So it was interesting that evenwhen we still had the one field
, that different people wouldpotentially interpret that in
(26:57):
different ways, which justhighlighted the need that we did
have for change.
And so with our new softwarewe've separately separated out
those fields so that now we dohave a field for gender and a
field for sex at sign at birth,so we give it the full title,
just to ease any ambiguityaround that, excuse me.
(27:21):
And again with separate fields,also then for gender identity,
which can be different again,and then also allowing for
pronouns.
And so with TrackGene, becausethe gender or the sex is so
ingrained with the pedigreesymbol, it wasn't as simple as
just being able to add extravalues to that list and away we
(27:43):
go, it just.
Yeah, it wasn't that simple,and so that's why we would
receive that the question overthe last few years from our
existing users, from ourpotential new users, when we're
doing demonstrations and things,they go why haven't you put
extra fields in gender?
Or why haven't you put extravalues in the gender field?
(28:05):
And like, well, we can't,because we don't know how that
works with the symbols, likeit's just so ingrained in the
background.
So it's been great to be ableto change that now so that we
have got those inclusive valuesin the gender list and how that
sits with sex assigned at birth.
And, yeah, we've been able tobring that all together with the
(28:28):
new pedigree drawing.
But then, yeah, it's the changesthat also came with that, which
is, you know, how do you then?
So, yes, we can represent thosedifferent genders, which is
fantastic, but then being ableto create relationships to those
people.
So what we've always had is,just, when you add a spouse,
it's always automatically theopposite sex, and that's been
(28:51):
something that you do reallyeasily and it's like, well,
that's not always the case.
So now, yeah, having theability to yes, if someone wants
a spouse, you can, yeah, pickany gender for that person, for
the spouse.
So, and also trying to balancewhat was one click to add a
(29:11):
spouse because you didn't haveto think about it, but then
obviously it's extra clicks ifwe have to then select which
gender for that spouse.
So we do try and balance theease of doing the data entry and
building that pedigree withthat, then having the
flexibility to represent thereal relationships that are out
(29:33):
there, that aren't just, yeah,man on the left and woman on the
right.
So, yeah, it's been interesting.
Matt Burgess (29:41):
I think that it's fascinating because you know, as
a genetic counselor, we drawfamily trees and I think the
main aim I think this isprobably correct in saying is to
just see what's going on in thefamily from a genetics point of
view.
However, looking at a familytree, it tells so much more than
(30:04):
that and even though we kind ofsay we're not as interested in
familial relations, being ableto accurately represent what's
going on in the family in aninclusive way is really powerful
.
And you know, like for a lot ofconditions it doesn't really
matter what your sex is, butthen for some conditions that it
(30:28):
is really really reallyimportant.
And it's like you know we'renot just asking for fun or
because we're being nosy, butlike it's good to get accurate
information and then it's goodto be able to record that.
So I like that Trackdream kindof has that functionality.
Kathryn van Diemen (30:48):
Yeah, it's been.
It's, but the genetic counselorsis basically, you know, who's
driven this process.
So it's been interesting thatit's not been something you know
when you know we we apply for,you know new tenders and things,
it's certainly not arequirement that's set out by
any IT departments or you knowanything like that that we've
(31:08):
seen so far.
So it's very much been thegenetic counselors that have
driven this process, becausethey want to be able to
represent the people thatthey're seeing, and so, you know
, they want to be able to put apedigree in front of their
client to say, you know, this iswhat's going on in your family,
and so if they can't representthat accurately or if they're,
(31:31):
you know, having to hand, drawyou know different things onto
the pedigree, you know that'sjust not sufficient for them.
And so, yeah, it's very muchbeen.
You know the the want to dothat for their clients, which
has has driven this, which Ithink is a, you know, fantastic
thing for the genetic counselorsthat you know.
That is what's driving thiscare of, of care of their
(31:52):
patient and their client, andwhy I love working with this
community.
So, yeah, it's been great.
Matt Burgess (31:59):
We are patient centred.
It is good.
Yes, now our time together isnearly over, unfortunately.
I've had a really fun timechatting with you, but one last
question.
I know that you recently movedhouse.
How's your doggy going in hisnew environment?
Kathryn van Diemen (32:21):
She's loving it.
So sorry, my girl dog, I think,yes, pepper is absolutely
loving it.
So we've gone from a littletownhouse with almost no
backyard to now being, yeah, ina house which has a very big
backyard, and so pepper is mylittle cocker spaniel, who's now
two, and so, yeah, with my newhouse it was a long building
(32:44):
process over two and a halfyears.
So my dog is now two and we gother to move into the new house
and so, sadly for her, she's hadto live in the townhouse
environment for much longer thanwe expected, but she's
certainly blossomed in her newbig backyard and, yeah,
absolutely loving it.
(33:05):
So, yeah, she's done very well.
Matt Burgess (33:08):
Good little pepper .
I'm sure there's lots of goodsmells out there for her.
Kathryn van Diemen (33:12):
Yeah, definitely.
Matt Burgess (33:14):
And my banjo is a quarter cocker spaniel, so I
wonder if they'll get to meetsometime soon.
Kathryn van Diemen (33:22):
That would be amazing.
Pepper is wonderful with otherdogs, so yeah, automatic best
friends.
Matt Burgess (33:28):
Lovely Well.
Thank you so much and I'll Ithink I'll let you go.
Kathryn van Diemen (33:36):
No, that's wonderful.
Thanks, hates Matt.
Matt Burgess (33:39):
Okay, I'll talk to you soon, thanks, bye.
Thank you Bye.
So thank you everybody forlistening.
That was the Mr Fine geneticsand I'd like to say a big thank
you to Catherine for being mylovely guest on today's episode.
I'd also like to say thank youto Trackgene for sponsoring the
(34:02):
Mr Fine genetics and I hope thatyou listen into other episodes
in the future.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.