Hi Maria1,
This student's argument really does seem indefensible and, well, frightening. Judging whether research is worthwhile is a really tricky area and I don't think anyone should assume that they have some kind of foolproof test for this or that there is any necessary correlation (negative or positive) between funding/personal income and the worthiness of the research.
However, I'm going to try to construct a charitable reading of his argument!
I think that there are a very, very, very small number of people who are self-funding research because it isn't good enough to be funded, and perhaps shouldn't be done at all. And it can be annoying when you encounter these people.
I can think of two examples I've encountered personally. One was actually in my undergraduate degree when a mature student who had worked for many years in a top chemicals company semi-retired and decided to do an arts degree. He was self-funding and joined our course. He would regularly turn up to seminars without having done the reading and instead talk from his "life experience". Which is fine - life experience and original thinking has a great contribution to make to research. But so does reading around the field and learning from others. He also regularly made comments along the lines of how pointless the essays and exams were - the really important thing was broadening the mind. He said he was the best judge of his own success.
The second example is very similar but this time a Phd student. Again, self-funding, again coming from a different discipline - this time economics. This student gave a paper recently which was meant to relate economics to another discipline. It didn't. When challenged by the audience on this, he accused us of being uneducated about something he had been studying and practising all his life. Again, there seemed to be this sense that it wasn't necessary for him to listen to us or really to learn because he already had the answers.
What I take from these two examples is that probably both students were struggling in a new discipline and were finding it difficult to own up to that. They were probably also experiencing the common problems of mature students (all students?!), e.g. isolation.
At the same time, it is hard not to get rubbed up the wrong way by someone who seems to be liberated from worries about money and academic achievement - and who in fact suggests that your concerns and daily troubles are unimportant.
So, maybe the student you are talking about has met with one of the very, very, very few self-funded students who are like this and it upset him?

I've been having a lot of problems lately: poor motivation, lack of self-worth, trouble even getting out of bed.
So, I set a three week deadline with my sup to write something, to get back on track.
The deadline's tomorrow and I haven't written anything and haven't read enough to write anything.
I'm just sat here crying my eyes out.
I hate myself so much and yet I still can't face picking up a book. I know it's pointless anyway, because I've run out of time. I hate this. I really, really hate it. Why does it have to be like this?

So... What to say...
I haven't done any work since the 7th of July.
I can barely get out of bed in the morning.
Last night I got really desperate.
I don't know what to do.
I've lost so much time. How am I ever going to get back on track?
I just feel desperate.
I can't see any way out of this.
(Please don't worry though - I would never do anything silly).
What can I do? How can I ever face my supervisor again?
I'm not sleeping properly or eating. Nothing seems to help.
I just want to scream.
Sorry - this is a very self-centred post, not really helpful for others. Sorry.

Sorry that you're feeling overwhelmed. Here are my suggestions:
(1) Don't look back. I know it's difficult but you cannot go back and change things. You can't undo agreeing to little projects or not asking for more help, etc. So, just say that regrets once and for out loud, or write them down, and then draw a line under it. It's over. There's nothing to be gained by repeating those regrets ever again.
(2) Don't leave - you CAN do this. And don't rule out academia altogether. After this little nightmare is over you might find you have more good memories of what you've achieved during the PhD than bad. In any case, doing a PhD (especially with all the individual initiative and hard graft you've shown) prepares you for a whole host of careers besides academia. The corporate world and the public sector love skilled, intelligent people.
(3) Focus on now. You are going to be building on all that you have already achieved, so write a list of what that is. What have you done? What things are ticked off already?
(4) The scary bit: what is there remaining to do? Don't lose sight of what you have already done and get overwhelmed again. This is a bare minimum list. For example, find out the regulations about your thesis. How many words does it have to be? How many words (in whatever state they are in) do you have already? Ignoring all thoughts about making these good words, the bare minimum is you have to write is required length of thesis minus what you have already done = x thousand words.
(5) Now the scary bit is over! This is the positive bit where you identify how you are going achieve the things on that bare minimum list. Split the tasks into sections and write down the time and resources you think you will need for each bit of each task (be generous!)
(6) I would then, if possible, meet with your supervisor and discuss what you've come up with. Hopefully he can help you refine this work plan.
I know this is hard to face up to and you are certainly going need frequent breaks doing things you enjoy, and time with family and friends to help you on the way, but I really think you can do this. It isn't that you'd be letting people down if you left at this late stage, but that most of the work is behind you, whether it feels like that or not, and if you press on you will make it.
Lastly, the Joan Bolker book which everyone recommends on this site has a few stories like yours (including, I think, one where someone decides two weeks before completion that they just can't go on!). You are not alone.:-)

Definitely don't cite works you haven't looked at.

Here's my attempt at an explanation wherein author A is the original author and author B is the secondary author...

If the point that you want to use was made by the original author (i.e. 'A is the major exponent of theory x') then reference the original text and not the secondary text, though include the secondary text in your bibliography. This is because repeating what A has said isn't an original point made by author B, and if you looked hard enough you'd probably find many other sources which cite A in the same way. And then all your footnotes would have to be huge!

