Discussion of Multiple Personality Disorder

[Fade]

As inspired by another thread, here's one where we can discuss the psychological phenomena known as Multiple Personality Disorder, or more accurately, Dissociative Identity Disorder.


The way the movies and television portrays this condition is not really very accurate as to what is really gone on in the mind of a dissociative. So, the perception people have about the disorder would lead to them believing it doesn't exist. And, they are right, in that sense. A dissociative doesn't have dozens of different people living inside of them with different memories and feelings. At least, I have never met anyone who genuinely suffers from that condition. :D

In fact, the majority of cases in which a person was displaying such tendencies, the psychologist was to blame. I recall several cases where a person would claim MPD as a defense, only to have the psychologist expose them as frauds.

Here is how it was done:

Person makes the claim.
Person undergoes counseling to verify.
Person is pounded under scrutiny to see if they personalities are consistent.
Psychologist drops hints, very subtle, pointing to the way a "real" dissociative acts.
Person begins taking on these traits.

Voila, person exposed.

However, there is a real condition (in my opinion, being that I don't suffer from it, I can never be 100% certain what goes on in the brains of my fellow primates) in which dissociation takes place. This condition is strongly linked to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. It is thought that often an extremely traumatic event can spawn "new" personality. A memory, or entire set of memories, is absolutely repressed within the mind, and the conscious mind has no ability to remember that the events ever took place. This can sometimes bleed over, for lack of a better term, into other aspects of their waking minds.

It can also happen on a more immediate basis. For instance, during a rape, a person can escape from the situation and completely dissociate. The result would be a big blank surrounding the period. Nearly any trauma of severe enough significance can cause this, I have heard statistics citing things like 5% of all the population has suffered this at one point, though I have absolutely no idea if this is true or not, so take that with a grain of salt.

Research suggests that people who do wind up dissociating suffered significant trauma at many different points throughout their childhood. Because of this trauma, the child creates what is called an alternate ego-state. That is, a place where that trauma doesn't exist, and the child is normal and happy. This new ego-state can, and sometimes does, rise when the child grows into an adult. The escape, in some people, can be so severe that they cease to be able to function.

I am sure there is a lot of ground that I didn't cover, but this is because I only have a passing fancy with MPD and DID at all. My specialities (which were schizophrenia, as well as general sociology) had only passing acquaintance with the concept of new personalities (as opposed to hallucination).

For more information, I suggest google.

Or, read things like
http://www.sidran.org/didbr.html
http://www.psycom.net/mchugh.html
http://www.healthubs.com/dissociative/

And of course, our friends at ReligiousTolerance.org has links to arguments for and against
http://www.religioustolerance.org/mpd_did.htm

[Denise]

Fade, this state of repressed memory, how many people repress and how many don't? How uncommon is it? For me, a traumatic event is etched in my mind and it's hard to forget. Why does one disassociate, and some do not?

[Fade]

Why does one disassociate, and some do not?

I don't know for sure.

Perhaps something to do with ones culture. We do a lot to predispose our children to different phobias and disorders. I dare say most psychological problems are either directly or indirectly caused by ones parents. I don't think Freud was 100% off the mark in his musings on the role our parents play in our psychological development.

It seems to me that our minds are much too complex to have evolved a set of instructions along with our intelligence. I think nature granted us only the ability to eat and reproduce, and the rest of our gray matter was pretty much open to whatever environment we happened to live in. I wish I had some big book of statistics telling me who does and who does not begin to dissociate, but I don't. In fact, I have never actually participated directly in either a study involving this disorder, nor was I present during it's treatment.

[BillyJoe]

Fade,

At the age of about two or three, a teenager stubbed out his cigarette on the lower right hand side of my abdomen. I only found this out when, in my own teens, I asked my father how I'd gotten that scar.

Should I be looking for a hidden personality?

[aggle_rithm]

Originally posted by Denise
Fade, this state of repressed memory, how many people repress and how many don't? How uncommon is it? For me, a traumatic event is etched in my mind and it's hard to forget. Why does one disassociate, and some do not?

NO ONE dissociates from traumatic events. One of our defense mechanisms is to remember traumatic events more clearly, so we can form a strategy if it should happen again. The only way they could be forgotten is if a person's long-term memory is either compromised by physical trauma, or the person is very young and hasn't developed long-term memory yet.

[aggle_rithm]

Originally posted by Fade

It can also happen on a more immediate basis. For instance, during a rape, a person can escape from the situation and completely dissociate. The result would be a big blank surrounding the period. Nearly any trauma of severe enough significance can cause this, I have heard statistics citing things like 5% of all the population has suffered this at one point, though I have absolutely no idea if this is true or not, so take that with a grain of salt.

It's important to draw a distinction between people who dissociate from a memory and those who simply decline to talk about it. This is especially true when sexual assault is involved. Also, I would be interested to know how many of those 5% suffered physical trauma that could account for their "dissociation".


Research suggests that people who do wind up dissociating suffered significant trauma at many different points throughout their childhood. Because of this trauma, the child creates what is called an alternate ego-state. That is, a place where that trauma doesn't exist, and the child is normal and happy. This new ego-state can, and sometimes does, rise when the child grows into an adult. The escape, in some people, can be so severe that they cease to be able to function.


I don't know to what research you are referring, but I'm skeptical about its quality. The idea that people can dissociate from trauma is based mainly on anecdotes and folklore. Pop psychologists have been reinforcing this belief in each other for years.

Any study that involves memories of a KNOWN, VERIFIABLE traumatic event (such as the kidnapped schoolchildren a while back who were buried underground) has shown that memory of the event was very clear and relatively accurate. In the case of the kidnapped children, NOT ONE of them repressed the memory. If the phenomenon is as widespread as some psychologists say, then why didn't at least one of them "dissociate"?

Most anecdotes of repressed memory are based on ASSUMED, UNFALSIFIABLE traumatic events, such as alleged sexual abuse before the age of three.

[Fade]

There's the problem aggle, it's not always possible to verify events.

As with most things in psychology, take it with a grain of salt.

[JeffR]

I'm pretty open to the idea that MPD may be real, but I don't think it's possible to prove or disprove it. It's all about what's going on in the mind of the "victim". In a particular case you might be able to show that MPD is being faked, but that wouldn't prove there are no real cases.

I have only read popular accounts of MPD, but what seems to be a common thread is repeated exposure to the same traumatic event such as beatings or molestation. The victim knows what 's coming and knows there's nothing he/she can do about it. The dissociation supposedly is a coping mechanism for escaping from a familiar trauma which the victim is powerless to avoid.

BTW, is there such a thing as NPD (No Personality Disorder)? I think I might have it ;)

[Fade]

I have noticed more Washingtonians lately!

Seems there are, what, 3 of us now?

It's not a problem with us.

[JeffR]

Originally posted by Fade
I have noticed more Washingtonians lately!

Seems there are, what, 3 of us now? Could be just one - a core and two alters.

[BillyJoe]

Originally posted by BillyJoe
Fade,

At the age of about two or three, a teenager stubbed out his cigarette on the lower right hand side of my abdomen. I only found this out when, in my own teens, I asked my father how I'd gotten that scar.

