I don't know if I have the problem or my supervisor has a problem - I dont know why. I just feel I dont own the research - its like she has half the conversation in her head and then expects me to know what she is on about. I tell her this then she explains everything in a really patronising way. She wants me to do something that is totally unfeasible... i have told this - but she wont take no for an answer. becuase i complained at her that she is always late and never turns up - I have to do a minutes for our meetings and an agenda for the meetings in order to prepare. I know this is good - but I just feel that it isnt really going to help me in my research much. She spends more time talking about EndNote than actual research...I just want to discuss core data rather than referencing. Sorry for the rant - there is so much more. The thing is - i dont know if these things are a problem or i am just making them into problems.

she is new to this topic as well! Shes not got a phd yet. She doesnt have a clue. She knows no key papers in the area - I am giving her my work and when we goes to meetings to my first supervisor she takes over telling her how shes done all this work. She is only my second supervisor cos my first is far 2 busy.

I dont know why I feel unhappy.

they are like best mates... its v.awkward. Politics in this place is mad.

'she takes over telling her how shes done all this work'.

I wouldn't have that. Stand up for yourself. Tell her exactly why you're not happy [re that anyway]. Email could be good as you have a record if it occurs again. The fact that she's not a PhD doesn't exactly place her in a strong position re this as well.

give her a slap

Is this the one that has been doing a PhD for like 10 years or something?

I would absolutely refuse to have this person as my supervisor.

yes this is the one who has been doin it for 10 years. The thing is i really wanted my main supervisor... so i had to have this one as a compromise. Its making me insane. Whenever she comes into the lab it makes me want to scream.

Can you do a PhD for 10 years? There was a woman on my MSc that was into year six doing it p/t which was incredible.

Now you have some good ammunition, just say to her 'look, its taken you 10 years to get to this point, so cut the crap, and stop lying about all the work you have done, and talk about all the work you need to do'.

Refuse to have this slacker as your supervisor, point out to the department that someone that takes that long clearly hasn't got the sound understanding of how to do a PhD, and so certainly hasn't a clue about how to supervise one.

With her as your supervisor, you should give up any hope of finishing inside three years

i dont think you are even permitted to take that long around here? i think you have to submit in something like 6 years max ...

we're not allowed to spend that long here anymore... but she started in the days where she was allowed to spend that long on one...
Agrh - the woman is driving me insane - esp with her stupid agendas AGRH.

10 years does seem a really long time for a PhD but I know a few lecturers at my university who have taken that long. Does she have many publications? Part of the problem might be RAE pressures, teaching, admin etc have diverted her efforts, and it would take so much to update her work now in light of new research. It is likely she feels bad about not completing her own PhD, so I imagine raising it with her might just be met with defense or anger. I would not recommend this unless you are sure you don't want her to play a role in supervising you (and preferably have an alternative).

I know you hate the agendas (me too!) but could you use them as a way of drawing her back onto what you want to cover for this session? e.g. if she starts talking about endnote you could suggest that if you encounter problems with it you might put it on the agenda for next meeting, but you are conscious of the time and on the agenda for this meeting is interpreting data etc. My department also makes me write up the meetings afterwards with agreed action points. I use it to manage my supervisor, e.g. record what she has agreed to do as well, put time and date of next meeting in big bold letters. At least you have it in writing if she doesn't turn up or read your work.

i emailed a good professor mate of mine...and she is going to help me with some conflict management. I think its a good idea.... what do u all think - i dont watn to change the supervisor - i jst want to change her attitiude.

I sympatheise with you. In your place I would probably have kicked her butt by now so credit goes to you for remaining so patient! I don't think I could have stood for anyone taking credit for my work! It is so not on.

Why don't you switch 2nd supervisors? In principle if you have problems with your 1st supervisor, the 2nd supervisor is there to patch things without taking sides. Sounds like in your case the purpose of having a 2nd supervisor is invalidated since they are "best friends". Find an alternative who can help with data interpretation. Try asking them for help in interpreting your data a couple of times. If you feel the alternative could work better, then tactfully change over to the alternative.

In the case of the non-feasible solutions your 2nd supervisor is getting you to do. Why not email your 1st and ask what she thinks of these solutions?