If the point is an original point made by the author of the secondary text (e.g. 'No one else has noticed this before, but I think that the correct way to read A would be to see him as an exponent of theory x' or 'Many scholars think that A supports theory x but I think it is a combination of x and y') then cite the secondary author, PLUS the original author where relevant.

That is to say, if what you are really interested in is B's ideas, which she happens to voice through a critique of another author, then it may be possible to talk about B's ideas more generally without referring to their specific views on author A (who is not connected to your work). In this case you could reference only author B. However, if you are interested in author A and author B's view of A then you would reference both.

To summarize(!):
(1) I'm interested in the theories of author A (author A in footnote; author B in bibliography)
(2) I'm interested in theories of author B about author A (authors B and A in footnote; and of course both in bibliography)
(3) I'm interested in the theories of author B which refer to author A, but the bits about author A aren't really relevant to my discussion (find a way of talking about B's theories without reference to A - author B in footnote; or if you can't do that reference them both, but don't spend a long time reading author A).

The only exception to this could be if a source is so hard to get hold of that you can only find it referred to in a secondary text. If this comes up I'd discuss it with your supervisor and take their advice (supervisors often seem to have the most obscure things buried in piles of paper!)

Hi Mathkitty,
That sounds like quite a bit for a week. And 900 pages! Eep! Good luck with it.
I didn't manage 1 000 words - I got 700 down and realised I had an unanswered question. Fortunately I found a book to answer it but have been my stupid rubbish self today and not got on well with it at all.
I started at 10.15 (grrr - I need to be more organised in the morning) and turned the internet off! By 2 o'clock had read and made notes on introduction and one chapter of the book. But this afternoon I succumbed to the surfing.
I'm just so fed up with myself. :-(

Hi Monkeyme!
Those targets sound really constructive. I will be very impressed if you get through all of that this week.
Well, I have met with my sup and things seem okay. The plan has been fleshed out a bit more and it's time to get writing.
Don't know why I feel so nervous about starting this silly thing. Okay, just do it!
I have a (non-PHD) meeting at 6.30 today so I have until then to draft as much as I can. I'll set an ambitious target - 1 000 words, first draft quality.
GO!:-s

Still talking to myself... hoh hum... Seriously, I would welcome anyone willing to participate in accountability on this thread.
After 2 utterly crap days, I have worked all day today and finally have a plan (very rough but at least with some actual content!) to show to my sup.
Feel totally shattered and not a very happy bunny.
(down)
Sorry to be depressing!

Argh - this just isn't happening.
I feel totally wiped out. WHY? Grrrr... I'm so crap.

Hi Mathkitty - how did you get on with your goals?
This thread seems to have died off at the moment, but I NEED to be held accountable.
I have a paper to give pretty soon and the last few weeks I have been very sluggish work-wise.
Today I am working on getting through a v v difficult but very relevant text.
Have read only 20 pages so far and begun making notes on that - despite being at my desk pretty much solidly since 10.15 :(
Why am I so rubbish?!!!!!
Okay - so for the rest of today, I am finishing the notes on this chapter I am reading and making notes on one other chapter, plus writing an outline of my paper. Have a lecture to go to later as well.
:-s

Hi Scarlett - sorry to hear of your distressing situation. Fybogel seems to help me, but I presume you've tried that as I think that is the first thing recommended these days when you see the doc about IBS. My doc also told me to keep a food diary so that I can spot triggers but NOT to practice an exclusion diet. i.e. if a breakfast cereal makes things worse do stop eating that particular breakfast cereal but don't start cutting out all wheat or gluten or whatever. The doc suggested that this blanket exclusion can upset your body more and increase stress, although obviously if a clear pattern emerges linking difficulties to a food group then mention this to your doctor.
Seems to me like the key thing for you would be to cut down on the stress and I second the posts here which suggest you try some ways to cope with that. You could even try a short session of counselling - from what I've read online about IBS this is often a recognised part of treatment for the condition where stress is a major factor. I really do think you should take this as a sign from your body that you need some down time.
The other thing would be to rule out other factors. I assume you've had a blood test to check for any other health problems? How are your hormones (assuming that you are a female Scarlett!)? My doc also said that troublesome menstrual cycles can be a factor (again increasing stress) and potentially sorting out that could help.
Best of luck with it.
(PS - from the number of responses on here, it almost seems like we could start an IBS support group! Or perhaps someone should do research into the correlation between doing a PHD and developing the condition!);-)

