Dear Sue and Sneaks

I consider the project as mine.  I obtained the funding, wrote the proposal, did all the transcribing of the focus groups and spent 5 months thematically analysing the data. My manager spent at most a few hours "cherry picking" what she considers important.  I would not mind if there was collaboration and discussion - it feels like an ultimatum - include my views or I will write my own paper.

I do not see how my manager could write a methods section in a paper giving details of how she analysed the data - what would she write? The data used in the analysis was phenomenal - it would not be possible to carry out any systematic analysis or become familiar with the data in such a short space of time.

Is this clarification enough?

I wonder if I could ask your advice regarding an ethical issue that I am
facing.
The project is a qualitative study and has used focus group discussions. I
spent considerable time carrying out the analysis and used a
recognised method of analysis I
feel that the analysis was carried out correctly, in keeping with our
promise to the ethics committee and that I presented the data in a balanced
way.
I gave the PI who is managing the project the transcripts of the focus
groups discussions. She and her co-supervisor have spent time [I estimate
a couple of hours] going through the transcripts and have sent me a list of
"comments" or notes identifying "areas that they feel are potentially
important in the data". When I asked how this should influence my own
analysis I was told that their comments represent "expert views" of what is
important in the data and that they should be incorporated. I asked how
they arrived at these areas of interest, what was the process by which these
areas were selected and was told that they are aspects of the discussion
identified as particularly pertinent to the study aims.
We are now in a position of writing a paper. The PI is referring to the
"comments" that she previously presented to me as "her analysis" of the
data and is suggesting that she writes a paper on her "analysis" of the
data.

Can anyone advise on the ethics of this?