As a rule of thumb, if possible, it is always a good idea to use the client’s language from the beginning (Mosquera, 2019). On the one hand, when clients talk openly about their parts it normally is a good idea to follow up on their wording. On the other hand, when a client does not feel comfortable with the use of “parts” language, it is preferable not to use it. Some clients get defensive when they hear the word “part” and in those instances, there is no need to insist; it will be pointless and lead to more resistance or defensiveness. When a client becomes defensive or notices resistance, it is important to validate their experience and respond with curiosity and care, as such resistance and the reasons for it need to be explored in a way that the client can tolerate.
However, there are some exceptions to the rule of using the language preferred by the client. One will be when we observe that clients are using “parts” language as a way to avoid taking responsibility for their actions, using expressions such as, “I am not responsible for that behavior because this other part did it” or “It was the other me who said it; my friend shouldn´t be angry at me.” In addition, some clients may talk about “inner people” or prefer to talk about their parts in a way that gives them too much autonomy. In these circumstances, we can agree to use both ways of referring to parts: the client can continue talking about “inner people,” and we may respectfully acknowledge that and also maintain our “parts” language: “What you call your inner people and I call your parts…” or “Those parts of you that you experience as inner people.”
Overall, “parts” language can be used with the different presentations when it helps with the work we are doing, and it should be avoided when it gets in the way of therapy or improvement in clients.
