Sounds frustrating! Being micromanaged and relying on part-timers are two common frustrations of employment these days. On the bright side, you are in employment and are being offered more work, subject to funding. It might be an idea to see how much you can define the upcoming project and be proactive in gaining funds for your department. On the other hand, I can see it makes sense to look out for other job opportunities at the same time as doing as much good work as you can in your present post, given the limitations that you mention.

I would recommend a masters degree before PhD, as this will give you a good foundation in research skills and a deeper knowledge of your topic. It also gives you a better CV when you apply for PhD places.

Because we are people who are proud of our ideas, we find it very frustrating when others steal them. My head of department once gave a lecture to the PhD students and said that we shouldn't worry about ideas being plagiarised. How wrong she was! It's very sad when supervisors rip off their students' ideas, and in fact it shows how few idea the supervisor has themselves. However, many PhD projects are mainly a training process without any major potential for intellectual capital, so in the end the problem is often mainly one of lack of professionalism and communication rather than a legal matter. On the other hand if the supervisor or others were to go to market with your ideas, then it would be time to let the legal eagles fly.

Like a lot of people, I have learned to lower my expectations of my career and just try to get as much out of whatever work I can get. These days it is a win just to be in work.

I'd like to think that you are going to be successful in this and I hope you don't meet too many barriers. HazyJane's advice is well worth following here.

Sounds great. Can you post a link please?

That's awful. Did your wife get her PhD?

It depends on how angry your supervisor gets.

Are there universities that don't allow supervisors to attend the viva? As far as I know the only problem with them attending is if they don't notify the examiners in advance, but even then I think this is a formality rather than a strict rule. I can see that not everyone would want their examiner to attend, but I suspect from this discussion that lots of people don't know they have this option, and might opt for it if they realised that they could. Interesting.

Words of wisdom: It's always darkest before the dawn. Just stick with it through this difficult time and you will succeed.

Words of advice: rather than treat the R&R as a death march, take a few days off and do nothing related to it. This will clear your mind, give you some perspective (things that were confusing when you were exhausted now become clear), and leave you with more energy. Also, when you get back look over your work and ask your supervisor for feedback, if needed.

Have you heard the Beatles song 'Blackbird'? Give it a listen, you might find it inspiring.

I was told that only real advantage of having your supervisor present is that you can monitor their body language out of the corner of your eye when you answer questions: if they nod and smile then keep talking, but if they cringe, flinch, or start crying, then best rethink what you are saying.

On balance, best for your supervisor to attend if possible.

Although it doesn't usually end up in fist-fights this is a fairly common issue, so I'm surprised that you didn't get any answers to this question. Here are some widely used and fairly reasonable guidelines that you can invoke and might get people to (reluctantly) agree on authorship issues.

Now is the time to look for solutions rather than dwell on the past. Potential supervisors aren't necessarily going to think the previous situation was all your fault - people fall out all the time in academia. It's common knowledge that some supervisory relationships go toxic, or just fall to bits for whatever reason e.g. the supervisor or student goes off the rails due to unavoidable personal problems. So my advice is to focus on what you need in order to finish your PhD. My impression is that you want now a supervisor who is good at data analysis (rather than an expert in the field which you needed at the start of your studies) and someone who has a 'can-do' attitude. If you look around you might find someone just right for your circumstances e.g. someone who is keen to get some experience as a supervisor and who will be happy to give you some guidance on stats and generally get you back on the road.

Hope it all goes well for you.

Pay: no. Think of it like karma: for every paper you submit for review, you should review at least one other paper.

Advantages: (a) you get to see some of the latest research in your field. If the journal is a top journal in the field then the research is also likely to be of good quality. (b) It hones your critical thinking skills. (c) You get an insight into what journals want to see in a paper.

Disadvantages: it takes up time, especially if there are lots of changes required over two or three resubmission.

Well done!

Tips for viva:
1/ write down all possible questions you might be asked, and then all the answers you should give
2/ rehearse in your mind a good viva - this can help reduce nerves
3/ do a mock viva with your supervisor, and another person if possible.

Good luck.