Posted by Dinah on April 10, 2004, at 9:38:43
In reply to Re: Multiple Personality: A shameful, nonexistent dx? » Dinah, posted by tinydancer on April 10, 2004, at 1:13:10
I'm sorry. I was thinking after I posted that my post was more a rant about my own frustrations than it was about support, and I apologize for that. But it's a major source of distress for me and I've battled it for some time in therapy.
> Wow, Dinah! You haven't told your husband. Isn't that difficult to bear alone? I definitley feel more shameful about this dx than I did when I got the BPD dx years ago. But I also have been in the "system" so many years that there is less and less of a need to conceal it from those around me, it only makes my pain and suffering larger for me to bear.
I only openly admit to OCD and depression at work, etc. They know about my "hypomanic reactions" to certain medications, because they had to. It was too obvious. But introducing the idea of DD-NOS would have everyone thinking Sybil and I just don't want that. For one thing, that doesn't adequately describe my condition. My therapist has had several DID clients and worked with them in an inpatient setting as well, when there used to be wards for the condition. And he says he never knows what box to put me in because I'm definitely not DID. But I'm more than the normal splitting of work self from home self from playing with my son. So that puts me in the wastebasket DD-NOS. The only book I've fond that describes (even close) my own experience is "The Myth of Sanity" by Martha Stout.
I don't find it difficult at all not to tell anyone. The fallout from telling would way outweigh any support I might get. I'm even afraid to tell anything here. Even doctors who should know better react with a bit of.... I don't know what to call it. But no where near as matter of factly as my therapist. It makes me feel bad.
>
> > I prefer "ego state" to "alter" because the word "alter" seems to imply that there is a core and then there are alters, and that really isn't the case with me. Or if it is, I have no idea which is which.
>
> I noticed you used the phrase ego state before. What does that mean actually? So you don't have any alter personalities and never did, or they have all integrated after you achieved co-consciousness?I have no desire for integration. I resent the very idea. The "emotional" side of me would think it would really mean letting the responsible, grown up, rational, emotionally limited shell of a human who everyone thinks of as "Dinah", who goes to work, and who interacts the world take over. The "rational" side of me wants nothing to do with the messy emotions. I'm pretty firm on not wanting integration and my therapist is respectful of that.
I dislike the word alter because the "emotional" side of me would claim that that was the original Dinah and the "rational" side was merely a "front" that developed the illusion of separate consciousness - like Data on Star Trek? The "rational" side would insist that since that's the part that largely that interacts with the world and is present most of the time, the "emotional" side is just a troublesome leftover of what it chose to leave behind. So each side claims core personality status and neither wishes to be called an alter. The term ego state is much preferred. Separate centers of consciousness would be even better, but more unwieldly. Separate levels of consciousness is what my therapist would say. And that works out just fine with me too.
> > And I suspect you're right about people wanting demand performances. And you're right that that is abusive. I am sooooo glad my therapist reacts as matter of factly as I do. He never asks to speak to some other part of me, or does anything that makes me feel like I'm anything but a perfectly normal human being.
>
> What do you mean that he never asks to speak to some "other" part of you? How would he do that? I feel like my T treats me with respect and absolutely like a normal human being but he naturally wants contact with my alters too.
>
My emotional self was only able to communicate by bolts of emotion for many years and I would just find myself doing things I didn't understand or having reactions that made no sense to me. I spoke in terms of me and me back then, but the emotional self just started directly communicating a year or so ago. My therapist never asked before then, because he didn't want to encourage an iatrogenic phenomenon. My therapist never asked after that because he never really makes a big deal about it, and asking would make a big deal of it. He just talks to whatever ego states presents himself. He talks to them in a different way, in the way that each is likely to respond to by appealing to, say, logic or emotion (or self interest) as needed. But he would never dream of asking to talk to whoever wasn't there. For one thing, I would probably resent that. For another thing, it's just not that easy to comply. I can't shift back and forth on request. My emotional self usually shows up for therapy. My rational self, of course, feels no need for therapy.> I hope you don't mind me asking you some questions, I was just a little confused by some of the things you said and really want to understand what you meant!
>
>
I don't blame you for being confused. I don't think I'm the typical presentation of anything. Hence the DD-NOS rather than DID. But I hope I didn't offend by venting my own frustration.
poster:Dinah
thread:334109
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20040409/msgs/334847.html