I know that  some 2-3 decades ago, some entered university teaching with only BAs/BScs, which at that time was (it would seem) sufficient to teach. Without obtaining further qualifications (e.g. MA/MSc, PhD) some of them have published extensively, successfully supervised PhDs and externally/internally examined PhD theses and have risen through the ranks to become professors. I wouldn't worry too much about these. But I'll certainly have concerns about new comers without PhDs wanting to supervise PhD candidates: WHAT YOU DON'T HAVE, YOU CANNOT GIVE!

Reading through threads on this site, whilst one cannot and must not tar all supervisors of PhD candidates with the same brush, some of the of PhD candidates’ frequent complaints/allegations on this site include, but not limited to the following.

1) Appointing supervisors who are not specialists in the PhD candidates’ fields of study.
2) Appointing university lecturers without a PhD to supervise PhD candidates.
3) Lack of adequate supervision (e.g. not providing critical feedbacks to supervisee as at and when due, not meeting regularly with supervisees to review progress, etc).
4) PhD supervisors passing on their supervisees’ work as their own in publications without any reference to the actual author.
5) Appointing examiners (internals and externals) who are not known to be specialists in the PhD candidates’ fields of study.

Personally, I experienced/suffered (1-2 and 5 listed above). You can read my story here (http://www.postgraduateforum.com/threadViewer.aspx?TID=10217#repliesTop).

My question is this. Are these issues and many more horror stories frequently told on this forum peculiar to the UK PhD system or is it the same experience across the rest of Western Europe and North America?

This happened to me 4 years ago. Coming from a developing/3rd world with limited access to the internet (unlike these days), I got admission and full funding to study with a guy who (although is well known and respected in his own field, internationally) has no expertise in my chosen subdiscipline.The moment I arrived, I smelled rat.Funding tied me down. I sought for assistance from others in the department.None of them specializes or have interests in my sub-discipline. Contacts made at conferences, etc gave helping hand. When I submitted in my 4th year, I smelled DEAD RATS. External wasn't a specialist in my area. The internal examiner, from another department of the Uni has nothing to do with my subject area, even remotely. Within my department, no one was willing to examine the work. They claimed the theme of my thesis falls outside the remit of their expertise. My second supervisor met to discuss my work once: this was the final draft before submitting it for examination. Until the very last minute, just before entering the Viva room, both supervisors said 'you'll be fine...no problems'. Alas! the viva roomed turned into slaughter's slab. I was finished. The verdict: resubmit after major correction for an MPhil. When the Dean of graduate School was briefed about all of this, I got a letter 2 months after the viva asking me to resubmit after major corrections for a PhD. Of course, by then, I had lost faith in the system. During my 4 years there the department graduated no PhD. The department was axed and all lecturers moved elsewhere. I did the same.This summer, my viva was successfully held. The verdict: resubmit after correcting spelling/grammatical errors. Luckily, this time around funding came from my home university where I was a lecturer.This whole issue, for me, underscores the need to overhaul the UK PhD system.

This happened to me 4 years ago. Coming from a developing/3rd world with limited access to the internet (unlike these days), I got admission and full funding to study with a guy who (although is well known and respected in his own field, internationally) has no expertise in my chosen subdiscipline.The moment I arrived, I smelled rat.Funding tied me down. I sought for assistance from others in the department.None of them specializes or have interests in my sub-discipline. Contacts made at conferences, etc gave helping hand.Second supervisor only read my final draft before submission. When I submitted 3.5 years later, I smelled DEAD RATS.External wasn't a specialist in my area, and the internal examiner was appointed from another department school, and his expertise has nothing remotely to do with my subject area.Of course, no one within my department was willing to examine the work, claiming the subject matter of my thesis falls outside the remit of their expertise. My second supervisor met to discuss my work once: this was the final draft before I submitted it for examination. Until the very last minute, just before entering the Viva room, my supervisor said 'you'll be fine, all is well, no problems'. I wasn't fine, all wasn't well and there problems.Viva roomed turned into slaughter's slab. I was finished.The verdict: resubmit after major correction for an MPhil. When the Dean of graduate School was briefed about all of this, I got a letter 2 months after the viva asking me to resubmit after major corrections for a PhD.Of course, by now, I had lost faith in the system.During my 3.5 years there the department graduated no PhD.The department was axed and all lecturers moved elsewhere.I did the same.This summer, my viva was successfully held. The verdict: resubmit after correcting spelling/grammatical errors.Luckily, this time around funding came from my home university where I was a lecturer.This whole issue, for me, underscores the need to overhaul the UK PhD system