The whole system is so flawed, mainly because it's assessed on the value of the property you live in, rather than the annual income you actually generate. I am currently corresponding with my MP about it. Here's a comparison for you..

One of my non student friends (Friend A) earns 19K a year in a call centre job, lives on her own, pays 75% council tax as a single person.

Another friend (Friend B) is a full time research associate at my old uni. She earns roughly 25K p.a. RAs are simulataneously registered for PhDs (their research counts towards a PhD provided their sponsor/department agrees to this) and this is the case for B. Therefore in the eyes of the uni she is concurrently registered as a full time PhD student, despite being a salaried member of research staff. And as she has the full time student status alongside her job, she's exempt from council tax, despite earning 6k more than Friend A.

Slightly unfair, isn't it?

I agree, Otto, it is not fair. I have lived with 2 full time students before and as the only working person there the council tax was still reduced by only 25%, despite me being outnumbered by those who were exempt. However, it is also unfair that others eventually pay for those that are defrauding the system. The money lost in benefit fraud means that taxes increase for those who *do* pay them

The council tax benefit logic is, admittedly, questionable. But that's the way it is - at least for now. Instead of encouraging people to defraud the system (and yes, while it IS unlikely you'll get caught, there can be severe consequences is you ARE), it is better to campaign to try and change way the council tax is worked out.

Nimrod's right when it comes to external funding it's normally non-negotiable except in exceptional circumstances (IE pregnancy, illness, etc.

My uni actually has 4 start dates - in Oct, Dec, April and July on the 1sts of each month. I wasn't offered my (externally funded) PhD studentship until 10th October 2002, I wasn't even interviewed until about 6th - in otherwords, past the Oct registration date. I eventually got started by end Oct, but my registration was backdated to the 1st, rather than commencing the next available date. This was becasue of funding conditions. It effectively meant that I (officially) has a month less that everyone else.

Goods, I am so sorry things have got on top of you like this and can COMPLETELY empathise.I was exactly the same, failing to believe that my work was good enought right until the end.

The last stages of writing ARE the hardest and you have my heartfelt sympathy. BUT DON'T QUIT - you are so close and I think your work MUST be good as you yourself are so highly critical of it. It took me a long time to realise that but when I eventually did it was a real enlightenment and I wish the same for you.

With regard to GPs and anxiety management, I can confirm that betablockers can help. I was prescibed one called Propranolol by my GP and took it on instances when I felt particularly panicked. I didn't need to take it regularly (IE every day) but you can do this if you feel it woudl be beneficial.

Really hope you're OK, keep us updated

Hi, don't know the place but just wanted to say well done on the offer - sounds a very prestigious place!

I took 4 years as well and had 2 masters degrees behind me. Getting done in 3 years is (I think) the exception rather than the rule.
If you can do this, great, but it's more likely it will take longer. I had to go through ethics committess and spent virtually most of my first year sorting that out despite good supervision. And I knew some of the the clinicians/NHS ethics committee members!

I was 29, snuck the registration in before I hit 30

I wasn't really conscious of age though - personally I think it's not a bad thing to have afew more years behind you when doing a PhD

Are you in the UK? My understanding of the whole process was that everyone was registered for an MPhil and then upgraded to PhD subject to satisfactory assessment at the end of the first year.

The only exceptions are (i think) for those 1 + 3 studentships that cover a 1 year research methods course and then the 3 years PhD funding (like the ESRC ones).

keeping everything well and truly crossed for you - good luck!

We have a black cat, he is cool, if he was a person he'd be a rapper with lots of jewellery and a flash car, swaggering about like he owned the place!

When I as writing up he used to sit on me knee while I was at the computer, it was lovely having him there

I can [sort of] see the logic behind your question - most people DO go into a 4th year. However stop and think about what the first year involves: making and developing new contacts, lit review, first experiments, maybe beginning to prepare for conferences. You’ve also got the added factor of MPhil to PhD transfer assessment at the end of the 1st year.

With all this going on, self funding, especially if you were holding down a job to do this, would be quite stressful. You may also miss important seminars/meetings because you might have to work. When you're in the 4th year, you're just writing up (incidentally, I don't mean the word "just" to trivialise the writing-up process! I mean that it's the only PhD related thing you're doing, as opposed to all the activities in your first year.) It's a lot easier to self-fund when your PhD activities are more streamlined into writing, rather than a lot of other things.

I take it you mean to successfully apply for a funded place, and then defer funding for a year, is that right? As opposed to registering for a fill-time PhD on a self-funding basis then applying at the start of the second year to continue what you've started?

Tha latter is risky as your application might not be successful. With regard to the former - I very much doubt it. Most university departments are allocated funding on the basis of recruiting PhD students within a specified financial year. Funding allocation decisions are made at high uni levels, and I very much doubt that they would allow this just for an individual preference.(continues....)

This is a really interesting discussion. Thoughout my PhD I've often marvelled at how "matey" some of my friends were with their supervisors. 2 academics who supervised a couple of my friends used to come out drinking with us whenever we went out, and their students loved it. The acedemics in question were younger than the average departmental staff member, but even so, it was not something I felt comfortable with if I happened to be out with these friends and their supervisors rocked up pissed too! Call me old fashioned, but I think there need to boundaries.

My relationship with both my supervisors was more formal in that I wouldn't fo out in the evening for drinks with them - coffee during the day, yes, but no more. I COULD talk to them about problems outside of the PhD, which was good.

I have NEVER known anyone finish in 2 years. I've know people finish in three - most of my friends have taken 4 years, but the ones who have done it in three have usually worked as Research Associates who have been resigtered for a PhD simultaneously and their research work has counted towards it. And writing DOES take longer than you think. I did 3 drafts of my thesis befoer it was ready for submission

Otto is right to consider the viva as well. It can take a while to come round, so although completion correctly takes this into account, it is more productive to think about yout time in terms of from beginning to when you SUBMIT. Waiting for a viva is pretty much out of your control so there's no point factoring it into your completion time.

On short, I really wouldn't squeeze a PhD into 2 years. A registered MPhil can take 2 years, let alone a PhD.

Try the medical algorithms project. It's free registration and contains info about many medically related questionnaires - they're all divided into clincial specialities, but not all of them are public domain and are subject to copyright so check their conditions of use.

http://www.medal.org/visitor/login.aspx