poly-fragmented vs. "traditional" DID

[orek]

I've been reading about this lately and there is a group for this on another survivor site that has me thinking:

We were aware of being poly-fragmented when we were first diagnosed back in the early 90s, but after a bad experience with that counselor and another after, we pushed everything under and had to start all over again when we finally ventured into therapy again years later. We had to reintroduce the fact of the abuse, then the DID, organically and from scratch just to make sure we weren't wrong about it all. So after 9 years with a wonderful trauma T (who retired last summer) who helped us accept the reality of the abuse and eventually did diagnose our DID, bringing us to the point where the relationship between upfronters and insiders is not so antagonistic, we are moving forward with a new trauma t who also works with the neuro-physiology of trauma. Excellent!

But after finding the poly-fragmented DID (sub)group and getting so excited because I relate so much to what they write, including often feeling a bit on the fringe of "traditional" DID experiences, I am starting to remember more about fragments and/or insiders that I had become aware of during the early DID discovery years and some of their feelings and experiences that still feel so real. I never decided I wasn't poly-fragmented through my rediscovery years; I just forgot about the concept and term, even while holding an awareness of the feel of it inside.

In short, I never thought to bring it up with my retired T (that I can recall), and when I asked my current trauma T about it, who has more experience with DID than my last one did, she said she never heard of it and was going to research it. But I get the impression that she's skeptical. So my question is this: anyone here ever heard of it or relate to poly-fragmented DID? I am so hungry for feedback and more understanding on this, and I can't find a whole lot about it just Googling it. Thanks.

[orek]

Just hitting "reply" again so I can subscribe to this thread. Do the notifications work?

[Tangled Web]

Hi Orek. I think subscribing still works.
I have never heard of poly fragmented DID but am now curious about it. I will keep my eyes and hears open for ya though

[MakersDozn]

Our understanding has always been that "polyfragmented" systems are those with over 100 insiders. We can't help but wonder if this concept comes from the same sort of "expert" school of thought that defined so many concepts that have ended up hindering multiples rather than helping.

As we've said before, each system has as many insiders as it needs to have. Yes, large systems have needs that smaller systems may not, but we'd rather not see any stigma created in considering these issues.

MDs

[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.

[Tangled Web]

You definitely have my curiosity peaked. What poly fragmented mean to yous Orek? We also have layers and sub layers and have a feeling of one dimensional aspect of "people" like it feels wrong to call them people.........never could make that make sense to anyone--so we dropped it and tried to make it into something else but nothing ever quite fit so we left those things alone. But I can relate to what you are saying I think......... and I am very curious to learn more about this if you are willing to share No pressure though.......

[orek]

My initial internet research brought up these links or sites. Can't recall how/where I found them, but it might start you reading on it. The Sara Lambert article is pretty informative, if maybe a tad outdated I couldn't find info on her, but judging from the link below, she's featured in a book we have, so I'll have to find that and see what credentials she has. Anyway, this is a start:

Incest-related syndromes of adult psychopathology - Google Books Result
books.google.com/books?isbn=0880481609...Richard P. Kluft, American Psychiatric Association.
"The more severe and prolonged the trauma, the more severe the fragmentation."
Richard Kluft

----------------------------------------------------------------


The dissociative spectrum (Braun, 1988) extends from normal dissociation to poly-fragmented DID.
http://www.fortea.us/english/psiquiatria/spectrum.htm

----------------------------------------------
Poly-fragmented DID is an extreme form of DID and involves over 100 personality states. This is often the consequence of sadistic and brutal abuse ... over a long time interval.
http://www.urgenttermpapers.com/dissociative.html

