A Flower in a Desert – A Story of Determination and Overcoming Obstacles During A PhD

A story of growth and inner strength through a difficult PhD

Dr. Prise finished her PhD with a different set of motivating forces compared to when she started.  She entered the PhD with a passion for science, but exited by tapping into her inner will-power, resourcefulness and grit. She started with expectations of open communication, shared ideas and critique relating to successes and, of course, unforeseen failures. Before she realized it, the acrid laboratory space that made up her PhD was not a bountiful place to thrive…before she realized she became a “flower in a desert.”  The excitement to succeed in science was tested. Only sheer perseverance let her endure. 

At the start of her PhD, she rotated through labs in her department, where she sought an advisor with an open space and for one that would meet her needs. As a scientist, she had obvious criteria.  First, she wanted a place to do meaningful biological research. Second, she desired a supportive environment.  Third, she required guidance from a caring, experienced advisor. Lastly, she looked for an advisor who would be accepting of her physical needs.  Due to an accident, she necessitated physical therapy and a flexible schedule. 

In the end, she decided to work with a professor known for his research and good science, despite a more laid-back attitude. She thought the more hands-off approach would likely suite her needs. Although new and exciting, the PhD was immediately demanding. She worked around the stresses that her health necessitated, conducting physical therapy in the evenings. A typical work day in her first year of graduate school demanded a tight schedule, working 6:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

In the laboratory, she faced a surprising set of challenges. Her advisor took a hands-off attitude for any data he deemed negative.  Weeks of work in the lab, was neglected because it did not produce the outcomes he sought. When she needed guidance to get “positive” results, she was ignored. She turned to her fellow lab members for support. The senior PhD in the lab was not able to help. He was too busy looking for his “positive” outcome.  The senior scientist in the lab focused on his project. Therefore, she became isolated and worked even harder trying to do good research and garner a reaction from her adviser. 

The nuts and bolts of the PhD must also be discussed.  The pay was of course was minimal. But, in addition to having to stretch every dollar, she was not afforded healthcare support for her physical therapy throughout her first year of the PhD. At the start of her second year, she recalls finding a lawyer to handle her physical therapy bills being just as much of a success as passing her qualifying exam. 

Further, as an international student, Dr. Prise, ran into other issues. She was only one of two international PhD students in her area. After the first year of her PhD, the other student moved on, which left her more alone.  At least there had been coffee with someone with a shared experience.  The lab became more like a library. Sometimes days went by without her muttering a word of science to anyone. 

Entering her second year, the data did not get better and the research only became more difficult to keep going back to. Without active mentors, she realized that she would need to push her advisor a bit more to allow her to approach her candidacy exam and build a committee. 

With mostly negative data, she continued to trudge through the program. Each day was a chore instead of one filled enlightenment. When she thought that the project and advisor were unsustainable, the environment in the lab shifted. Her senior scientist colleague was notified that their project would end due to a lack of funding. At this time, the senior scientist began to utilize the equipment in the lab during the day, forcing lab members to work nights. With this scholar monopolizing all the lab equipment during the daytime, Dr. Prise worked nights. Given the hierarchical environment that her advisor setup, she was unable to confront this senior scientist productively. Due to this senior scientist’s difficult situation, and perhaps a difficult situation on their side, the lab became even more toxic. To say the least, the environment was not collaborative. 

Amidst these difficulties, Dr. Prise remained strong. And, despite negative mentorship and the hardships, she began to see some positive data at the bench. 

Two logical, yet often overlooked outcomes of her experience:

Outcomes of data are outside of our control, and the only work to control is work ethic, attitude, and time management. – PhD Source Inside Take #1

Be it positive or negative data, consistent work ethic and showing up is more important. – PhD Source Inside Take#2

During this time, Dr. Prise did develop a feedback loop. Notwithstanding the toxicity of the environment, she created a space where she could flourish.  She also sought advice through Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Ombudsman to gain a neutral opinion on the environment she was in at work. In addition, to reaching out to the Ombudsman office, Dr. Prise contacted the counseling services office. Using this service, she established a touchstone of reality, which gave her needed support during this rough and tumultuous process. 

Creation of a network of supporting mentors during the PhD can be the difference maker to overcoming toxic obstacles. – PhD Source Inside Take #3

Non-scientist mentors like the Ombudsman office and University Counseling Services can establish a touch stone of reality to help you maintain your health during difficult times of your PhD. – PhD Source Inside Take #4

In addition to establishing positive mentors in the field, Dr. Prise began to network outside of academics. She decided that with all of these difficulties in her laboratory, academics was not a fruitful direction. She realized efforts could be more helpful and more productive in other fields.

The art of the pivot. People who are passionate and intelligent are desired in many scientific career paths. Learning this is to be empowered. – PhD Source Inside Take #5

Exploring career options does not close doors to academics, but only opens new opportunities to have choices. – PhD Source Inside Take #6

Dr. Prise entered the fourth year of the PhD with relationships in rough shape. Fortunately, Dr. Prise had stock-piled mentors and had some outside support to keep her going forward. Her PhD adviser did not support the proposition that she would defend at the end of her fourth year, but it was the only thing that kept Dr. Prise going. With 2 years of negative data, an unsupportive mentor, and a toxic environment, Dr. Prise knew she was doing all she could. Adjusting her schedule, seeking advice, confronting challenges, maintaining her personal relationships, yes, she had bent, but Dr. Prise would not break.

In the final year of the PhD, the motivation to finish was at the heart of her drive. Dr. Prise was often times starting experiments at 5 p.m., after the senior scientist would stop monopolizing the lab supplies. She was logging hours on the weekend and was working 60 to 70-hour weeks. Her efforts were fortunately churning out positive data, but the toll it was taking was evident in the lack of sleep and halt in progress during physical therapy sessions. 

During this final year leading up to her defense, Dr. Prise would take weekends to explore new career opportunities and attend scientific networking events. With a greater vision of what she could do in the world, outside of her PhD program, she was rejuvenated at the bench. 

When certain avenues seem stalled or halted, a great response is to see what other options are available. – PhD Source Inside Take #7

Looking back at the final months of her PhD, Dr. Prise recalls it as one of focus, determination, and fervent desire to finish the program. With the odds stacked against her in multiple fashions, she published an article from the positive data in a strong journal. Dr. Prise remembers the relief of her defense, and looks forward to the next opportunities, where she will take what she learned and where challenges may not seem as difficult. Overcoming these challenges, may make the rest seem easy.  

In the desert, the velvet mesquite (prosopis velutina) is a common shrub that flowers annually. Before the velvet mesquite can grow into the recognizable full-grown, annually flowering shrub, it must survive from a seed.  It is often the only flower for miles of desert and rough terrain. Yet, it endures. 

Upon a rainstorm, the mesquite seedling will send down roots to harbor into the desert soil. Continually searching for the lack of water, the mesquite’s roots dig deep. Dry spell after dry spell, the roots weave and push deep into the soil, reaching as deep as 50 meters (164 feet) in a full-grown mesquite. Fighting against difficult odds and arid conditions, the velvet mesquite reaches tall for its first flower of the spring. 

- A flower in the desert.

The names in this article have been fabricated to protect confidentiality. A great thank you to the courageous person that this story highlights.