Should I be looking for a hidden personality? You didn't reply so you probably thought my question wasn't serious but.....

My point was that that cigarette burning into my abdomen at age two or three must have bloody well hurt. Yet I don't remember it. But it couldn't have been so bad that I would have repressed it. So what gives?

[aggle_rithm]

I was mistaken when I said memories of traumatic events were "very clear and relatively accurate". Studies show they are NOT accurate, but tend to become distorted over time. However, the basic elements are not forgotten.

The studies in question were discussed in these articles:

C.P. Malmquist, "Children who Witness Parental Murder: Post Traumatic Aspects"

L. C. Terr, "Chowchilla Revisited: Effects of Psychic Trauma Four Years After a School Bus Kidnapping"

It might be difficult to find the articles themselves, but there are references to them all over the internet.

[Fade]

My point was that that cigarette burning into my abdomen at age two or three must have bloody well hurt. Yet I don't remember it. But it couldn't have been so bad that I would have repressed it. So what gives?

There's your answer.

[Denise]

Originally posted by Fade


There's your answer.

Yes, but isn't it true that it is currently believed by many of the professionals that a person cannot remember back to the age of two? That what a person may feel are memories of that time are actually created memories from family members telling the subject about certain events?

[BillyJoe]

But I do have memories from the age of two or three.

We arrived in Australia when I was about two and a half and I remember the immigration camp especially the shower sheds, the smell of the glycerine soap.....and the two young girls from the camp who used to delight in washing me :)

The cigarette incident happened later after we had moved into rented accomodation. It was the landlord's son who perpretated the act.

[Jeff Corey]

Most adults don't remember many events from before the age of 5. This is called "infant amnesia" and may be due to the slow maturation of the hippocampus.The puzzling thing is that 5 year olds can remember events from the ages of 3 and 4.

Serious memory researchers like Beth Loftus doubt that traumatic memories are repressed, while clinicians are more likely to believe so (without any hard data).

[Denise]

Originally posted by BillyJoe
But I do have memories from the age of two or three.

We arrived in Australia when I was about two and a half and I remember the immigration camp especially the shower sheds, the smell of the glycerine soap.....and the two young girls from the camp who used to delight in washing me :)

The cigarette incident happened later after we had moved into rented accomodation. It was the landlord's son who perpretated the act.

I have a memory from about 2 as well. But it seems that many of the researchers feel that an adult cannot have any memories of being two years old. I'm not quite sure why that is, and that's why I posted the query.

[Fade]

Originally posted by BillyJoe
But I do have memories from the age of two or three.

We arrived in Australia when I was about two and a half and I remember the immigration camp especially the shower sheds, the smell of the glycerine soap.....and the two young girls from the camp who used to delight in washing me :)

The cigarette incident happened later after we had moved into rented accomodation. It was the landlord's son who perpretated the act.

The mind is funny like that.

I remember how my mother smelled when I was young. I asked her about it one day and she said she was particularly fond of a sort of lavender soap that she had found on sale, so she bought a LARGE amount of it and used it for years and years until she ran out and couldn't find it again.

What you have to understand about memory is that it's all associative. Think of our brains as a sophisticated version of winzip, that uses files all over your computer to zip things down into virtually non-existent files, that nevertheless can inflate to something quite large. We remember things through a filter of emotion and previous associations. So, something which ALREADY associates strongly will more often be remembered more clearly.

For instance, I don't like baseball. I have attended maybe three games in my life. I don't remember many specifics of them, other than the teams playing and having my neck sunburned at one. However, I have been to literally hundreds of symphonies during my life, and I can distinctly remember most of them. I can remember what they were playing, how specific movements worked, where my seating was, how it effected the sound I was getting, and if a particular favourite of mine was highlighted that night.

This is because I already have a large background in symphonic music!

For early childhood memories, it's often roll of the dice as to what you will and will not remember. Also, there is no single defining event that will give you a mental illness, it's almost always the result of MANY things.

Yes, but isn't it true that it is currently believed by many of the professionals that a person cannot remember back to the age of two? That what a person may feel are memories of that time are actually created memories from family members telling the subject about certain events?

TOO SPOOKY!

I had written up a few paragraphs about this exact topic under what you quoted and decided to snip it all because I was tired at the time and it probably wouldn't have been very concise!

Most "memories" we have from early childhood are, indeed, very fragmented actual memories liberally soaked with what our parents have told us. This is often why child-informed adoptees often feel as if they have no sense of cultural belonging. They don't have anyone telling them stories of their early childhood. In a sense, they never had one!

[BillyJoe]

Originally posted by Fade
What you have to understand about memory is that it's all associative. Think of our brains as a sophisticated version of winzip, that uses files all over your computer to zip things down into virtually non-existent files, that nevertheless can inflate to something quite large. We remember things through a filter of emotion and previous associations. So, something which ALREADY associates strongly will more often be remembered more clearly.This sounds right.

I was probably washed by those young girls every day :) :) :) and smelled the soap every day but I can remember only one occasion when this actually happened. This "occasion" could have been a compilation of all the times that it happened. The repeated occurrences could have served to consolidate the memory.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

My family was involved in a bad automobile accident when I was 2 1/2. I can remember various things about the hospital room. I can remember singing with my dad. So I haven't repressed all of that event.

Can't remember much else until about five.

~~ Paul

[sickstan]

Originally posted by BillyJoe
You didn't reply so you probably thought my question wasn't serious but.....

My point was that that cigarette burning into my abdomen at age two or three must have bloody well hurt. Yet I don't remember it. But it couldn't have been so bad that I would have repressed it. So what gives?

Childhood is full of memory holes. The fact that you were 2 or 3 years old lends credence to the normal amnesia of early childhood. Do many of you remember getting that injury that caused that scar over your eyebrow. Most likely, you remember only that someone told you that you were jumping on the couch and fell onto the cocktail table, eyebrow first. That you actually remember the pain or the circumstances of this incidence is uncommon.

[sickstan]

Originally posted by BillyJoe
This sounds right.

I was probably washed by those young girls every day :) :) :) and smelled the soap every day but I can remember only one occasion when this actually happened. This "occasion" could have been a compilation of all the times that it happened. The repeated occurrences could have served to consolidate the memory.

Smells are our deepest and most persistent memories. I can still go back to my first grade school year in Taiwan simply from smelling one of those erasers. This is probably because the hippocampus is adjacent and shares some function with the olefactory cortex in the temporal lobe.

Sometimes music has the same effect. Play any 80s or 90s station and you can begin recalling events that happened when that song was being played to death on local radio stations. Whenever I think of the song "Pluckles" on the violin, I see aquariums filled with swordtails, as I got my first aquarium at the time I was learning that song.

[Dancing David]

The problem with repressed memories is confabulation, our brains make up stuff to fill in the holes in perceptual reality, look through just one eye, do you see a hole where the optic nerve goes through the retina? A lot of people who suffer head trauma have confabulated memories of the time prior to the accident.

I can't remember where but I remember reading that there was a reseach study that showed sixty percent of repressed tauma being collaborated by an adult who knew of the event but didn't discuss it, of course the study did not say how amny were in the interviews.

