ooops - spelling disasters

My day is very similar Wed- Fri. 9 am, drop daughter with childminder, come back, have breakfast listening to radio 4, then start work about 9.45. I also take 'housework breaks' and make a tea/coffee usually mid morning and mid afternoon. I don't stop long for lunch - about 30 mins. Work til 6-7 depending on how it's giong and whether I'm dooking dinner. Sometimes go back to work after dinner (break 7.30-8 -8.30 for my part of bedtime routine) until 9.30 -10 then some trashy telly and a(nother) glass of wine. Saturday I work from 10.30-5 but take less breaks. Mon and Tues I generally don't work as I have no childcare and i find it very difficult to get into it in the evening when I haven't worked for a day or two.

The internet vortex is the biggest problem. All my work involves the pc - I'm doomed. You have to somehow ration yourself with your internet activities - but it's very tough. Time just passes :p

Routine works best for me and I think I keep to it better because me time is a bit limited by childcare - i.e. rather than feel available for work all the time clear some hours of the day for work.

Very regular deadlines too. I sometimes do the daily list thing too so I know what I should be getting done.

Once a week is plenty of supervision, especially for a first year, I think.

I just keep going. Last time I submitted a chapter not only had he not read it - he had lost it. If I waited for feedback my PhD would probably take about 20-50 years.......

This can all be sorted out - it justs needs time. You are in a difficult in between phase. But you WILL get a new supervisor - and I do think you should ask your head of dept if you can get some interim feedback. The new uni should also have a student counselling service which I thoroughly recommend you make use of. Try to look forwards and not backward.

Great minds think alike8-)

Agree about humour. Humour is a fascinating subject in itself. The way that it is often at the expense of an out-group for the mirth of an in-group. Most humour seems to have a dark side - it's part of the structure and form of humour. I have myself often got into trouble for this reason. (I can be quite funny irl - you'll just have to take my word for it....).

I think you can definitely write this lady off as far as supervision is concerned. Editing 13,000 words is a lot to do as an unofficial supervisor. While you are waiting for your new supervisor to be made official, could you explain to your new head of dept that you need feedback on a paper and have someone there take a look at it?

I mean - these men have NOT been very helpful - duh!

I tend to agree Hypothesis - these are all valid choices. In my experience the choice of who works full time and who is primary carer is largely made on finances and in most cases I have known the man is by far the larger earner. I do have a male friend, now a lecturer part-time, who did childcare and PhD while mother worked - she earned much more than he did. In cases where the man earns little or nothing, the mother generally works but I haven't noticed that the men in these cases have been very helpful either with childcare or housework - so it's been the worst of all possible worlds for those women and many of them went on to be single working mums (which was a considerable improvement over time).

I do think there are a few women who think it is an escape of some sort to give up work and have kids - boy are they in for a shock though (unless they are loaded and have a nanny and housekeeper too). Most women understand that life will get busier and more, not less, stressful after kids whatever they do. I also think it's fair to say that some women who want children and know they intend to stay home with them prefer partners who are more financially solvent. But that is a certain kind of marraige, based on traditional roles that perhpas wouldn't suit many of the posters here. It's a choice though - and one that I see works well for some families. I think it can be hard for a man to stay home because male status and self-esteem tends to be more dependent on job status. I think it's also just plain boring for a lot of people - men included.

Horses for coarses as they say. Someone has to take good care of the kids - and that's the first priority, however that is arranged. I'd like people to have more choices.

It doesn't sound as though this women is still your supervisor at all - is her continuing 'supervision' official or unofficial? Either way - you need a new sup asap. Try to deal with your paper and revisions following feedback from the journal.

Sounds like you desperately need a new supervisor and some regular deadlines. I have a 3 yr-old, work from home and rarely see my supervisor. I did get very lost and fed up in the middle years - but feel much better now I'm writing up and can see the light at the end of the tunnel. Contact your head of dept directly and explain that you must have a UK-based supervisor. Is there a conference presentation that you could work towards as an interim goal?

There may also be some kind of student-parents group at the university that you could contact to find more like-minded souls. It can be a bit of a no-man's land - neither working with colleagues nor a full-time mum.

You don't think that having a personal belief in a personal god has anything to do with religion but I do - it is the basic requirement that legitimises religion. That's where we differ. I'm not sure that your belief is in a personal (rather than an impersonal) god. To me this is a very important distinction as it is the personal, i.e. listening, watching and intervening aspect that leads to the major problems arising from the ensuing dogma.

I have no (well very little...) problem with beliefs that are basically more mystic.

I'm a biologist and an atheist. Religion is a powerful influence on culture. You cannot just ignore other people's beliefs because they have consequences. Many aspects of law and politics are heavily influenced by the dominant religion of that culture. I don't want to be goverened by rules influenced by other people's beliefs in a personal god that has no credibility to me. There is probably next to nothing to seperate my views from those of, say, a liberal christian - but liberal religious believers legitimise the concept of a personal god that is so abused by so many.

I've known a great many people with extreme views, including my own parents. Dawkins commented that religion is a form of child abuse and I'm inclined to agree. I cannot see it as just a harmless, cosy blanket to shield people from the harsh realities of life, suffering and death. Of course mean and intolerant people may be so with or without religion - but it is so much easier to legitimise irrational behaviour in the name of religion and so much harder to reason against it.

''I think the 'get pregnant let my partner sort it out' comment implies (and I think the response from the other women illustrates this) that it is a manipulated thing. You may be backpedaling now but your comment implies that it is a premeditated disregard on the part of the pregnant woman to neglect any responsibility and be 'supported' ''

That was exactly my reading. How very often I see people make remarks with major inferences made indirectly - indirectly enough that when challenged they can simply put up their hands and claim no such inferences were intended. It won't fly. You'd have to have zero social competence to really be so clueless.

It certainly is a fact that many women are financially supported by their partner when they have children - nothing to dispute there. It's the unpleasant other inferences that are insulting and disagreeable.

And if you think being at home with kids rather than 'working' is 'being taken care of' I suggest you try it out as a lifestyle choice and see how relaxing and stress-free it really is (I only do it part-time - that's quite enough).

That's a pathetic attempt to make your remark acceptable - and even more laughable - to somehow dress it up as the opening to an academic debate. Dream on.