-----------------------------------------

What is polyfragmentation? The term comes from the root poly, meaning many, and fragments. In complex polyfragmenatation, the survivor will have not only alter systems, but hundreds or even thousands of fragments, isolated parts of their mind created to do a job, and do it well and unthinkingly. Often the job is one that would be abhorrent to the main personality or presenting system. The further away from core beliefs, the greater usually the dissociation and fragmentation that must occur. In other words, a LOT of trauma has to happen to make a person do something that they really don't want to do. And the person has to feel very far away from themselves as well when doing it.
http://www.didcoping.com/h70-dissociati ... tion-svali

----------------------------------------
Poly-fragmented Multiplicity
By Sara Lambert

The number now required to be considered "extra" in the multiple stakes is 100-plus, and it is known by the more clinical term "poly-fragmented".
http://fromtheinsideout.tripod.com/arti ... ag-mpd.htm

---------------------------------------------
The Osiris complex: case studies in multiple personality disorder - Google Books Result
books.google.com/books?isbn=0802073581...Colin A. Ross, Colin Ross - 1994 - Psychology - 296 pages
Polyfragmented... is the fragmentation of the psyche into dissociated personality states that mistakenly believe themselves to be separate people. ...
http://books.google.com/books

------------------------------------------------

Rebuilding Shattered Lives: Treating Complex PTSD and Dissociative ... - Google Books Result
books.google.com/books?isbn=0470768746...James A. Chu - 2011 - Family & Relationships - 366 pages

"Extreme versions of DID occasionally develop in response to particularly horrific ongoing trauma with polyfragmentation encompassing dozens to hundreds of personality states. In general, the complexity of dissociative symptoms appears to be consistent with the severity of early tramatization."

[orek]

I see that the Lambert article doesn't come up with the link. Just Google Sara Lambert and poly-fragmented DID. Same with any others that might not work. I'm worried that she's associated with Christian thinking, which I don't trust in this area because of the counselor who first diagnosed us..and then turned weirder and weirder on us. But secular leaders in the field like Braun mentions it on the dissociative scale, so it's not just some invention of the Christian "SRA-is-everywhere!" community.

[Note: I'm not saying SRA doesn't exist, and no offense intended to those who embrace Christianity; I simply prefer psychological expertise to come from those with a scientific, not religious, training.]

[The People]

We might be considered polyfragmented. Two says we have or had 102. We don't agree or disagree here but there are many. One PDoc stated that people with that many issues usually have red dot background. She too was cra cra. Some of the children don't seem to be fully formed. They carry one issue and once they have dealt with it they disappear. Must look into it some more.

I was just going by what sounded right as poly means many (don't think specific number but not sure)Anyway I googled and this is the first link I found. Same as what I said.

https://faithallen.wordpress.com/2009/01/19/what-is-polyfragmented-dissociative-identity-disorder-did/

[nats]

hi orek,
think we've discussed this together years or so ago on the forums, back when there were more of us identifying with poly-fragmented descriptions. yes, most of what we've found about it points straight to red dot stuff, even to the attitude that this is the 'only' way a system could end up with this many people and fragments. over the years we've come to disagree with this assumption that red dot is required partly b/c we think so much is unknown and thus exaggarated with DID and partly b/c we just dont have the time or mental space to try to make sense of all the ra ra and hysteria surrounding any mention of red dot stuff.

so yes, it's an accepted concept as much as anything with DID is, tho possibly out of fashion now and its how we would describe our system if we were ever to describe it...

[orek]

I've read her descriptions, too, People. Also good. Also, unfortunately (for me) Christian. But nevertheless relevant, I think. And the "not fully formed" makes sense. That'd be another way of having/thinking of fragments that aren't fully developed into full-blown personalities. That'd be the only plausible way so many could co-exist. And it's encouraging to read that those fragments tend to spontaneously merge or disappear after the emotion or issue they are holding is vented/addressed. That coincides with anything I could find on it, too. Thanks for the feedback.