In my personal experience the memories were there, I just let them live side by side with the other memories, I am totaly against the use of hypnosis in therapt except to induce relaxation.

Peace
dancing David

[BillyJoe]

Originally posted by sickstan
Childhood is full of memory holes. No disagreement here. In fact, the further you go back the more holes than memory. And the first couple of years is one big black hole.

Originally posted by sickstan
Do many of you remember getting that injury that caused that scar over your eyebrow. Most likely, you remember only that someone told you that you were jumping on the couch and fell onto the cocktail table, eyebrow first. That you actually remember the pain or the circumstances of this incidence is uncommon. Remembering pain is uncommon? That's interesting. I just assumed that I should remember something that was as painful as a cigarette burn. Apparently I screamed my friggin' head off and remained unconsolable for hours afterwards.

[BillyJoe]

Originally posted by sickstan
Smells are our deepest and most persistent memories. Hot freshly baked bread. :)

Originally posted by sickstan
Sometimes music has the same effect. There was a song called "Freedom" about twelve years ago while I was renovating my present work place before starting off on my own. Does anyone remember that song.


BTW, sickstan, thanks for your responses.

[BillyJoe]

Originally posted by Dancing David
The problem with repressed memories is confabulation, our brains make up stuff to fill in the holes in perceptual reality, look through just one eye, do you see a hole where the optic nerve goes through the retina? Sort of, but I'm not sure that you should use the phrase "fill in" without using the "scare quotes". Nothing is actually "filled in". But probably you understand this?

As a matter of interest regarding the blind spot.......

http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/gifs/blindspot1bw.gif

Close your left eye and stare at the cross mark in the diagram with your right eye. Off to the right you should be able to see the spot. Don't LOOK at it; just notice that it is there off to the right Now slowly move toward the computer screen. Keep looking at the cross mark while you move. At a particular distance, probably a foot or so, the spot will disappear (it will reappear again if you move even closer). The spot disappears because it falls on the optic nerve head, the hole in the photoreceptor sheet.

[Dancing David]

Look at a table cloth, look at wall paper. Use one eye, where is the hole, it is about the sixe of your fist. Your brain makes up the stuff that you see there.

Peace
dancing David

[BillyJoe]

Originally posted by Dancing David
Look at a table cloth, look at wall paper. Use one eye, where is the hole, it is about the sixe of your fist. Your brain makes up the stuff that you see there.David,

One part of the brain discriminates shapes and another part of the brain discriminates colors. This gives us colored shapes - like your rectangular blue tablecloth. There is no information coming from the blind spot so it doesn't affect the outcome. In other words the brain doesn't "make up"or "fill in" because it doesn't need to - an absence of information doesn't have to be accounted for.

BillyJoe :)

[DrMatt]

I could believe the notion of something like MPD as a result of physical brain trauma. MPD as a collateral to PTSD still seems to me like a learned behavior like being-hypnotized.

[Fade]

Originally posted by DrMatt
I could believe the notion of something like MPD as a result of physical brain trauma. MPD as a collateral to PTSD still seems to me like a learned behavior like being-hypnotized.

Depends on how you define "learned"

Do you mean taught by an outside agency? Then no.

Do you mean internalized to the point of disorder? Then yes.

The second way is how quite a few of our disorders start.

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by BillyJoe
David,

One part of the brain discriminates shapes and another part of the brain discriminates colors. This gives us colored shapes - like your rectangular blue tablecloth. There is no information coming from the blind spot so it doesn't affect the outcome. In other words the brain doesn't "make up"or "fill in" because it doesn't need to - an absence of information doesn't have to be accounted for.

BillyJoe :)

What if you look at wallpaper or checkered table cloth, there is no data ... hey are you mocker me? I meant that our brain fill in the checkers for us, it makes them up because they are not percieved in the visual cortex at that locale.

Why should thier be a diagnosis of MPD, it is now DID and therefore not to be used. I still feel that the people I met who thought that they had alters actually had Boderline Disorder.

Peace

[DrMatt]

Originally posted by Fade


Depends on how you define "learned"

Do you mean taught by an outside agency? Then no.

Do you mean internalized to the point of disorder? Then yes.

The second way is how quite a few of our disorders start.

Umm, I'm a little unclear on this distinction. Most of what we learn is not ... at least deliberately ... taught by outside agencies. Internalizing to the point of disorder seems to me to be the basis of belief-by-faith, too, yet religion is not currently classified as a disorder. In my lifetime, only the Soviet Union ever did that. So I'm hoping you can go into more detail about this distinction, as it seems quite confusing to me. Perhaps there's a more important distinction than the agent involved?

[Fade]

Originally posted by DrMatt


Umm, I'm a little unclear on this distinction. Most of what we learn is not ... at least deliberately ... taught by outside agencies. Internalizing to the point of disorder seems to me to be the basis of belief-by-faith, too, yet religion is not currently classified as a disorder. In my lifetime, only the Soviet Union ever did that. So I'm hoping you can go into more detail about this distinction, as it seems quite confusing to me. Perhaps there's a more important distinction than the agent involved?

Learn by doing, rather than learn by rote.

[BillyJoe]

Originally posted by Dancing David
What if you look at wallpaper or checkered table cloth, there is no data.....No, there is no information (data) coming in to the brain from the area of the tablecloth corresponding to the blind spot. That must be clear surely.

Originally posted by Dancing David
I meant that our brain fill in the checkers for us, it makes them up because they are not percieved in the visual cortex at that locale...... David,

Definitely the brain does not fill in. To say that the brain fills in implies there is a picture in the brain corresponding to the reality out there. This is not the case. This is the old discredited idea of the "Cartesian Theatre". This does not happen.
Features get discriminated in different parts of the brain and there they stay. They do not come together again to form a picture in the brain. There being no picture, there is no need to fill in anything.

Getting it?

Originally posted by Dancing David
.....hey are you mocker me? No, but do you mock me? - I just noticed your signature.

[Dancing David]

I no mocker you I praiser you, great quote, I remove if it doth offend.

Uh, I don't follow your argument, when I took nuero-biology there was a lot of discussion of how the brain does project visual images in the visual cortex, can you point me in the direction of different reseach? There is also this real cool time sharing agreement between the audio-cortex and the visual cortex.

Evilyn Satinoff (nueropsychology). U of I, 1986 said ' and your brain just makes that up'

I didn't mention the Cartesian theater, so where do you come from, always willing to learn more.

I look at the checked cloth with one eye, I don't see a hole where the information is not, why don't I see the hole?

Peace

[BillyJoe]

Originally posted by Dancing David
I no mocker you I praiser you, great quote, I remove if it doth offend.No, please leave it. It has only happened once before (with Loki - something to do with p-zombies)

Originally posted by Dancing David
Uh, I don't follow your argument, when I took nuero-biology there was a lot of discussion of how the brain does project visual images in the visual cortex.....If there is a projected image, who is there to see it. And, if there is an eye in there to see it, presumably that eye needs a brain behind it to process the image that it sees. And now I think you can see an infinite regress.
No, different features of the visual input (such as color, hue, brightness, texture, shade, borders, shapes etc) are processed in different parts of the cortex. They do not then come together again to form a picture otherwise......(see above)

Originally posted by Dancing David
.....can you point me in the direction of different reseach? Sadly, no. It is what I've picked up in my reading of the subject.

