Nepotism is rarely a victimless act because it devalues the worth of qualified individuals. My first exposure to nepotism was when I joined the Williams lab at Georgia Tech in the Biochemistry department. I joined the lab because the PI Loren Williams was a brilliant biophysicist who worked on chemical evolution and origins of life. Loren was the department’s cinematic ideal—outgoing, talkative, and possessing the sort of effortless charisma that made the complicated business of chemical evolution feel like a casual conversation at a cocktail party. Loren said he had a project available translating biopolymers using noncanonical amino acids. When I joined the lab, I met with Brooke Rothschild-Mancinelli, who was in her final year of her PhD. She would be my mentor to help me get started with the project. Everything seemed great from the initial time period, but then I started to see the cracks as time went on.
The first meeting I had with both Loren and Brooke was a surreal experience. I sat in the meeting, hoping to hear Loren’s insights on noncanonical amino acid thermodynamics, only to sit through a long conversation between the two about Brooke’s mother, world renowned NASA astrobiologist Lynn Rothschild. It was the strangest experience where I felt like I was sitting in a family reunion between distant relatives. It was anything but scientific. At the end of the meeting, Loren asked me how was everything. I politely said, “Brooke is amazing!,” to warm my way into the lab. Loren’s reply surprised me. He burst out, “That’s what her mom always says!” I knew in that instant that I was witness to prestige by proxy. The nepotism that everyone always talks about in academia, but never sees firsthand. Apparently, Lynn had introduced Brooke to Loren at a conference, which led to her applying to Georgia Tech and joining the lab. Brooke was passionate about science, but for somebody with such a long scientific background, it stood out that she never published anything.
After joining the lab, it quickly became apparent that Brooke operated by a different set of rules from others in the lab. Her project was more synthetic biology similar to her mother’s work, while Loren’s expertise was physical chemistry. Every meeting I attended between the two was another long drawn out conversation between both of them about her mother, while I just sat there listening. The first time was pleasant, but then it just became uncomfortable. Brooke acted like she was this great scientist, but it became apparent to me very early on that her biggest asset was her mother.
When Brooke finally published her work, it was not accepted by a peer review journal. She didn’t seem to care because she had already secured a postdoc in the Angela Belcher lab at MIT. That was a huge red flag because in science you’re judged by your output of peer reviewed scientific journal articles. Elite institutions are designed to look like meritocracies while they can also operate like social clubs. Her publication record is public and can be seen on ResearchGate or Google Scholar. A major concern is that postdocs are the pathway to secure academic positions. Every scientist dreams of working at MIT, but Brooke’s seat was already guaranteed before she published a paper. In a field where a publication record is the only valid currency, Brooke’s acceptance into the Belcher lab suggested a more subjective hiring process. While Brooke might have had the qualifications to study at Georgia Tech, she was not competitive for MIT. Most successful MIT applicants have a number of first author publications in major scientific journals. It’s one of the most competitive technical programs in the country.
Brooke submitted her paper to a major journal, but it wasn’t accepted. Any other PhD student would have submitted to a lower tier journal, but she appeared insulated from the usual anxieties of the publication cycle. Brooke had already secured her placement at MIT in the world famous Belcher lab. What stands out for me was that she wasn’t shy about the fact she was going to MIT without a publication. There was a quiet, unearned confidence in the way she discussed her move to the Belcher lab. In all fairness, she knew a lot about science and techniques but never had a first author peer reviewed publication. It was the academic equivalent of an undrafted benchwarmer being handed a starting jersey for the Celtics, simply because their father’s number hangs in the rafters. After joining the Belcher lab at MIT, Brooke was published as a coauthor in a paper authored by her mother Lynn. The fact that she was published alongside her mother after getting hired underscores the pervasive nepotism. As of April 2026, Brooke has still not published a first author peer reviewed scientific article in a major journal, according to ResearchGate.
This story is important because it details pervasive nepotism in science at some of the most important scientific institutions in the world. A lot of more qualified scientists with many first author journal publications lost out for the postdoc position at MIT. While it’s Angela’s lab, the money that funds the lab is public and there are a finite number of postdoc positions in the country. It raises a grimmer question of institutional integrity: whether millions in NASA grants flowing into these labs were influenced by personal relationships. The question is whether Lynn at NASA had any impact on Loren’s funding and if hiring her daughter played a part. It erodes trust in the industry and creates a toxic work environment whereby legacy students have special privileges. These are all important questions that need to be explored in order to create new regulations that address nepotism in science. We are told that science is the pursuit of objective truth, but in times like these, the only truth that seems to matter is who you know at NASA.