Not integration but blending

My T is concerned that Alter 1 and I may not have integrated but instead Alter 1 blended with me and overlaid me. That is, Alter 1 is imposing feelings and will on me. That would explain why I have no new access to memories. The idea is quite horrifying. Does anyone else have experience of anything like this?

Right now, this web article really speaks to me:

Multiplicity and Victimization - Pat McClendon's Clinical Social Work

I especially like this: the saying "What part of `no' don't you understand?" becomes "What part of you doesn't understand `no'"?

The personalities and personality states of patients with covert and subtle forms of MPD usually influence each other rather than emerging overtly. They may influence each other by talking to or transferring thoughts and feelings to one another or by imposing themselves on, dominating or suppressing each other.

These influences take the form of co-presence, co-consciousness and passive influence, which often overlap. In co-presence, an alter influences the behavior or affective state of another without assuming control (Kluft, 1984). In co-consciousness (Prince, 1906), an alter is aware of the feelings, actions and thoughts of another. In passive influence, patients feel that impulses, acts and affects are imposed on them, that their body is influenced by some force, that thoughts are withdrawn from their mind, or that their mind is influenced by thoughts they ascribe to others (Kluft, 1985b, 1987a).

It's like this for me.

under ice wrote:It's like this for me.

For me too. That quote is from an article published in 1988. A scan of the original article is on the web:

Dissociation : Vol. 1, No. 2, p. 027-033 : Diagnosis Of Covert And Subtle Forms Of Multiple Personality Disorder Through Dissociative Signs Franklin, Jean (Ridgeview Institute and the International Society for the Study of Multiple Personality & Dissociation [now ISSTD], June, 1988)

No I am not yet comfortable enough with my system to know when I am co-conscious, blended, passive influenced, co-presence. Sorry Una to be no help to you

I'm wondering, underice, if you could explain what co-presence is like for you?

bourbon wrote:No I am not yet comfortable enough with my system to know when I am co-conscious, blended, passive influenced, co-presence. Sorry Una to be no help to you

I'm wondering, underice, if you could explain what co-presence is like for you?

I've understood it's co-presence when I have thoughts, emotions and behaviour that are noticably different from my own regular way of dealing with things. It's like a change of psychic environment and I don't necessarily notice it at once or at all during the situation. If I do, it sometimes feels like I'm a puppet on a string who does stupid things, or speak meaningful things the origin (and sometimes purpose) of which is unknown to me. For what I know, in my system there are three guys who do this, and it really depends on their role and purpose and recent appearances how I take it. If it goes on and then stops during interaction with people, it can leave me kind of clueless with nothing to say.

Oh, I'm sorry. That does sound possible.

Katherine and I are almost always blended. We share most thoughts and emotions, but when we seperate and I pull away? She's a lot more well defined than me. I keep the strength and mutarity, some of the likes and dislikes. But most of the things that make "me" are really hers. I just feel empty when we seperate. If people are just getting overly nerdy, it will be like a shift, where her characterists of intelligence and geekiness will overrule my teenager instincts. But if you catch her attention and she remembers who she is, which automatically seperates us? Then I'm left struggling not to just black out, while she's perfectly fine.

I... seem to have gone on a tangent that. But I hope some of the rambling might help?
~Rage

Blended and overlaid with passive influence on the host. That is an interesting development, Una. We do feel that Quato by design has always influenced John passively, as if they're living in the same condo building, while the rest of us live in our own homes in the mind. John has lost time to Quato though maybe only during sleep. Thanks once again for your article links. We would be lacking some helpful reading without your researching spirit.

We're quite puzzled what our system has evolved into. We're not sure terminology could solve the issue, so we're not looking for a real definition. The quality of executive control slips and slides around now even within a short period of time. Full co-conscious, co-presence, passive influence, mixed executive control (someone controlling the hands, someone else the face and head), it's just difficult to say moment to moment. We have experienced blending so we know it's not that. There are many moments where neither John nor I know who is out. We have to consciously think of saying something to the other to discover who is in charge at the moment or begin to walk in order to see how the body moves. His tension is fobbing off on me, which I do not like, and my calm is staying with him well after I vacate. Those who have stronger personalities and attitudes are more recognizable but we feel as they spend more time co-conscious with each other, the differences will become less clear.

There has been movement towards a theoretical center, but more of the type that one tends to become more compatible over times with one's best friends, dropping extreme attitudes and such, in order to facilitate harmony. However, we're quite fearful of a collapse toward John, the host, as that would be disastrous. I'm currently being empowered as a co-host and may need to begin a thread about that.

Hi Jonathan. The terminology is an attempt by others to describe our subjective experiences, and as far as this experience is concerned I have found no adequate description in the literature. I have read so many books and articles about DID now that I am surprised not to find an adequate description of either integration or blending. I am not convinced they are separate experiences. Only time will tell.

