ANPs, EPs, DID and tertiary dissociation

** Trigger warning for defined roles ** (I don't know why, but apparently this needs a trigger warning.)

I have read in The Haunted Self (this is really a good book when you want to understand DID!) that there has to be more than one ANP in a system before it can be seen as tertiary dissociation.

Just to make the terminology used in the book clear:

• Primary dissociation has one ANP and one EP. For example, simple PTSD.
• Secondary dissociation has multiple EPs and one ANP. IIRC complex PTSD is an example of secondary dissociation.
• Tertiary dissociation has multiple ANPs and multiple EPs. For example, DID.

I don't really understand the difference between ANPs and EPs, but as it are just labels I'm not going to pay too much attention to the difference (especially as the distinction isn't always very clear in DID).
I have read a bit of this thread:
dissociative-identity/topic68445.html
So this all makes the distinction a lot harder.

And when I read this:
dissociative-identity/topic81772.html#p713516
It makes it all even more complex, when an ANP needs to have been host in the past (or be the current host).
One definition of an EP I have read is that they are stuck in the trauma.
What if a part falls between those definitions?

Just to make things easier to read, I'm going to assume those parts I seem to have are real. But I'm not sure they are real (I haven't had a diagnosis yet, but that's a whole different story and off-topic).

I have at least one part that thinks she is dead (Siria) - so probably an EP stuck in trauma. And one part (Sandra) that seems to be more a kind of ANP, but, as far as I know, she has not yet come forward (fronted). But, when she is an ANP, would that automatically mean it's tertiary dissociation and thus DID? Or am I missing something?

Reasons I think Sandra is an ANP:

• She lives in the present
• As far as I have seen so far, she has a rather complete personality (assertive, gothic, socially apt, tried to convince me it's DID).
• She doesn't seem really emotional. More than I am, but I (if this is all true, the host) don't feel very emotional.

I have some female-isch tendencies, like sitting with legs crossed (but not really intending that). And I know that I, as a young child (in a certain period maybe), felt more comfortable to play with girls than with boys. I haven't really thought about this, but it makes a lot more sense now!

I've never heard of ANP and EP until now and looking into it, it seems quite interesting. I don't have any EP's by the look of things. We all seem to be ANP and work co-consciously with each other. Although I suspect each one of them does represent a specific emotion or set of emotions they do all behave and act like regular people- that is to say that all experience the full range of human emotion, they have lives that run in real time, etc.
I know i've said this before and I imagine people are skeptic when I say I have never suffered any trauma. After all that is why DID occurs. I was simply a child who chose to exist in another world and in doing so I missed out on real life events that were probably vital for me to learn how to function properly and thus I have not developed my emotions properly. So for me there are no parts that hold trauma or seem to be stuck in a certain time.

I understand this is difficult, Oaktree, as I'm still trying to make sense of my experiences and it's horribly frustrating. I also don't have an official diagnosis of DID. My diagnosis was psychosis but that has since been retracted as the docs think it's definitely a dissociative disorder.
All the best though. I hope it becomes clear for you soon.

It's mainly a definition thing. I mean, whether a part is an ANP or EP depends on the definition, right? Another label doesn't change the part itself. And considering those terms were originally intended for war veterans, it seems to me like I shouldn't pay too much attention to the distinction.

Frank_Darko: for what I have read about you in other threads, some of your parts seem to have some EP-like characteristics. And when they live in an imaginary world (real for them), I wouldn't call them "apparently normal" . Not meant to insult anyone, this is just what I know about the ANP/EP distinction and what I have read about your parts.

I added some clarifications that I have learned this last year, to help you feel less muddled.


I have read in The Haunted Self (this is really a good book when you want to understand DID!) that there has to be more than one ANP in a system before it can be seen as tertiary dissociation.

Yes.

Just to make the terminology used in the book clear:

• Primary dissociation has one ANP and one EP. For example, simple PTSD.
• Secondary dissociation has multiple EPs and one ANP. IIRC complex PTSD is an example of secondary dissociation.

(the authors do add USUALLY to the having one ANP def)

Tertiary dissociation has multiple ANPs and multiple EPs. For example, DID.

The authors state that USUALLY those with DID have at least 2 ANP and ONLY DID is tertiary dissociation.

I don't really understand the difference between ANPs and EPs, but as it are just labels I'm not going to pay too much attention to the difference (especially as the distinction isn't always very clear in DID).

