Part of me would like to feel for the student who may have a genuine illness, but the other part of me that has a doctorate knows that it was very, very hard and I totally lost it in my second year and went off around the US for 6 weeks to get my head clear.
The bottom line is that a doctorate is not an easy thing to get, it's stressful and some people probably can't take the stress.
I agree it sounds awful, but I agree that you are correct. Not everyone who wants a PhD can just get one. It is damn hard work. You devote your ENTIRE CAREER and in some cases life, to your Ph.D. It's not fair to the others who are working hard if you are just given one.
I don't have a PhD but I do have a black belt, which shares some characteristics.
Specifically, I see people from time to time who I feel perhaps did not work as hard for their rank as I did for mine.
The lesson I've learned in the end is don't trust credentials too much. If you want to find out what kind of martial artist someone is, don't look at the belt, look at how they train.
I would imagine the same can be said for a PhD. Don't look at the degree, read the research!
Its not feasible to "test" knowledge always. Many degrees, are the qualification to practice a particular profession.
Think about how bad it would be, if medical degree holders do not know how to treat people, pilot license holder do not know how to fly airplanes or civil engineer degree holder not knowing what alleviation is safe for the suspension bridge. The only way patients/flying authorities/ government authorities etc. would know if a doctor/pilot/engineer is qualified to carryout the assigned task, if the degree actually reflect a reasonable level of proficiency in the particular field.
I do agree that the certification process for those important professions plays an important part in ensuring public safety. I offered my comment as a path to feeling a bit better about seeing other people who share one's credentials without, it seems, achieving quite the same standard.
I would also offer however, that even those professions do not completely trust the degree. Each one of those professions has a number of oversight and regulation bodies which are inconstant contact with the the practitioners. Specifically:
- Malpractice insurers who specify covered and non-covered activities
- Professional colleges which review practitioners regularly
- the FAA
I take fundamental issue with the idea that a single metric should be sufficient to disqualify a student.
If papers and research are exemplary, I see no reason that exams should disqualify someone from obtaining a Doctorate. The bar should be somewhat higher, but not to the point that the only way you can get a PhD without passing all the exams is to win a Nobel.
I don't know how well that applies to this specific case, however.
I take fundamental issue with the idea that a single metric should be sufficient to disqualify a student.
Typically, other than exceptional cases, usually there is a bare minimum requirement to meet(on some criteria or other) to avoid disqualification. System needs its rules to run efficiently.
My friend is preparing to enter a mathematics masters (actually the suspended prof was going to be his advisor), and he's already stressing out. He tells me that at that level of study (in mathematics), it's not uncommon for over half the grad student body to be illegally taking ritalin or something, pulling 20-hour days every day and still freaking out that they can't take it.
Higher education at that level is very stressful, and a part of me is offended that certain anxieties are given exceptions since they're 'health disorders', while other, just-as-crippling anxieties are ignored.
The bottom line is that a doctorate is not an easy thing to get, it's stressful and some people probably can't take the stress.