DISCLAIMER: the following story does not necessarily correspond to the facts in reality. In particular, it does not necessarily correspond to the author of this post and his/her supervisor.
I joined my advisor's lab as a PhD student. I developed my own new direction for my lab, which is recognized by the community. We have presented papers at the top conference in my area. My advisor had never presented their before.
Professor: little scientific contribution
In the publications we have written together, I have been the first author and can claim 98% of the scientific contributions. The other 2% is for my advisor's very minor suggestions. Most of the time, after the paper is accepted, the finalization process is 100% on me.
When we have other co-authors, my advisor tries to appear to input more and implies that I have been told to do something (for example, "as we discussed earlier"). My advisor often implies to me that the others are unhelpful to my work, and seems to prefer working in isolation with me.
My advisor has recognized my contribution, saying "your work" as in "sorry for talking about your work" in internal meetings. However, my advisor also seemed to insinuate that I am the one being overly protective about my originality, saying on several occasions in a jocular tone "No problem. I can be the first author."
Professor: little scientific discipline
My advisor asked me once to add someone who did not contribute at all as a coauthor. On several occasions, he/she suggested me to submit the same paper to multiple conferences, and to spam low-quality conferences with my publications. Now that he has seen the benefits of my way of quality-thresholding, he started to educate me to have a high standard.
Professor: the good side
My advisor has a pleasant personality, enjoys a good reputation among certain communities in our university, and has encouraged me when I fail. Our working relationship is a really, really patient one, and my advisor can leave me alone for several months without pushing. This is not sarcasm but the biggest help that I was given. I have been able to take a larger-than-usual number of vacation days, and have found that my advisor never crosses the line in communication.
I have been very exhausted writing papers and am suffering mental problems from having to fight on the frontiers of science with little help. I am just always stressed. I find it difficult to smile or even to concentrate, and have nightmares every few days.
At the graduation stage, my advisor continues to talking about the "next paper", and talks about doing post-docs, without agreeing on my graduation date. He/she intentionally delayed some of these administrative procedures. Frankly I feel too disgusted to continue this "co-authorship".
I feel less confident about complaining to the university, because (1) I do not speak the local language; (2) I find it difficult to be sociable because of my health issues; (3) I am from a third-world country, which could bias people's judgement; (4) I rely on him/her to organizing the defense; and (5) what should I complain about?
Generally, how does a Ph.D. student. who has progressed well, safely and permanently leave an unhelpful and undisciplined professor, to avoid being intentionally delayed in the graduation process, and to roll on with the rest of his/her life?
What are the general limits of a student's rights in the process of getting his/her Ph.D.? Can he/she submit the thesis and demand to defend, without respecting his/her advisor's suggestions to stay longer as a Ph.D. student or a post-doc?