These parts are so much more than labels! You as the host should not understand, but the more you read about it, the more the other alters in your system will understand which part they are - and that is even difficult. In my case it is 2 observing parts (ISH and Observing EP) that work on this, after observing the alters inside for our whole life. You as host are ANP - so that is usually not hard to figure out, although a high functioning EP is thought to be able to act as host, but that is not very common and I doubt they do without the help of ANP's. A simple way of looking at this is those parts who WERE a host at sometime in your life are probably ANP. When it comes time to integrate, the ANP's can really help and support the EP's. It is good for them to understand their roles. The more educated the alters are the faster integration will be and the better your system will work together.

I have read a bit of this thread:

My understanding of SD has advanced quite a bit in the last year. Those are old threads. I would not refer to old stuff. Just looking at them confused me. Most of the time in a forum we are debating things back and forth and trying to make sense of them. No one, including me in those threads had read much on it then.

One definition of an EP I have read is that they are stuck in the trauma.
What if a part falls between those definitions?

In my case the abuse was so horrific at home that the ANP also suffered a lot of abuse. They add A LOT! So yes, ANP can hold trauma memories. Bad things can and do happen before a switch sometimes when abuse is really bad. Still the EP's have not usually been hosts. I don't know how a host could decide who is what part. Even my alters have trouble with this. It is the Observing parts (ISH's and Observing EP) that do this for our system. I have 2 that talk it back and forth and even then it is not always easy to tell. I don't imagine that any part of the system living in a very abusive home is free from trauma, but they are free enough that they can function as host and continue the job of life in the outer world - unlike an EP.

Just to make things easier to read, I'm going to assume those parts I seem to have are real. But I'm not sure they are real (I haven't had a diagnosis yet, but that's a whole different story and off-topic). I have at least one part that thinks she is dead (Siria) - so probably an EP stuck in trauma. And one part (Sandra) that seems to be more a kind of ANP, but, as far as I know, she has not yet come forward (fronted). But, when she is an ANP, would that automatically mean it's tertiary dissociation and thus DID? Or am I missing something?

In my case ALL the alters that were thought dead (63) of them were ANP. This took days of thought by my ISH to decided if they were EP or ANP. I was thinking EP, but I was ... dead wrong.

Short story: One ANP who was host during my childhood - Great White Shark (imagine what kind of kid I was) was hurt so bad by the school principal that GWS was shoved so far back into consciousness that he and the other alters thought he was dead. This occurred after I attacked my 3rd Grade Teacher Ms. Anderson. I still hate her. She looked like a plastic barbie doll and was mean to me. She would tell the other teachers that I was Schizophrenic and crazy. GWS, along with all the other alters that were through dead were found by my ISH during a reorganization process/integration. We refuse to leave anyone behind.

I am sure I was a sweet, lovable child and she was dead wrong! (where is an angel icon?)

oaktree wrote:Frank_Darko: for what I have read about you in other threads, some of your parts seem to have some EP-like characteristics. And when they live in an imaginary world (real for them), I wouldn't call them "apparently normal" . Not meant to insult anyone, this is just what I know about the ANP/EP distinction and what I have read about your parts.

Maybe you are right there but it makes me a little uncomfortable. I don't particularly like to view their worlds as imaginary. I like to think they exist on another plane of existence. I know that Scott and Ted are from the same place but they've never met each other as they live in different parts of the country.That world seems to virtually be the same as this one. I often used to question if they were somehow different forms of myself from the 5th dimension (I won't go into physics talk). Darren seems to be from a very corrupt world that doesn't follow the laws of physics. It's like corrupted data on a hard drive.
I might just be a little crazy lol but I dunno. I guess I'm not quite ready to objectively state where they are from isn't real.
But anyway going back to the ANP/EP situation I do feel they are probably more ANP from the definitions I have read but who knows.

tylas: That clarifies things. One thing still: is there really always a distinction between ANPs and EPs? Or is it more like a gliding scale? Because for what I have read here, it seems more like a gliding scale to me, not something that is either the one or the other (for example, IIRC, tomboy24/Kat was described by Cassandra as an ANP with EP-like characteristics).

Frank_Darko: let's just put it on that I find it hard to imagine other dimensions. That's all. Maybe you are indeed not ready yet. I didn't want to make you feel uncomfortable, so sorry for that. They indeed seem to be ANPs for what you have posted (but of course you know them much better ).

(I see there's been new posts but I'm not changing this one )

ANP and EP are terms to help people get a better idea of what roles their alters may have, and how what purpose they play within the system. Not all alters will fit the exact definition. They're mainly meant as guidelines to help you organize and make sense of things better.

