Or: How much separation is too much separation?
The ISST-D treatment guidelines state:
“It is countertherapeutic to suggest that the patient create additional alternate identities, to name identities when they have no names (although the patient may choose names if he or she wishes), or to suggest that identities function in a more elaborated and autonomous way than they already are functioning.”
- Source: www.isst-d.org
So what does this mean? Why does this matter?
“Countertherapeutic” means “Working against a therapy”. It refers to something that goes directly against the way therapy should be approached, enacted, or provided.
Doing something countertherapeutic will make your healing journey harder, and in some cases can cause you even more harm.
Does this mean that you should never give your alters names?
No. The guidelines clearly state that it is ok to name alters, but that you should not name alters who do not have names.
A personal take on this, by a reddit user, is:
“You’re supposed to discover and accept differences, not push alters to be more separate than they already are.”
Basically, if an alter has a name, or chooses a name, and wishes to be referred to by that name, then you should accept that.
If an alter changes their name, you should also respect that - especially as a lot of alters choose or have names which are descriptive of their roles, purpose, or values. And as these roles or purposes might change, the alter in question may wish to change names with it.
Interestingly, “Got parts? : an insider’s guide to managing life successfully with dissociative identity disorder / by A.T.W.” actually suggests that people with DID/OSDD MUST pick names for parts/alters who do not have names.
This is found in the section titled “Getting to know you”.
In this case, I believe that the purpose of naming alters who do not have names, is to identify them and link that alter’s personality, triggers, traits, etc together more easily. It is my interpretation that you do not need to pick a name, but that you do need to pick an identifier for each alter in order to complete the task laid out in that section of the writing.
An identifier is a word, name, or term, which helps distinguish one person or alter from another.
For instance, at school you and your friends might refer to a fellow schoolmate as “the red haired girl”.
In a system, you might refer to a little alter as “the happy one”, or perhaps “the 6 year old”.
Identifiers like this can help make sure that everyone in the conversation knows who you are talking about.
This can be particularly helpful in therapy for DID/OSDD, as it will make it easier to track an alter’s thoughts and personality, as well as helping the therapist identify which alter is having a particular problem, reaction, or any negative learned behaviours that they may need help with.
Systems will often use labels as identifiers - eg “host”, “little”, “protector”.
I even know a system who refers to alters by numbers in a chronological order (that is, the first alter to become known is alter 1, the next is alter 2, and so on). This particular method is unusual, because most people would interpret this as a hierarchy, or a way of saying that some alters are more important than others.
The type of identifiers you use is up to you and your system. Make sure to remember that identifiers can change at any time - “the angry alter” may become less angry, and then a new identifier may be needed.
If you do not allow identifiers to change, you may accidentally be forcing other alters to feel as though they have to act in a certain way - eg “the persecutor” may have started healing and growing, but if you insist on still calling them “the persecutor”, they may be angry or feel helpless to control their actions.
When is a name or identifier bad? - See this separate post.
What is the problem with increasing separation between parts?
It is my interpretation that pushing alters to be more separate than they actually are, will likely increase or strengthen dissociative barriers between alters, which is contrary to the goal/s of treatment (whether you want fusion or healthy multiplicity). And can make communication and cooperation even harder.
However, the ISST-D guidelines (and the personal experiences of many systems) shows that some separation, or acknowledgement of separation, is good and healthy.
Why is this? Isn’t this a contradiction?
No. To summarise, you should not force names/traits onto an alter.
But you should also not refuse to acknowledge that they have a name/trait.
If you break an alter’s trust by forcing something on them, or by refusing to allow them to be themselves, your healing journey will become more difficult.
All of your alters (including whichever alter is reading this) are equal.
You are all part of the same person. So you should accept your differences AND similarities.
“ Taken together, all of the alternate identities make up the identity or personality of the human being with DID.”
- Source: www.isst-d.org
- Do not forcibly pick a name, appearance, trait, etc, for any alter.
- Do not insist that any alter must keep a previously chosen name, previously displayed trait, or insist that their appearance or age cannot change.
- Do not refuse to allow an alter to choose (or self-report) their name, appearance, traits, etc.
- Be respectful of an alter’s choices.
- Be open to helping an alter if their choice of name indicates a deeper issue, but do not push them about it.
- Be careful. If you decide to assign an identifier, appearance, or other indicator, to an alter: Be mindful, and watch out for signs of increased barriers, dissociation, or otherwise negative results. If you see that starting to happen, I’d suggest slowing down and reviewing what could be causing it. Talk to your therapist about it if possible.
andulkaphoto
jbbartram-illu
yousharknotpass
annaxmalina
pixelskylines
vaporwave
