[ywnico]

100% agree, this is the crux of the issue. Pretty much everyone I know, myself included, felt used and taken advantage of by their PhD advisors.

The combination of complete control over their students (mainly due to being able to decide when/whether they can graduate) and the pressure of tenure and the publishing race makes it no surprise that so many professors slide into abuse. Reporting abuse while still a student is obviously extremely risky, and even reporting it after graduating can cause a career setback by giving up the recommendation letter.

I wonder if it would be possible to expand the role of the PhD committee (which is currently pretty much relevant only for the thesis defense) to become a replacement for a single advisor.

[vibrio]

I agree with all you said but am not optimistic about empowering the committee as a universal fix. Power politics in academic departments were worse than any I’ve seen in my subsequent career. My committee was firmly under the thumb of my advisor. Any discussions I had with them about the pi being unreasonable were terse at best, and “we’ll talk in the next meeting when everyone is there” at worst.

[Qem]

> and even reporting it after graduating can cause a career setback by giving up the recommendation letter.

Recommendation letters should be dropped as selection means. Leads to extreme subjectivity, unaccountability, and opens the door to abuse.