A wise friend of mine once said that if things were going to work in a relationship, they would, and if they weren't, then, they weren't--whether its because one or the other or both is doing a PhD/a demanding job/wants-does not want children, dogs, birds, a garden/gets ill/has family that gets ill/whatever.

A relationship has to be strong to stand up to the forces of crisis. Life being life, those things will come around some day, some time, in some form. I don't know that I would blame the PhD per se...I think more broadly speaking, its about a relationship that just did not have the "glue" to withstand those external pressures, no matter what form they take. Love is easy when life is smooth. But when the chips are down, and you NEED that person to be there for you, that's when it gets challenging.

The book, as I recall, has this hilarious rendition of what happened to the author--she put up for years with a British fellow who came and went at his convenience, and she spent hour and loads of money at astrologers and psychics trying to find out if she would win his love once and for all. Then she concluded she had fallen in love with a stereotype of a British bad boy that was all the rage...she fell for his accent and his thoughtless ways...and decided, one day...what the heck? That fad was over! And she moved on.

Check out the book, Pineapple, "He is just not that into you"--its a bit of a cheesey self help read, but it DOES make some valid points, and it puts the break up of a relationship into a neutral spot ( not the self blame we women seem to head to!) by suggesting, literally, he was just not that into you, for whatever reason, likely nothing to do with YOU or your fault, more accurately. It gives some tips on why and how to move on from a relationship, even those where you still have some kind of connection, like the friends with benefits.

If the "lure" of academia is to get to do high level thinking, avoid tedious mind numbing drudgery....hmmmm....I am not so sure that stuff is present in academia....in other words, its full of tedium and drudgery and the chance to do high level thinking few and far between. The ivory tower a myth? Grading papers makes proof reading footnotes look like a New Years Eve Gala out on the town! Is this the life I aspire to??!!! I dunno. I could have a more brain power left over to do high level thinking in my off hours if I worked delivering pizzas! I like my research....but if you are in a teaching position, where do you get the chance to carry on with research? And how do you have any brain cells left to do it? Or hours in the day? The thought of day after day of brain numbing marking...academic politics...yuk.

If you have a big report coming up, no wonder you feel drained and tired--no doubt somewhere in your brain is the memory of what you are trying to overcome with this new one being successful! That's a lot of PRESSURE! But it sounds like you have done all you can to prepare for it and respond to the concerns raised to you--and you, and anyone, could do no more!!!! Good luck on how this turns out, but I've got a feeling its going to be JUST FINE!!!

Pineapple--I totally sympathise when you talk about how this PhD process can be so draining of your internal resources, your resolve, your well-being...a few months ago I struggled through what I posted on here as my "dark night of the soul" when I was really at a low point. I am glad to say its resolved, at least for the moment, and I think that having ebbs and flows of well being are unfortunately part of something as intense as a PhD. As my supervisor puts it, its a very unnatural thing to be doing!!--all the high level thinking, long hours of isolation, constantly under real and self imposed deadlines, not seeing completion or closure for years...its a hard slog!

BHC, I wonder if the slackers in your programme have ever had a "real" job? ie not a studenty part time sort of thing? If they never have, the real world will be a cold hard blow of reality. I think that people who have had "real" jobs and know the drill of meeting expectations, etc in the work place, bring some good skills to a PhD programme, such as a work ethic, a sense of responsibility for their own work, and some maturity and communication skills!

Has some kind of plan been put into place to rectify the problems? ie. is the supervisee given some sort of roadmap on what to fix, when and why--or are they left to flounder in a sea of distress and confusion? If the supervisee fails to perform as expected after these steps are taken its a far cry from just telling someone they aren't meeting expectations and doing nothing more.

Yes, supervisees be they employees or PhD students need to be self-motivated and take responsibility for what they do. Just as a work place would not tolerate someone who did not show up for work, why should a PhD programme have to tolerate that? Just as not doing your job tasks at work would not be tolerated, why would a PhD programme have to tolerate that?

I don't think that being a PhD supervisor is all that different from being a supervisor in a work capacity. The supervisor in my opinion, in either setting, has a certain amount of responsibility to the employee/PhD student. If the employee/student is not performing well and up to expectation, what has that supervisor done? Are the expectations clear? Has there been a meeting to discuss them and make sure that both supervisor/ee are on the same page?

There is the stereotype of the introverted academic, afraid of his/her own shadow, low on people skills....and while I doubt this is true of everyone in academia, it may hold true to a greater or lesser degree for some...and your supervisor may just be very uncomfortable on those people skills....who knows? If its not working for you, politely invite them into a dialogue.

Perhaps they only offer criticism because they have nothing else to offer--not as in your work is poor--but because they haven't a clue on how to do supervision, and think what they are doing is THAT! Supervision ought to be a dialogue, and while I think this cuts against the grain of the norm of doing things, its more helpful. I dialogue with my supervisor--and we have reached a comfort level with this way of interacting. Sometimes its hard to do it if you are initiating that, but you could do it with something like, " I think that comment is very interesting. Can you tell me a little bit more about what you were thinking about with that?" some kind of lead in to get them to expand...and offered in a non-threatening way.

If all you get is criticism--then I think the supervisors are not doing their job. Their title is SUPERVISOR, not CRITICISER--and there is a huge difference in their two. Any criticism from a supervisor ought to be packaged up so it is constructive, so you can work with it--there is the famous sandwich method of putting a criticism between 2 statements of what is good. As well, the criticism should show you or lead you to ways to overcome the concern...not leave you like you want to run away.

I believe I get a fee free 6 month writing up period--and some kind of fee charged to you after that---if you do not finish within the 6 months. I really do need to check on this!!!

Knowing all this makes me realize and reminds me that I should not take my own access to education for granted--I should value it, and prize it, and know it does not make me "better" than anyone, for indeed it does not, and it reminds me that out in the world are no doubt lots of people with the same passion for learning and research that simply cannot get access...because of the circumstance of life in a developing country, or a war torn country, or whathaveyou.

It makes me sad and ill to think of the amount of unfairness in the world. And the deliberate cruelty with which the unfairness can be handed out to individuals. I cannot save the world, I cannot solve that level of problem, all I can try to do is be cognizant in my own small corner of the world of these things, appreciate what I have, and do what ever I can, even no matter how small, to try and make this a better space and place.

And then, states and schools went to long lengths to not actually integrate...I know of someone who was African American in a southern US state where the state, rather than have him attend the state university, paid to send him OUT of state to another university. He became an internationally known professor in his field. HE got access...and was a brillant person...but how many other people equally potentially brilliant could not get the access because of the barriers put in place, all on skin color?