Must add a P.S. I actually like what she writes in the Blooming Lotus blog. I don't recall where I saw that she's Christian, but in her blog she writes about self-love and acceptance for healing, not God's love or power, etc. She probably has personal spiritual aspects to her healing, but she keeps the blog about sound psychological healing practices as she experienced them in her journey. So kudos to her. At the end of any particular blog there are links for other related links within her blog that address aspects of poly-fragmentation and DID--layering, alters and names, etc. I relate and agree with much of her writing and descriptions. She does come from red dot background stuff but only mentions it in context where appropriate and without the over-blown hysteria and power so often given to it by others I've read in books or known as counselors.

[orek]

"over the years we've come to disagree with this assumption that red dot is required partly b/c we think so much is unknown and thus exaggarated with DID and partly b/c we just dont have the time or mental space to try to make sense of all the ra ra and hysteria surrounding any mention of red dot stuff."

I agree with that, nats. But I think most of the hysteria surrounding it was coming from the Christian counseling community, which is why I don't trust the writers and "experts" that come from that background or frame of reference. I agree with People's description of "cra cra"! I have to step back and reevaluate it all from a different mindset and frame of reference. And secular leaders in the field, like Ross, have written of SRA, and another, Braun, has put poly-fragmented DID on the far end of the dissociative scale after DID. All because a subset of the Christian psychology community went more than a bit bonkers on the issue and was seeing SRA everywhere doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Humans have always tortured/abused others, including children, have always sought power and belonging in groups, and have always perverted spirituality to justify their actions. However, this isn't my main interest in the poly-fragmented issue. And I don't believe it's a prerequisite to having a poly-fragmented system, anyway.

Our current T has wanted to know ages/names of insiders that come out, and I understand why. But often we don't know, or we present in groups, or we are doing fast switching so it's not just one insider fronting. That makes it hard to give that info at times (and we are aware that we aren't acting like her other DID clients in at least one fundamental way, even though, of course, everyone's system is different and unique). The poly-fragmented DID helps explain how we present, how our system works, etc. I think it's information that will help our T understand us--as well as help us feel validated by other DIDs with similar issues and experiences. We still can't help but worry at times that we are just plumb cra-cra.

I don't recall past conversations here over this. Is there a way to access/read old posts? I'd be curious, is all. (And, did I participate in that discussion, I wonder?) Thanks for the feedback.

[The People]

I am with you Nats. Describing is not worth the bother. Remember when mapping was all the rage? We tried that and someone ripped it up. Plus there was not enough internal communication at that point to know who was where and stuff that was asked for.

The article on above mentioned subject that I read last night did say not just red dot but also 'extreme'. How does one define extreme? A 1 time occurrence is extreme IMO as once is too often.

[orek]

Our current T does do mapping with her DID clients, though she doesn't press the point or make it a priority. And difficulty in mapping does seem to be an issue for other poly-fragmented folk from posts I've read. So, again, it just helped me feel I'm not alone in how we experience our dissociation. But, I get your and nats' point. I'll drop it--here anyway. I'm not trying to make myself out to be more complicated or more "severely abused." Nor am I trying to jump on some bandwagon or "rage" or invalidate anyone else's experiences. I was just glad to read of experiences similar to ours, and systems with similar fragmentation and wanted to know if anyone here experiences the same. And it does seem to affect certain aspects of the DID experience, like the ones discussed already, so I won't rehash it all. Thanks for everyone's feedback. Cheers.

[nats]

hi orek,
definitely not saying at all that you 'should drop it' here. think it's interesting and it was interesting when we had discussions before (yes, pretty sure you were involved, but no there's no way of accessing as it was the old boards when old posts got deleted).

what i mean when i say i'm not convinced it requires red dot is partly the hysteria we sensed around it (yes, your probably right it was predominantly Xian - don't know really), but primarily b/c we fit the polyfragmented description but have no other legitimate reason to assume even 'extreme' abuse. we tried for over 20yrs to figure out why we'd be this way and find reasons and got nowhere. gave up, stopped investing, started accepting - it just is the way it is and we'll never know why... it's good to discuss and certainly doesn't hurt.