DID diagnosis criteria

[mosaic]

Here is how the DSM-5 describes DID:

DSM-5
A. Disruption of identity characterized by two or more distinct personality states, which may be described in some cultures as an experience of possession. The disruption in identity involves marked discontinuity in sense of self and sense of agency, accompanied by related alterations in affect behavior, consciousness, memory , perception, cognition, and/or sensory-motor functioning. These signs and symptoms may be observed by others or reported by the individual.

B. Recurrent gaps in the recall of everyday events, important personal information, and/or traumatic events that are inconsistent with ordinary forgetting.

C. The symptoms cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.

D. The disturbance is not a normal part of a broadly accepted cultural or religious practice.


How much does this jive (or not) with your experience of multiplicity? Where do they get it right and where do they get it wrong?

[MakersDozn]

Great topic, mosaic.

Well, we agree with the last criterion about not being part of a cultural or religious practice, but beyond that....

Brother number one used to be skeptical about multiplicity, especially about the idea of seeing the positives and not treating it as a disorder. We had to explain to him that at least for us, being many isn't the problem. The repeated trauma that *caused* us to be many is the problem.

We realize that not every multiple sees multiplicity in the same way. In talking to people in other areas of the online multiple community, there are in fact quite a few who do believe it's an illness that they need to heal from, or at least get ongoing treatment.

More often than not, these multiples are either relatively new to their diagnosis and/or do not have a high level of internal communication. But there are also those who are quite self-aware, further along in their healing, and still remain focused on a goal of living as one unified being.

Then there are those who advocate that a person doesn't even have to have been traumatized to be multiple, and that some people are multiple naturally. We respect their right to their belief but do not share it.

All of this has taught us to work toward keeping an open mind, just as we want the professional world and the singleton world to have an open mind about us.

MDs

PS: Not too long ago, we took an online version of the DES (Dissociative Experiences Scale) questionnaire. We scored 18. When we told this to some online multiple friends, we said, "We don't dissociate that much anymore, but we're definitely many."

[The People]

I agree with MD on much of this. It definitely fit more in the beginning hat it does now. People thought I was moody but they didn't know the extreme because we would disappear on bad days, days being covered but unsociable or overly distraught alters. So when I told the friends they were shocked but would eventually come around and say "yup it fits."

Anxiety and stress are still very much a cornerstone of our live. Some alters in particular carry it around. We spent way too much time in H because of it and it got to the point that people thought we were faking it. And I think this is the place where DID dx overlaps with BPD. In both cases anxiety prevents or makes difficult normal interactions, relationships, challenges the ability to work etc. I often refer to it as the cornerstone of my DID as panic and anxiety cause switching.

We joined a writing group last night and think the newness caused the dissociation. What will people think of us? How would they like our writing? They liked it BTW.

FOO wouldn't notice if I had a camel growing out of my back.

BTW are you considering this for your thesis?

[MakersDozn]

FOO wouldn't notice if I had a camel growing out of my back.

Well....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRUzPtSFoGw

MDs

[nats]

we always had issues/mixed views of DSM criteria. we've never fully accepted why DID is preferable to MPD, but that's a minor thing. for us, we object to the fact that 'disorder' is a requirement for a diagnosis of multiplicity and thus all of us who function on a daily basis would be considered a disorder. i personally don't see myself as a disorder. i function very well. maybe not all the time in all situations, but certainly above average (granted, average is a low bar when it comes to humans, but that's a separate discussion). so, given i and my internal colleagues are highly functioning in all but a small minority of normally-avoidable situations, what gives these professionals the right to label us a disorder? we are multiple, yes. we are not able to do everything that non-multiples seem able to do, but we are able to do others they can't. thus, we have issues related to whatever caused our multiplicity, but we are not a disorder.

[Unity]

Quote:People thought I was moody but they didn't know the extreme because we would disappear on bad days, days being covered but unsociable or overly distraught alters.

I looked into bipolar disorder, it was because i notice sometime sharp change of mood that can be overhelming for no apparent reason, well i'm trying to figure out better what is going on in my mind, but looking into dissociative disorder, i can see now it explain better with trigger thing, because it's clear if i avoid certain things and certain situation, those bad days rarely come in or are not that bad, but clearly when faced with certain situation it trigger certain reaction, it explains this better than bipolar or mood related disorder, but idk




well said nats

[MakersDozn]

We agree completely, nats. For us it's not being many that's a disorder; the disorder comes from the trauma that *caused* us to be many.

We too would consider ourselves high-functioning. And it's important for us to remember that we don't need to be perfect--we don't need to do everything well all the time. Nobody, whether singleton or multiple or anything in between, is perfect. So it helps us most to focus more on the positives, no matter how difficult this can be at times.

MDs

[nats]

"it's not being many that's a disorder; the disorder comes from the trauma that *caused* us to be many."

yes, that is exactly it. all this stupid focus through the years on 'integrating alters', in our mind rather misses the point. it's not that we have to or should be expected to become singleton any more than a Black person needs to be White or a gay person needs to be straight.

what we are isn't the problem and never was. working through what caused us to be this way will help us heal from it but healing doesn't automatically require eliminating others...

[Tangled Web]

very well said nats and MDs!!

[cew]

nats,
I agree. It is the dysfunctional behavior resulting from unmet needs, abuse, neglect, trauma, what have you, that really mess things up. That these qualities are distributed among parts isn't the core problem. If you have been many for your whole life, it would seem helping all parts heal should be the first goal. Not, getting them to merge.