T keeping secrets from other parts

Windsoar wrote:You & those that answered brought up a question we have had. Not sure how to make it a subthread! You mentioned your T not sharing conversations with some. How do you feel about that? Just learned some of mine have *private* conversations with T that are not shared. Sometimes T shares with one in charge with or without their permission. Sometimes others are listening in.Feel that they *should* have a right to workout a problem or issue with T. But also feel there shouldn't be secrets. But also just curious about what's up. Our T is a trauma expert & well known in the field. Most of us have come to trust him. But... He rarely asks for one to come out. Mostly just to be sure one comes who can drive safely home. They are more likely to ask permission to speak to him. Is this how others sessions are commonly conducted?

Hi Windsoar,

I hope it's ok that I made this into its own thread. (You just click on "new topic" at the top of the page when you're not in a topic, and give it a heading).

Is your T a DID expert or just in trauma? There is a lot of specialized training needed to treat DID, and Ts with a lot of experience always keep the "big picture" in mind (that's what my T says). That's always being aware that they are speaking to the whole system as well as to a particular part.

My parts know they can talk to the T themselves if they want to, or relay things through whoever is in front. We have too much co-consciousness for there to ever be secrets, so I can't speak from direct experience, but my T did say that he doesn't want there to be secrets.

I guess if one of your parts told the T something and asked that it not be shared yet, for a specific reason, then that could be ok. I DON'T think it's ok for information to be shared by the T without him first telling the part who gave it to him, or better yet, asking if it's ok to do so.

Who do they ask permission from to speak to the T? The host? It doesn't make sense for them to ask the T if they can speak to him--can't anyone speak to him that wants to?

My T talks to whoever is in front, not necessarily knowing who it is unless it becomes obvious. When/if he knows, he might address them directly by name (that always feels really weird to us, because we like to hide behind the body's name). If someone new shows up, he welcomes them.

we usually have an agreement that if it can be told to the T is can be shared with someone from the system as well. A part might choose an adult part to share it with.
all our DID-trained Ts always asked if we have been co-con when a Little fronted and if not they bring us up to date on what happened and paraphrase the conversation.

our current T is Mrs Integration and she always askes us to talk to each other while we talk to her. So she is always including the system in the conversations and makes sure that we connect between ourselves and not use her as a bridge for our communication.
we believe that a T who does talk to parts separately and doesn't connect these parts with each other is knee-deep in classic triangulation and will cause harm sooner or later.

If the T thinks that we might be overwhelmed we believe that she would not 'keep secrets' but instead share just the topic or idea without going into detail. If she refused to tell us we would fire her.

birdsong87 wrote:we believe that a T who does talk to parts separately and doesn't connect these parts with each other is knee-deep in classic triangulation and will cause harm sooner or later.

If the T thinks that we might be overwhelmed we believe that she would not 'keep secrets' but instead share just the topic or idea without going into detail. If she refused to tell us we would fire her.

Exactly. Agree totally.

MDs

When Arin spoke with our T for the first time on Wednesday, one of the things she told our T was that she knew information about our past, that the others did not. Information specific to her trauma / abuse.

Arin asked if she should share that information. Our T told her no, not yet. She did not even want to share the information with her, as she felt it was not appropriate for others in our system to be made aware of it. She explained to Arin that there would be a time for that in the future, in a later phase of treatment.

I believe our T would not keep secrets between parts of our system. Unless, perhaps, she felt it were for a very good reason.

When I met our T, I did tell her that I would not share anything with her that I would not share with the rest of the system, and she accepted that. Although it vexes the others, I am the only one who routinely 'keeps secrets' among our system. They understand that I do it for their own good.

Overall we agree with birdsong87, if our T were withholding information and refused to give us any explanation or overview, we would be forced to end the relationship. It would not be feasable to proceed as we would not feel we could trust her.

Rebecca

This is not meant in reference to or in judgment of any particular member system here. It's more of a general question. Who determines what's "for their own good"? And what are the standards for making such a determination?

Just wondering.

MDs

MakersDozn wrote:This is not meant in reference to or in judgment of any particular member system here. It's more of a general question. Who determines what's "for their own good"? And what are the standards for making such a determination?

Just wondering.

MDs

I'm sure I don't have THE answer (and there probably isn't only one correct one), but my thought is that the determination is probably made by parts with protector/gatekeeper/ISH jobs in the system--parts that tend to have the whole system in mind more than individual parts might, and that the determination is made based on current information and may (should) change as new information comes in. What used to be "for my own good" (complete unawareness of parts for example) isn't anymore.

Hey MDs,

So for us, in our system, Rebecca's idea of 'for our own good' is basically to make sure the whole system doesn't get messed up, and to make sure whoever is fronting doesn't get so overwhelmed that they can't function or whatever.

So, she'll keep stuff secret -- for now -- because she thinks that sharing it would overwhelm some of us or all of us. She makes it clear that stuff will be known later, when we're able to handle it.

Where it gets annoying is sometimes she'll act like she's keeping something back 'for our own good' when the truth is, she doesn't actually know. It's like she hates admitting there's stuff she doesn't know.

Like Gang said, the 'for our own good' part changes. So when it does seem ok to share something with us, Rebecca will share it, even if it was withheld in the past.

Viola

Thanks, Gang and Viola. We've never been able to do that, even if we had wanted to. It's very difficult to keep secrets in our system, as we have a communal "memory bank" or library -- whatever you want to call it. We can all access it, but we stay away from material that we're not yet ready to deal with.

[Insider 1: Okay, how do we determine what material we can't yet handle? And is it reasonable to expect a young child or traumatized older person to be able to do so?]

[Allegra: Glad you asked. ]

~Light~ and Gideon, the non-corporeal yin/yang duo that we mention in our signature, are the closest we have toward a gatekeeper of this nature. At least, that's how we perceive it. The fact that they're non-corporeal and don't interact directly with anyone else makes it easier for us to see them as abstract meta-regulators than as regular system members.

If we were all on the same level, we might resent them for having more privileges and knowledge. But they're "above us" in a way, so we see no need to compete with them. It's a convenient construct that works because it takes the ultimate responsibility off the rest of us.

Not sure if this makes sense, but that's how our system works.

MDs

MDs, that makes good sense to me.

We sort of see Rebecca as separate in our system, kind of similar to how your ~Light~ and Gideon are apart in yours.

Rebecca isn't noncorporeal, but she's 'different' because she lives in the inbetween, the void between the outside world and the inside world. Everyone else, is either inside, or outside. So it puts her in a place different from the rest of us. Where she always has access to both.

We also have a sort of central memory bank area (tho we can't all access it, not easily or directly), in the middle of the inner world. It's the only building in there that belongs to no-one, but at the same time it 'feels' like it belongs to Rebecca. So that and her being in-between, both make it feel like she stands out from the rest of us.

I don't think any of that makes us feel like Rebecca is 'above us' or whatever, but it does make her feel different.

Viola

I was meaning "for your own good" in a general sense--not just in terms of keeping secrets, but how we make decisions that are "for our own good" as we go along--in our life.

We can't really keep secrets in our system--we're used to relaying memories and events as they happen so that everyone has access to them. So when someone is more in the front and thinks or feels something, then we all become aware of it.

Sometimes we wish we could let a part talk to the T without the rest of us having to be there and hear it/feel it, but that doesn't happen.