For the record:
--ANPs are Apparently Normal Parts. These parts don't hold trauma, they are usually rather distant from emotion (or at least have a lot of control over their emotions), they tend to take on "leader roles" within the system (such as a caretaker), a host is an ANP because they're the ones the alters are trying to help "appear normal" as they handle everyday life, and it is a diagnosis criteria to have at least two ANP's for it to be DID (if you only have one ANP, that's considered DDNOS-1).
(I tend to disagree with black-and-white criteria, though. If one matches the symptoms of DID more than DDNOS-1, yet only has one ANP, I would think DID would be a more fitting diagnosis. But that's my opinion).

--EPs are Emotional Parts. These parts hold trauma, they are usually emotional (this doesn't mean only crying, Kat is could be considered an EP due to her extreme anger), they can but don't usually take on "leader roles" within the system, they usually have worse PTSD than the host/others, and they're not the host. (I would imagine one could be the host if the system, such as if a system was in crisis, but 99.9% of the time, EPs are not hosts).

These are meant as guides to help you make sense of what roles/purposes alters play within the system, and not every alter will "perfectly fit" under the ANP or EP definition.

Here's our system as an example:

--Cassandra: host, ANP. (Has PTSD)
--Kat: Protector, a mixture of an ANP and an EP (she could function fine in "normal" life, but her anger and slight PTSD keeps her from being a true ANP)
--Rain: Caretaker, ANP. (No PTSD)
--Shay: purpose unclear, possible ANP, has some EP tendencies (has not yet shown any signs of PTSD)
--L.C.: Painful memories/trauma-holder. EP. (Has bad PTSD)
--Luna: Painful memories/trauma-holder. EP. (Has extreme PTSD)
--Ray: Primal/animalistic instincts/trauma-holder. EP. (Has bad PTSD)
--Cassie: Unmet childhood needs/trauma-holder/ex-host. EP with ANP tendencies. (Has PTSD)
--Lynn: Unmet childhood needs. EP. (No signs of PTSD)

--Marie: Caretaker/Protector. ANP. (No signs of PTSD yet)
--Valera: Protector/"Adam's girl". ANP with EP tendencies. (No PTSD)
--Dallas: Protector. ANP with EP tendencies. (Slight PTSD)
--Damone: Painful memories/trauma-holder. EP. (Extreme PTSD)
--Rebel: Fighter/rebellious part. EP with ANP tendencies. (Slight PTSD)
--Kyra: Ex-host. ANP with EP tendencies. (Slight PTSD)
--Cassidy: Denial part/trauma-holder. EP. (Has not yet shown signs of PTSD)
--"Hannibal": Introject/Abusive Protector. Seems to be an ANP with EP tendencies. (Has never shown signs of PTSD)

--Hawk (me): Purpose unknown, possible new host. I seem to be an ANP with some EP tendencies. (No signs of PTSD yet)


Hope this was helpful in some way.


~The Hawk

oaktree wrote: I didn't want to make you feel uncomfortable, so sorry for that.

Its no problem pal. I don't expect people to hold the same views as myself. I'm aware they aren't exactly... conventional.

and The Hawk, once again thank you for your in depth and well formulated responses. You never fail to provide insight.

The Hawk: that's an extensive description of your system! It seems to me you have indeed a clear distinction between ANPs and EPs, with some having tendencies to the other side.

Is this like the female/male distinction? Someone can have tendencies to the other gender, but is always one of the two (surgery / strange uncommon cases aside). Not like, say, old and new (age is gradual). Do I understand that correctly?

You're both welcome. Glad that what I see/know could help.

(I try to see all I possibly can, then use what I see/know to help myself and, if I'm able to, swoop in and help others. So I guess the name "Hawk" is becoming more fitting. That's cool with me, though. I'd rather be named after my tendencies than after a hairstyle I love (the mohawk, called a 'hawk' for short), no matter how awesome of a hairstyle it is. (That's how this name started, as a nickname from my love of the mohawk hairstyle). I still like it better as a title though. "The Hawk" just sounds so much more epic ).

oaktree wrote:Is this like the female/male distinction? Someone can have tendencies to the other gender, but is always one of the two (surgery / strange uncommon cases aside). Not like, say, old and new (age is gradual). Do I understand that correctly?

Yes! It is exactly like the female/male distinction. An alter will always either be an ANP or an EP, but that doesn't mean they fit those roles/definitions perfectly. An ANP alter with EP tendencies is like a female with masculine traits, or a male with feminine traits. They're still either a female or a male, but they can have traits from either one. Just like alters. An ANP alter with EP tendencies is still an ANP alter, they just have EP traits. Same with EP alters who have ANP traits.

Just like gender identity doesn't fit perfectly into neat little categories, alter identity doesn't either.


~The Hawk