Firstly, congratulations!
Secondly, this isn't the nicest thing to mention (although I'm sure you are already aware of this) - as I understand it the waiting 3 months idea is primarily in case there are any complications as this is the most risky time. If anything did go wrong (which it won't, I'm sure) you don't want lots of people asking you about it. Also it gives you time to adjust physically and mentally to the (lovely, beautiful, but sometimes quite weird!) situation.
I know people who have told their bosses very early on because it was affecting their performance, or because they wanted to re-arrange working hours, for example. Others have waited the three months. I don't know anyone who has waited much longer because by that point a lot of tell-tale signs are beginning to appear even though you probably won't be starting to show. Also, people need a chance to arrange maternity cover.
Obviously that's not a problem with a Phd! However, with PhD supervisors, personally I think things are a little bit different from a relationship with a boss. This is a quite intense, one on one arrangement where you are having to be constantly accountable for progress. In light of this, I think I would be tempted to broach the subject as soon as you feel able to, with the proviso that you want to keep this information strictly confidential. If anything did go amiss (again, sure it won't) you would almost certainly want your supervisor to know anyway. However, I'm not sure I'd expect a supervisor to be happy in these circumstances for your progress to just slacken off. As long as you're not on leave they are going to want you to be getting somewhere. So, if when you tell him you have something like a plan of action up your sleeve, I think that would make the meeting a lot easier. You don't have to know how every detail is going to work out, but a willingness to think through the situation will reassure your supervisor and will give him something to work with.
Also, check out the maternity leave guidelines from your funding body/university first. He may not be clued up about these.
Overall, I think you need to do what's right for you. That might involve following the above advice (which I must admit I haven't personally had the opportunity to put into practice) or it could mean learning how to cope as best you can with the euphoria and tiredness of the first three months and then telling him when you are ready.
Good luck with it - and congrats again!

Okay, a number of thoughts spring to mind. Firstly, in what context did you agree to do this article? Were you approached by the journal? Did you submit a proposal and get accepted? Are you just trying to get an article in without a guarantee it will be accepted? Has your supervisor put you on to this? Is it part of a special issue journal or book? How much choice do you have as regards your topic?
Sorry for all the questions but I think they could help you both in terms of boosting your confidence (if you were asked to write this that shows that someone is interested in your work and thinks you are capable of writing something exciting and publishable - well done!), lowering your stress (if this is just something you are hoping to publish, then is the 2 month deadline really a hard deadline?), and helping you refine your topic (who are you writing for?).
On this latter point, I don't believe that you have nothing to work from. This article is coming out of your research, and even if it's not a topic you've written about before you do have a grounding in the other work you've done. You know some of the questions you need to be asking even if you don't know the answers, and this is a significant start! In fact I think you could write a draft paragraph right now if you wanted to saying 'these are the key issues in this area' - you can beef it up with more ideas and evidence later, but for now it will show you what you've already got. I realise that this might seem insignificant to you at the moment but, again, think about who you are writing for. My supervisor is always telling me 'this explanatory paragraph may sound banal to you, but that's because you spend everyday reading looking at these documents - your examiner doesn't!' What he means is even when someone is very senior and has done a lot of work in a similar area, your research is specific to you and you can (you should!) use words explaining clearly what seems obvious to you, but what no except you could be expected to know!
Is this making sense? So, my advice would be (1) work out specifically who and what this article is for (2) write down in sentences everything that you already know that is even slightly related to the topic of the article (3) write down a list of the key questions you would like to address (not necessarily completely answer) in the article (4) pick your favourite amongst those questions/the one you consider most important and start your research there.
As regards researching and writing at the same time I think you should start writing early, but that you also need to give yourself time to do some research so that your earliest drafts have some substance to them. You have to decide a timescale that is right for you. 2 weeks solid research and then some writing and then more research, and then more writing, with the research periods getting shorter and the writing periods getting longer would be my preference - but it may not suit you. Good luck!(up)

Whilst I don't think that this is unusual for a postgraduate student (!) I do take the view that you shouldn't live like this. Nothing is worth the toll constant anxiety can take on your mental and physical health. This probably sounds a bit OTT to you as you seem to be coping very well at the moment and this could just be a temporary thing. But I think it's really important to be clear that feeling a bit nervous or anxious for a couple of weeks is one thing and constant anxiety is another. A few years ago I suffered from anxiety and depression and I have come out of that with is the conviction that feeling anxious for a long time or very intensely is a sign that you need to look after yourself and say 'no' to the things that cause the anxiety. This doesn't mean ditching the PhD! I mean say 'no' to the idea that unless you are feeling anxious and stressed you are not working hard enough, you are not on top of things. Don't equate being relaxed and confident with being lazy! And I think you should avoid giving yourself a hard time when you don't quite stay on top of all the work as well. Give yourself credit for the things you do right and forgive yourself for the times you mess up. There is no one "judging" you and waiting for you to slip up - not even your supervisors want that!
If you felt like the anxiety was becoming a bit more serious then I would recommend counselling - your uni will have a service and you can just go along for one or two sessions if that's all you want. If you don't have a positive experience with the counsellor, don't give up. Different forms of counselling involve different approaches to the patient and it might just be that you would be better off with the different counsellor.
Other recommendations: contact an old friend (once you start telling him/her what you're up to you'll realise how much you've achieved since you last saw them!); a bath with some relaxing oils; herbal tea and loads of water - also lemonbalm, a traditional herbal treatment for anxiety; fresh air, pretty countryside and exercise.