Originally posted by Dancing David
Evilyn Satinoff (nueropsychology). U of I, 1986 said ' and your brain just makes that up'That's a few years ago now. Lot's of progress, especially in this field, in the last 17 years.

Originally posted by Dancing David
I didn't mention the Cartesian theater, so where do you come from, always willing to learn more. I thought you were thinking in terms of what is known in some quarters as the "Cartesian Theater". It is more or less what I have described above......the idea that the brain forms a picture - a replica - within it of what it sees out there. This is a false notion.

Originally posted by Dancing David
I look at the checked cloth with one eye, I don't see a hole where the information is not, why don't I see the hole?In one part of your cortex your brain has discriminated a shape - the rectangular shape of the tablecloth. Somewhere else, probably close by, your brain has calculated the dimensions of this rectangle. Thus are stored a representation of "rectangle" and "width" and "breadth" - not an actual rectangle of this width and breadth. In another part of your cortex, your brain has discriminated a pattern - the checked pattern contained within the rectangle of the tablecloth. So you have representations for "rectangle", "width", "breadth" and "checked". So what do you see? Well, of course a rectangular tablecloth of a certain width and breadth with a checked pattern. The "hole" is not represented in your brain because there is no information about it reaching your brain.

Getting it now? :)

regards,
BillyJoe

[Dancing David]

So they now undstand the roots of confabulation a little better, so there is this rectangle image and this checked image in 'abstaracted' areas of the brain. The brain is still filling in the visual gap in the direct perception, and it must feed back with the direct perception or we could not 'see' squares that were imperfect in the tablecloth. Wether our brain 'fills' in the gap or used abstaracted overlays, it is still creating continuity where it does not exist. The persistance of vision and smoothing are well studied phenomena where our brain alters images.

My point is that our brains have a tendencacy to fill in and smoothout perception, just as a person who has a head trauma will have a strong recollection that they were headed to the gas station, while twenty eyewitnesses will say they were headed to the grocery store,

Thi smeans that there is a basis for momories being false even though they are 'valid' memories and not manufactured under hypnosis.

Do you get Cartesian popcorn in the Cartesian theater?

Peace

[BillyJoe]

Originally posted by Dancing David
The brain is still filling in the visual gap in the direct perception, and it must feed back with the direct perception or we could not 'see' squares that were imperfect in the tablecloth. Wether our brain 'fills' in the gap or used abstaracted overlays, it is still creating continuity where it does not exist.....My point is that our brains have a tendencacy to fill in and smoothout perception.....Okay, you're not getting it. :(

I don't mind if you say "filling in"(with the scare quotes in place) but filling in is wrong.
My point is that there is no picture in the brain. There is no picture that requires filling in of the details. There is no theatre in there. And....

Originally posted by Dancing David
Do you get Cartesian popcorn in the Cartesian theater?.....there is no popcorn. Sorry. :(

[Dancing David]

Excuse me Billy Joe but you may be the one who is wrong. The phrase projection is commonly used in discussions of how the brain represents visual material.
I am not talking philosophy here, our brains create a representation of the material that our eyes sense.

You are the one resorting to the notion of 'areas' of the brain that 'represent shapes'. Do you not understand that when I see a triangle there is first the raw sensation, this is then processed by the visual cortex to create a represnetation of the perception, where I percieve the details of the field and the details of the percieved object lying on the field, that is then interpreted by the frontal lobe as a triangle. You seem to be saying that there is a visual area that percieves a triangle?

So whats your source?Did you read it where? I may be out of college seventeen years but I can go to journals of psychology and neuro-psychiatry. Was your study making reference to people who have brain truama and have difficulty pointing out different shapes? This is very different from the ability of my brain to process visual information.


Peace

edited: to remove my cranky attitude!

[BillyJoe]

Originally posted by Dancing David
Excuse me Billy Joe but you may be the one who is wrong. Me?

Originally posted by Dancing David
.....our brains create a representation of the material that our eyes sense. Yes, except that I would have to know what you mean by "sense" (see below).

Originally posted by Dancing David
The phrase projection is commonly used in discussions of how the brain represents visual material. Projection is wrong. Now if you had said "projection" (with the scare quotes firmly in place)......

Originally posted by Dancing David
Do you not understand that when I see a triangle there is first the raw sensation.... By "raw sensation" do you mean the chemical changes in the retina caused by the incoming photons? This, of course, would be something of which our brains are not aware don't you agree - hence my caution with that word "sense".

Originally posted by Dancing David
.....this is then processed by the visual cortex to create a represnetation of the perception, where I percieve the details of the field and the details of the percieved object lying on the field, that is then interpreted by the frontal lobe as a triangle..... As with your use of the word "sense", I am a little confused about your use of the word "perception" here. Do you mean the the pattern of neural activity produced in the brain as a result of those chemical reactions in the retina? Again our brains would be unaware of this - and hence again my problem with the word "perception".

Originally posted by Dancing David
You seem to be saying that there is a visual area that percieves a triangle? I see. You are saying that the visual cortex does the representing and the frontal lobe does the interpreting. Well, I'm not sure but we are getting away from the point a bit aren't we?

Originally posted by Dancing David
So whats your source?Did you read it where? I may be out of college seventeen years but I can go to journals of psychology and neuro-psychiatry. Was your study making reference to people who have brain truama and have difficulty pointing out different shapes? This is very different from the ability of my brain to process visual information. As I said before, it was from general reading on the subject.
One source that comes to mind is Daniel Dennett's "Consciousness Explained" (he admits the title is a bit pretentious)

Originally posted by Dancing David
edited: to remove my cranky attitude!I hope the unintended tone of my replies weren't responsible for that. :(

regards,
BillyJoe.

[Dancing David]

Hey dude, I am sorry if you don't like the way phrases are commonly slung around in psychology, I suppose it is jargon of some sort and they are words that are in common usage as well.
Generaly sense is something that a 'sense organ' directly percieve(called sensation), perception is what our brain does to make it coherent to our frontal cortex.

The point of confabulation is simple, when I look at a visual field with one eye, there is this area that I percieve that has no direct correlation to direct sensation of my retinas. So in some sense it is manufactured by my brain.

There are many other areas where our brains manufacture things as part of perception, which was the point of my post.

I am not saying that there is a little projection screen or anything like that. Confabualtion is a real phenomena of our organic senses.

So when dealing with the memories of trauma survivors it is important to not use hypnosis or other means that might lead the brain to confabualting memeoris.

I have worked with people who have believed that they had alters, and I have worked with trauma survivors. I do believe in the trauma especialy as trauma survivors can usually find someone who verifies thier stories. I don't feel that children who were traumatized after the age of six have any trouble with repressed memories.

Funk On.