Yes, Una, the definition of integration is as foggy as the experience of dissociation. We definitely suspect that what we've been experiencing at times is integration, if temporary. John and Jack had some very upsetting moments the past few weeks knowing they were the same person. Not just being aware as in "I have DID so I know we're all the same person." We all recognize that, all but the youngest. But John and Jack really experienced one identity and trying to distinguish John from Jack seemed a ludicrous question. It was upsetting and tragic mostly because we feared the outcome would be John trumps Jack. Fortunately, we pulled us back from that.

We simply must give everyone more time in the body and begin to reject John's time in the body from being 100% at work and still most of the time after work. We must strengthen all the alters and build them up as a bolster against John, who is a good person but with damage that cannot be allowed to remain. We realize many therapists would absolutely not wish to move away from the host but toward him. Our T seems to wish this. But our unique situation makes that an impossible road to success. If I were host, we might all be integrated by now. This is no boast, I endured much less damage than John. We realize we also need to help John process his own trauma. Although he is our host, it's my assessment that he endured abuse in greater quantity and degree of terror than any alter save perhaps Ashar. He certainly endured a greater variety of abuse than any alter. This seems unusual for a host but it is our experience.

Hiya

I must admit I am struggling to get my head around a few of these concepts, and was wondering if I could run them by you all. I also have a little confusion over the terms as whilst I think I have a handle on the different kinds of behaviours, I'm reading the terms as being somewhat contradictory in definition depending where you look!

For example, in under ice's quoted text co-presence is described as : In co-presence, an alter influences the behavior or affective state of another without assuming control (Kluft, 1984)

Yet in the DID Word meanings and common acronyms thread (which is really useful) co-presence is described as: Co-Present/Co-Presence - when two or more persons are present, but not really aware of each other, or, not able to communicate with each other

Under ice's quote and subsequent personal example (thankyou for sharing that btw) makes sense to me and I can understand the concept. But I cannot understand the 2nd definition.

To try and solidify in my mind the different kinds of experiences, I've come up with two separate examples of events and will try to equate the different concepts to them. If I've missed my understanding at any point, please feel free to point them out to me!

Ok, example 1. A person is sat at a table, and then their hand suddenly forms into a fist and smacks against the table.

If the person, under their own influence, chose to make the fist and performed the action without being influenced by anyone else, then this is just a regular event. The placebo as it were.

If the person became aware (or remained unaware?) of general thoughts and feelings that were not their own, such as being aware of another personalities anger shining through, and their own mood shifted (ie they became angry themselves) and made the gesture of their own free volition, would I be right in saying that this is 'passive influence'?

If the same as the above occurs but instead of being general thoughts and feelings, this other personality is aware of where they are and perhaps wants to bang the table etc but doesn't have control themselves to do so, this is co-conscious?

If the same as the above occurs and the hand makes what seems to the person to be an involuntary reflex action but the person did not 'take a step back' to cede full control, even for that instant, this would be co-presence? Where two personalities have full control and can both control the body in a way at any given instant. This is what I picture Underice's 'puppet on a string' to be like?

If the person is sat there, and does 'take a step back', even if just for an instant, and the other personality takes full control, smacks the hand, and then either takes a step back themselves or carries on in full control, then this is considered to be a switch, regardless of how long or how often in a short period it occurs?

Whilst I appreciate that the labels I have might be wrong, and are just that, is this the sorts of differing behaviours that people observe at times? As a singleton myself, trying to wrap my mind around these interactions lacks personal context for me, so I doubly value all of the experiences that people have been sharing to help me understand.

To try and solidify these interactions in my mind, I tend to try and use analogies alot to give me a context I can relate to. Thats where my second example comes in. I imagine two people sat next to each other with a piece of paper in front of them, and a coloured pen.

If Person A is asleep and Person B picks up the pen and starts to draw whatever they want to, that is the equivalent of one personality being in full control and acting under their own influences. The placebo.

If Person A picks up the pen and draws whatever they want to, and is aware that Person B is awake and watching Person A draw, then this for me is co-consciousness?

If Person A picks up the pen, and Person B is awake and perhaps giving Person A ideas as to what to draw, or is affecting Person A's mood and thus indirectly influencing what they choose to draw, then this is passive influence?

If Person A and Person B are both holding onto the pen, perhaps wanting to draw different things, then whoever is stronger at any given moment will be able to make the pen move in whatever direction they want to, is this what we're saying co-presence is? In a less 'competitive' version, both are holding the pen, working together towards drawing whatever comes to mind, and if Person A isn't so good at drawing curves then Person B will manipulate the pen and help out for example. A 'real world example' could be an alter giving support and strength in a stresful situation like a job interview - they don't take over fully necessarily, but they can help get a person through.

Where I start to fall down in my understanding is in the difference between co-presence and co-hosting. Are these not the one and same thing?

Sorry for being so long winded and waffly (anyone who knows me would be surprised if I was anything else) but do these ideas somewhat make sense?