poly-fragmented vs. "traditional" DID

[orek]

Thanks, Tangled. Let me know what you find!

MDs, no I don't think it is anything that hinders or stigmatizes, quite the opposite. It explains the experience of some of us that feel somewhat hindered and/or invalidated by the more traditional definitions of DID. It used to make me fear all the more that I was crazy and/or making it all up until I learned that others experience their systems this way, too. And the 100+ is indeed part of the definition (though I doubt there's any magic number like that), but with the understanding that most of them are fragments and not fully developed insiders. (That would be impossible.) There are those, too, but many are fragments that are one-dimensional, holding a piece of emotion or abuse, for instance. A poly-frag system is also assumed to have more layers/sub-layers. This all fits with our system. I assume we shattered in this particular way because of the abuse starting in infancy, basically as a newborn, but it's also often associated with sadistic and/or RA type abuse. Still exploring that for us, though pretty sure about the sadistic stuff.

I've also read that it might be easier to integrate the fragments, despite their number, than the more separate-feeling fully developed insiders. And many fragments can integrate as a group as the particular abuse they are holding together is resolved.

Anyway, I felt compelled to "defend" it since we identify as poly-fragmented DID. Just curious if anyone else here does, too.