[BillyJoe]

Originally posted by Dancing David
Hey dude, I am sorry if you don't like the way phrases are commonly slung around in psychology, I suppose it is jargon of some sort and they are words that are in common usage as well.
Generaly sense is something that a 'sense organ' directly percieve(called sensation), perception is what our brain does to make it coherent to our frontal cortex.Well, it seems language is part of our problem here......

You say
"sense is something that a 'sense organ' directly percieves"
"perception is what our brain does....."

But "percieves" and "perception" are different forms of the same word. So you have the eye doing what the brain does. See my confusion?

Originally posted by Dancing David
The point of confabulation is simple, when I look at a visual field with one eye, there is this area that I percieve that has no direct correlation to direct sensation of my retinas. So in some sense it is manufactured by my brain.It's probably worse than that.

The brain manufactures most of what we see. If you were to walk into a room and look at the wall opposite which is completely covered in wallpaper with a repetitive pattern - say a picture of Marilyn Munro - what does you brain do? It processes the pattern - the picture of Marilyn Munro - and more or less says "repeat that all over the wall". In other words there a correlation in the brain of one Marilyn Munro picture only - not fifty or a hundred or whatever the case may be.

I suppose it could be called confabulation but its really just the imperfect way the human brain has evolved to deal with the visual input. There has been a trade off between accuracy and energy costs.

cya,
BillyJoe

[Tallgrass Prairie]

I'm new to this Forum so I'm a bit late on this thread that I am resurrecting. I am excited and relieved to see this important topic being discussed openly and rationally somewhere! I see there was another thread on it even earlier that appears to have derailed but nonetheless has some good discussion at the beginning relevant to the topic overall:

www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18460&highlight=multiple+personalities

I work in mental health and so I have a fair bit of direct exposure with the scenario/dynamics in question. I have been responsible for the safety of multiple inpatients bringing that diagnosis with them, dubiously bestowed on them by their psychiatrist, their therapist , or another facility that "specializes" in DID. I have to deal with the consequences of this miscarriage of thinking and justice daily, whilstproviding for the safety and welfare of a group of inpatients, many of whom usually carry more accurate diagnoses. I endeavor to deliver vvery progressive care to often very sick people, often at their worst, and under challenging conditions. Our facility goes to great lengths to be customer service oriented whilt maintainingg safety. So before I vent a bit, and gratefully stop pulling punches for a moment, I will say that being punitive or judgemental are qualities that I am tested on daily and receive rather a lot more abuse in the process of refraining from than many people might imagine. There is a great commitment to customer satisfaction and least-restrictive interventions at my facility. On with the OP and truthseeking......

My observations, if I may weigh-in:

* I highly recommend and agree with the views of Paul McHugh of Johns-Hopkins on this matter. I believe the OP had a link to some of his comments. He nails it, as far as I'm concerned.

* The individuals I have seen are/become quite ill from a psychiatric standpoint. There is little question that they are highly dysfunctional, "broken" in some significant way, if you will.

* That being said, I am tremendously skeptical regarding the popular notions surrounding dissociation. I have not seen one patient/client yet that I did not think was made worse by the diagnosis. I also can say that I have seen plenty of empirical evidence of inconsistencies in the their stories/presentations, and the most outrageous behavior being modified or exhibited selectively depending largely on the audience.

* The diagnosis, so far as I have seen, is not scientifically arrived at nor established by any sort of rationale remotely smacking of objective, measurable, non-falsifiable means or criteria. Want ot exploit others and never be held accountable? This is the diagnosis for you! It is fertile, fertile ground for fraud, commitment to dysfunction, milking the system financially, avoiding responsibility, fostering abuse, and decompensating clients. It's a clinical embarrassment along the lines of bloodletting, though clearly not as prevalent as the latter was at it's height of application.

* As for dissociation, as others have pointed out it is difficult to measure this objectively. You become dependent on the self-report of the client and their presentation. I am relatively open to the notion that people dissociate. But I think that we should be extremely cautious in exaggerating the possibilities to the extent that we [I]presume that anyone either has distinct personalities that function autonomously without co-awareness. That sort of conclusion should be considered extra-ordinary and demand tremendous scrutiny, IMHO. Once a person acquires the status of not being aware of nor responsible for their actions you open up a Pandaora's box of flagrant irresponsibility and destructive actions. Believe me. Believe you me. I think there probably are "personality modes" or "coping modes" that most of us switch between to deal effectively with changing needs and circumstances. Some are useful. Some are dysfunctional or become so when out of their original context. But I strongly doubt that they linger as distinct personalities and I really doubt that once proper therapy begins that a person cannot bring them into awareness as one would any poor habit. Yeah, one would certainly impulsively and instinctively revert to old habits when under stress or until new ways of being are learned and become the new mode for coping, but that's pretty much like what we all have to deal with in therapy and out. If there are any authentic cases of hardcore DID level dissociation out there, I seriously doubt that they are common or anything like the hyped and dramatic spectacles that most of us hear of or see. But like bigfoot, I haven't seen any cases yet that would cause me to abandon common-sense or commit to a belief in something I have not seen any evidence of. Frankly, I find a belief in bigfoot to be far less harmful and far more positive.

* The persons that I have seen carry this diagnosis actually were severe cases of Borderline Personality Disorder, IMO. DID is just "Major Borderline Personality Disorder" from my pov. Handing a person with this sort of pattern a DID diagnosis is like handing them a license to abuse. About half of the cases I've seen were very abusive persons [who may, like many of us, have originally suffered great abuses themselves]----"emotional" predators, control/abuse-aholics. They used their diagnosis to exploit and abuse those in their sphere. It is mind-boggling to watch not only gullible, ordinary work-a-day folks succumb to the mind****, but whole teams of higher-educated professionals get sucked in, too. The Major Personality Disorder that acquires the tool of a DID diagnosis cloaks themselves in victimhood in order to victimize. In cases of Factitious Disorder, another overlooked diagnosis that I have also seen hide behind DID, they will mutilate themselves in order to control others. This is such a mind**** for the average person to try and wrap their brain around that extraordinary explanations such as DID are often believed defacto. And I doubledog dare you to try and illuminate the situation when consulting with a group of "professional" truebelievers. They become completely out of touch with their own co-dependence with the perpetrator.

* Which leads me to "what's the big deal". The DID patients that I have seen, fall into 2 groups: The highly suggestible with alterations in their ability to navigate reality and possibly some legitimate abuse history, those with other sever personality disorders and a sometimes sadistic predilection for extorting feelings and emotional energy [the sensation of control] from those in their environment. In both groups it leads to bad news the bigger the lie and story gets, and they get warped beyond their original form. It reinforces, nurtures, and exacerbates high risk behaviors in both groups. In the latter group it leads to increasingly dangerous behavior not only to the patient but those in their vicinity. Healthcare staff and mental health professionals are placed in increasingly precarious positions. The families and acquaintances of the patient, dependent on the system for guidance under the best of circumstances are encouraged to play along with the farce or appear "nonsupportive". The patients often make ourageous and dangerous demands, hide contraband and repeatedly engage in self-harm threats or spectacles that place others at risk as well. Those with Factitious Disorder actively work to maintain wounds and infections which demand attendance by the healthcare system----and that foster antibiotic resistant infections.

* None of this is to say that the patient of any classification has "conscious" insight into their dysfunction, motivations, or patterns of behavior. In fact, as with any dysfunction, the person probably initially does not or may have a very difficult time acquiring it with the best of intentions. But it's not ok,and it's even less ok to lie or to give them permission to stay stuck or abuse others. Especially when it usually results in an observable increase in high risk behavior and overall decompensation in their condition and lifestyle.

* As for the psychiatrists that propagate this bunk, well, it's a combo of greed, ego, and their own ignorance and gullibility from what I can tell. The biggest proponent in my city is also one of the most powerful and prestigious psych drs. Small pond, but he is the big fish, nonetheless. And smart enough to know better. He should be forced to write the Hippocratic Oath 1000 times.

Thanks for letting me get this off my chest. >whew< It's so a frustrating and scary when you have to sail with people that believe in this sort of flat-earth nonsense on a daily basis. Mind boggling how the preposterous takes on the airs of legitmacy to such an absurd level. If it didn't foster poor thinking, toxicity, and high risk behavior I could detach from it more easily. But it rubs my integrity the wrong way---hard. The whole diagnosis as I see it applied is sad, sick, and likely wrong.

If anyone has any other links or resources supportive to working against this sort of thing I'd appreciate them very much! I think that reform will come, but I want to do what I can to support it in the meantime for my own sanity and integrity!:)

[Tallgrass Prairie]

This is the link that Iwas referring to, that Fade kindly posted earlier in the thread. McHugh totally gets it.

www.psycom.net/mchugh.html

[Dancing David]

Highya TallGP!

I worked as a case manager for twelve years, what a blast!

What do you think about the Linnehan model?

The other issue I had was the number of people with BPD, who would not take thier meds as rperscribed and the amount of substance abuse!

Later

[Tallgrass Prairie]

Hi Dancing David,

Ahhh, a tallgrass prairie denizen. There's one of the few Tallgrass preserves/parks in Illinois....maybe a little SW of Chicago?

As for Linehan, I am only superficially aware of her work though one of my best friends has some of her tapes and offered them to me. I started to read some Linehan a while back and she made some comment that I thought pretty naive and since I get a bellyful of that at work I wasn't able to continue at that time. I have recommended that others that I work with explore it strictly as a strategic move to try and get them to re-open the topic of Borderline Personality Disorder in a more progressive and proactive fashion than was historically the case in the mental health field. It has gone completely out of style as a diagnosis both as a result of some good intentions, and also because insurance and benefits providers won't subsidize it.

There is a lot of "shooting from the hip" from pretty decent, pretty average people in my area, as far as the professionals go. I try to encourage them to recognize that getting better at treating and intervening and dealing with Borderline issues is what we should be getting better at. Hoping that some of the other pieces will fall into place if they did so. So I actually have recommended Linhan before, though I had meager defensible reason to do so other than I wanted to get them thinking about the topic, and Linehan is pretty much the only game in town progressive-treatment-wise. But bucking the retro-thinking that is the majority is above my proverbial pay-scale.

The psychiatrists made a marked and probably measurable increase in profit-friendly, subsidizable diagnoses as things have tightened as far as coverage goes. Amazingly, DID is considered fundable, and the more mundane Borderline designation is not! Huge increase in Biploar diagnoses. Whenever the dr wants a subsidizable diagnosis they make the person Bipolar and keep them on Suicide Precautions for the duration of their stay. IT's not all illegitimate, but alot of it is fast and loose----which illustrates the problem concerning how ripe for abuse the mental health arena is compared to the other specialties. There are lots of people that get needed help, and there are certainly genuine mental illnesses. Society also offers a fairly good safety net for people in a real bad way. But there is also an enormous grey area that is not quantifiable or verifiable that depends on above average honesty, wisdom and integrity etc....something in precious short supply in both the practitioners as well as clientele, unfortunately. Reflects unfavorably on the field and feeds into some pretty backwards biases that alot of people have already, sadly, and cheapens what a lot of good people try to do.

[bignickel]

Welcome Tallgrass. I found your posts to be very informative.

A suggestion for you: whenever writing more than 2 paragraphs in a post, always, ALWAYS, use the copy function on your entire post before clicking submit.

Too many times I've clicked 'submit' after typing for 10 minutes, and been confronted yet again by the 'login' screen. I either then login, and get an empty 'post' page, or I step back and get an empty 'post' page. Major unhappiness ensues as everything I've typed is now gone :mad:

Don't know if you've done other forums as well, but following this suggestion will save you much aggravation.


I remember a program on Frontline(PBS) some years ago about the whole 'recovered memory'/multiple personality disorder business. Literally business, in that these clinics would keep these poor people there and under 'treatment' as they milked their insurance companies dry.

When the insurance ran out, the patients were kicked and given an address for local 'self-help' groups. Generally, as soon as they left the 'care' of the clinics, they got better.

A few clinics were sued by the insurance companies for fraud, if memory serves me right.

[Dancing David]

The treatment while you have coverage is fairly true of the for profit clinics in general.

If you don't have health insurance or you have Public Aid you will always be reffered to whoever is the blanket coverage in your area.

It is very common for people to get cadilac treatment but little help until thier coverage runs out.

Back to the whole DID thing, it seems a lot like the Intermittent explosive Disorder, it seems to be applied when the doctor is just not sure hwta to diagnos.

In my work(I carried a case load of 30-50 individuals, most of whom were living with scizophrenia, I had occasional to work with some major 'Cluster B' individuals.

What I noticed that they had in common was
1. High levels of anxiety
2. gameplaying with medication
3. substance abuse
4. A low tolerance for boredom.



The thing I hated most was when other people would act as though alters were real! There is no proof that alters exist, the person is having a hyterical reaction to panic level anxiety. Aleter are learned behavioral sets that people engage in when they are under stress.
So they(my fellow clinicians) would henny-penny about how this person was having an alter and they would encourage the fragmentation and reward it. I always thought that the best was to just sit with them and reassure them they would be okay, once the panic attack got better.

The cool thing about the Linnehan Model (DBT), is that it encourages the client to interact prior to engaging in para suicidal behavior, after that the boundaries are up and there is no reward. It gives the client the personal choice, instead of the 'ohmigod you tried to kill yoursel' payoff that they are working towards.

(There are tall grass prairies in central illinois, they are very small and fragmented, but we have many different resopration programs. The largest is at Allerton Park in Monticello, although Urbana has a very large restoration underway. We have alocal guru named david Monk, who has catalouged most of what is left of the prairie)

[Tallgrass Prairie]

Greetings bignickel!

Thanks for the thoughtful feedback and very practical advice. Actually, I learned this the hard way, too, on another BB. Pretty demoralizing when you write on something thoroughly---or at least, lengthily-- and then it goes down a cyber sinkhole, yes!

you wrote:

A few clinics were sued by the insurance companies for fraud, if memory serves me right.

Yes, there there were some notorious examples of this, especially at a Rush hospital in Chicago...?

I actually hope this occurs more because the drs that promote it are some mixture of greedy/selfish/ignorant and thus are a menace. Also because I think that will bring about the necessary reforms faster than any dedication to truth will. Hit 'em in the wallet.

Get more of those stories circulating in the media and I would anticipate that a number of folks will cash in their drs for their 30 pieces of silver. A large court award is no sure thing so it will be the few that feel the risk to benefit ratio is worth it---that is that they can sacrifice their current dysfunctional symbiosis with their treatment team for the likelihood of a scholarship through the remainder of life. Depends on what they are hungry for and where they can get the most of it though. But some, upon hearing accounts of others shaking down the system and the vulnerable, I have confidence, will not be able to resist this spectacular drama and it's secondary gain, any more than they could when they acquired their DID diagnosis. Bring it on, even if we have to retch a little at the types of persons that will financially gain from it [presuming that there is the probability that a goodly portion are going to be predatory personalities a la my personal experience].

[Tallgrass Prairie]

DD wrote:

The thing I hated most was when other people would act as though alters were real! There is no proof that alters exist, the person is having a hyterical reaction to panic level anxiety. Aleter are learned behavioral sets that people engage in when they are under stress.

Amen, brother, amen . The stories I could tell. The stories I could tell! I feel like I'm in one of those dreams where you can't run or scream or the people can't see or hear you or whatever. It is incredibly difficult to try and rehabilitate a staff person that just doesn't get it. Completely oblivious to the crudest understanding [which I would probably fall under]of the most basic principles of reinforcement and behavior modification and their role in exacerbating unsafe, unhealthy behaviors. Incredible. And they don't even seem capable of connecting the dots when the behaviors increase or decrease according to what is going on in the environment etc. The DID patients are held to an entirely different, inside out, standard of behavior and expectation set. The more crazy the staff gets, and porous their boundaries get, the more reckless, aggressive, and bold the patients get. That's what worries me. I'm adrift on a ship of fools and the only 2 people that know the score is the patient [at some level] and myself. With me out of the way they could feast on the rest of the treatment team ad infintum, if you catch my concern. Usually they save their baiting and set-up jobs for the vulnerable and they leave me mostly be. But as fast as I extinguish the behavior, others alongside reinforce it.

The best thing to do is speak to behavior not identities or personalities. I never use "names", even their own, when they are acting out as it opens up the dead-end topic of "who they are right now". I treat all behavior as routine: it is either safe and acceptable, or unsafe and unacceptable. The same as for any other patient of any other age under any other circumstance. This really makes it hard for them to work it.

No matter what they do I remain calm, supportive, but honest and pretty consistent. They mostly respect it, but a cpl of the hardcore sadistic ones constantly watch for signs of weakness and they would strategically shank me if I blinked. There is mostly easier prey around to amuse themselves with though so they seem to deem it not worth the energy----save your best antics for the most gullible people on the busiest shifts. Even then they absolutely compromise the safety of the facility and they model high risk behaviors and provoke other patients.

The other staff talk in impressed and mystified tones within earshot about what all the fascinating alters have been or are doing. They show their hands all through the game talking amongst themselves in front of the patient about how confused and and uncertain they are, and validating the presentation of alters as gospel truth. The more outrageous and abusive the behavior of the patient, the more nurturing and sympathetic they get. They telegraph their own anxiety level openly. I explain to new employees as fast as I can that its like one of those sci-fi creatures that feeds off of emotional energy----you have to consciously monitor your own presentation at all times to not generate excess energy that the dysfunction will feed on. I ask myself, "What Would Data Do?" :D Seriously, I find that character to be a good reference point or mental landmark when trying to think how one should behave in a professional, calm, objective, positive, open, curious, alert, matter of fact manner. It works quite well for me. Anyhoo, if my coworkers were of the ilk that watched programs like that [it's flawed, sure, but somewhat more thought-provoking than much of the rest of the drivel on tv whcih, granted, ain't saying much] then I probably would not be having to explain to them how they are so far off course. :rolleyes:

Glad I found this thread and registered. I needed to get some validation!

Stay sane!

[Phaycops]

Originally posted by Tallgrass Prairie

I feel like I'm in one of those dreams where you can't run or scream or the people can't see or hear you or whatever.

I think a lot of us feel this way pretty often :) It's incredibly frustrating work trying to get people to un-believe something that they're so immersed in, be it the discussion at hand or a belief that chiropractic keeps them from getting colds :rolleyes: I guess just hang in there and keep doing your best. I actually have been enjoying this discussion, although some of it is obviously over my head :D

This reminds me of an argument I was in on another message board. Someone told the sad story about her mother, who had been molested by her father all her life (she had remembered the abuse the whole time), finally deciding to confront the family with what she had been through to try to protect the other kids in the family. Well, what happened was that the father accused her and her therapist of "recovering" "repressed (false) memories" that weren't true, even though she'd never "repressed" jack. I explained, clearly, I thought, that her mother's father was wrong, in the sense that when a person remembers abuse their whole life it is unlikely that these memories are repressed, adding that a lot of people do recover false memories in hypnotherapy and that there's no documented evidence that trauma causes repression of memories that can later be gotten at through hypnosis. Boy, the misunderstandings that ensued. I felt like I was talking to wall. It was clear that not only did nobody know WTF they were talking about, but that they weren't actually reading my posts! (Although to be fair, one person did assert that "recovered memories" were real, so I did have a shot at a "real" debate, but it got so bogged down with me trying to make people understand the words I was writing :rolleyes: )

I guess the saddest thing is that so many of these people with these diagnoses (MPD, recovered memories, DID, etc.) become so much worse with their therapy, but that they are unable to break the cycle because they believe they are being helped by the therapy. What an awful situation. And the therapists and doctors that encourage it, albeit unconciously! Can't they see that they're not helping?! What a terrible position to be in, TallGrass. Just do your best, though, I guess. Sigh.

[Tallgrass Prairie]

Phaycops,

I wasn't trying to be a downer, I actually am pretty good at what I do and manage to extinguish a number of unsafe behaviors and establish minimal threshholds for acceptable [safe] behavior quite often in spite of therampant ignorance and good but dangerous and hopelessly misguided intentions I am surrounded by. Of late though, I've had some patients regress dangerously on me because of the nitwits I work with undoing my progress. Hence the frustration. :mad: Also, with the chronic understaffing and downsizing through attrition that so many areas of healthcare are going through right now, I'm being left increasing with a lowest common denominator staff better-suited to some other line of work, IMHO. I'm pretty patient, but when they work against the very core therapeutic aims that led me to work in mental health it chaps my proverbial ass [and integrity]. >shrug/sigh/<

You bring up another really good point about the "people of the lie" that work to squelch truthful [some are verifiable so we know that a portion are true and the claim generally is not outside possibility] claims of abuse, also. It's a balancing act to simultaneously acknowledge that both of those scenarios occur simultaneously----fraudulent claims of abuse or symptoms or narratives AND fraudulent denials of dysfunction/abuse/symptoms. And that mental illness and health issues are quite real in many instances, that significant advances have been made, and that some people really need and get essential services. These overlapping but somewhat incompatible truths are what makes mental healthcare and behavior such difficult topics. Its dependent to an unavoidable degree on a certain amount of subjective perceptions, and wisdom and honor for it all to work optimally, and even then it is challenging!

[Tallgrass Prairie]

Dancing David wrote:What I noticed that they had in common was:
1. High levels of anxiety
4. A low tolerance for boredom.


I've been thinking about this. I think that is a very substantial observation. The toying with pharmaceuticals, prescribed and otherwise, is a complex matter, but probably at least in part is an irrresponsible response, poor attempt to, balance the above 2 dynamics?

A simultaneous intolerance for both anxiety/overstimulation AND low stimulation.

Obviously that is a delicate balancing act and one that is likely a recipe for disaster. I have made that observation privately, with respect to other scenarios, and this the first I've heard someone else juxtapose it this way. I think that simultaneously isolating/neglecting a child [sensory undernourishment] cpled with active, random, physical/emotional abuse [toxic stimulation] at critical developmental stages could be the culprit. Hmmmm.

This conversation is likely going to go a bit beyond the original scope of the OP if we continue it. Iam open to and interested in hearing more about your take on Linehan if you are interested in continuing that conversation via PM?

....Back specifically to the DID dynamic. I should note for those that have limited exposure to the mental health system, and still deciding for themselves what it's all about, that in addition to my above observations about the persistent patterns of perpetrating abuse and various levels of dishonesty in certain individual hardcore cases, that none of the persons that I have seen are what you would call "happy". They are usually a co-victim of their own behavior, too. In the same way that a major alcoholic or a person that has a compulsion to check the stove 50 times a day or a bulimic is compelled by a pattern---but is often quite miserable as a result, too. And that is precisely what makes it so hard for those around them to lose their way and objectivity. Reconciling the fact that the client is both victim and perpetrator is 3-d chess, not checkers, and it is fraught with pitfalls. So I am not arguing against "helping" these unfortunate individuals, but rather that the incorrect treatment does everyone a disservice---including the client. The first priority needs to be protecting those in their vicinity, and second should be actively working to assist them in the remainder of recovery. Same as any other type of violent, abusive, unsafe individual. And again----there are individuals that get the DID designation that remain more simple and less aggressive, but are nonetheless off-course. There is still some distinct variation in the values/character/personality of the persons carrying this diagnosis case by case. But my core observation is this: DID as a diagnosis, IMHO, is bad medicine, flat-out. As McHugh suggests, the sooner we jettison such nonsense,the sooner the "real" therapy can begin/resume.

[Tallgrass Prairie]

bignickel wrote:

I remember a program on Frontline(PBS) some years ago about the whole 'recovered memory'/multiple personality disorder business. Literally business, in that these clinics would keep these poor people there and under 'treatment' as they milked their insurance companies dry.

I had a cpl of comments about this specifically, too, after I let it percolate a bit. So at the risk of getting a bad reputation around town as a postslut, I'll share them.

The toxic dance between some psychiatrists, some facilities, and some therspists---and some of their clients has a lot of unspoken complicity. When you're up close to it, it can be hard to pick any sympathetic characters in the drama, and insurance companies bring their own s**t to the table, too.

I would liken it to a junkie and their pusher. There is often a relationship between the 2 that is very difficult to come between, and also like the victims of domestic violenceperhaps [feel free to chime in and correct me as necessary, Dancing David] that you see on Cops, sometimes the person trying to help is subsequently the target of the ire of all the other dance participants! :rolleyes: The patients that I have seen are often very committed to the toxic narrative being supported and developed----their pushers. They have a voracious emotional appetite/craving/hunger, and the pusher is offering them a fix at worst, methadone at best. But often not a genuine long-term path out of the morass---aka ethical/effective treatment.

When you do not have the essential political clout to work against these forces, and the trust necessary to be emotionally present and authentic to the client in confidence, you have to watch the drama unfold and hope the "junkie"/addict gets a clue on their own and at some point ask, "Where am I going and how did I get in this handbasket?" But because of their own role and commitment to their destructive patterns, selfishness, poor coping skills, appetite for shortcuts to filling their cravings, ignorance, and perhaps traumatic histories, etc etc ----they, too foster the circumstances that inhibit persons of compassion/integrity from extending themselves in a courageous intervention sooner. Also, like parenting, when you have 2 different styles/values even when you are the "good guy" the child does not always respond in kind and go towards the light. People are complicated and tough, and like a strange stray, many people get bitten despite their good intentions at trying to help a person with a personality disorder.

bn:these clinics would keep these poor people there

This is more precisely what I am attempting to speak to. They are certainly on an unfortunate trajectory, but they also often have a role in it that they cling to and would hurt someone else [like me----or you] to protect. We have to simultaneously want to improve their lot----and simultaneously recognize that they are often complicit in their own plight and not terribly trustworthy, empathetic persons themselves? Caution is indicated in giving them too much benefiot of the doubt, but also in not giving enough. A toughie.

I try to tell new employees to regard most clients as if you were the Crocodile Hunter [WWTCHD? :D ]. You can be in awe of the splendor of diversity and life in nature. You can be nonjudgemental for the most part. You can want to protect endangered species---even predatory ones. You can want to ease suffering. But when working down by the river, even with the best of intentions, never, ever, never forget that the crocodile is not your friend. You must have a cautious respect. It is the dharma of the croc to eat you, and even when familiar with a particular one, you should always bear in mind that safety comes before sympathy/compassion. Now, I think it's possible that a personality disorder can progress into an improved "dharma", if you will----I have to believe that, and I think it can be true. But I would have to see them commit to serious change fopr a serious amount of time before I would relax my boundaries significantly.

But I would agree that the responsibilty for reform and ethical conduct,by default, has to begin withour society'ssafety net----the system itself. Tehy have to ultimately be held to a slightly higher standard of conduct as "professionals", I think. Better insight, and oversight of practitioners---especially drs.

But whenever this happens, reform is often a result of pressure from patient advocacy groups. Important, yes. But in turn they often are biased and blinded by their own agenda and they have little compassion for the caregivers in the trenches----like myself. So you have big biz greed vs naive/toxic codependence/enabling----and folks like me trapped in the middle. To this point, I am not aware of any advocacy organization that supports the true careprovider [not the administrators nor psych drs that make the big bucks for seeing the client 15mins a day with staff support ] or other victims of the violent mentally ill. That opens another whole can of worms that I won't get into. But I just wanted to speak again to the balancing act between victim/perpetrator status and what a tricky business it is.

I do wonder why there have not been more cases brought by Medicaire for fraud, however? Puzzling.

Ok. That's it.

Again, if anyone, especially the JREF, knows of any credible activist resources I'm all ears.

[bignickel]

The program was on an episode of Frontline called "The Search for Satan".

It may have involved some MPD, but it was mostly about SRA and 'recovered' memories. Very disturbing program. Unfortunately, the PBS site doesn't really have much information about it. The other web site has a good deal more.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/programs/categories/info/1402.html

http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/features/95/10/24/front.html

If you type in ' "the search for satan" pbs frontline' into Yahoo, you get a few proSRA websites that hated the program (and more antiSRA who liked it) - ProSRA being 'SRA exists', AntiSRA being 'no evidence of SRA'.