Why a disorder when it’s creative way to cope?

In my long journey to acceptance of my DID I find myself up against internal phobia or stigma that I have a “ disorder”. That something is “ wrong” and it ( I) need to be fixed.

I think this conflict adds to my denial / difficulty with acceptance of who I/we are.

We’re creative people who split in times of unbearable trauma.
Instead of MPD multiple personality disorder I would say to myself it’s many people’s discoveries or make up other positive wording .
I get stuck on this. I don’t want to be called a disorder .
Anyone else struggle with this internal stigma ? How do you move through?

I understand how you feel. I think there should be diagnoses such as Dysfunctional Parenting Disorder instead of diagnoses for children who have been raised up by them etc.

When I first started to be diagnosed, I felt like adults were clearly thinking I was the problem. They were not helping or believing me, even when they said they were. Especially borderline personality disorder felt straight out accuse and so did schizoaffective disorder. To me it meant I was having all these troubles with adults around me because of my personality is being wrong kind. So it's all my fault, others are just responding with their behavior to my sickness, and it's understandable that I have been mistreated for being such a pain in the ***.

I felt dissociation diagnose as a big relief, because it's always caused by traumas. And even now, every time I tell someone I have DID, I always explain it's not actually mental illness, it's a form of trauma. Just like on the physical side, it's different to have an illness like diabetes than to have a trauma, like if you fell off the roof and your bones broke.

But I do think DID is like broken bones, it is a problem. Actually it's like broken bones that grew wrong ways back together or to totally wrong directions, after not getting right kind of support. Because DID is not just a trauma, it's also lack of support. Just like broken bones without getting proper treatment. That is not your or our fault, that's something that was done to us, both breaking bones and refusal of aid. And it's not fair that those bones need to be surgically broken again to get them looking the same they were, or if you choose, you can just have physiotherapy and learn how to walk with twisted legs. That is how I see it.

But yes, we developed to be just the way we had to. It should not have been the case. We should have had the right to develop like most people do to be just one. And that is why it's a disorder. Calling it a disorder is a way to admit we were being mistreated. If DID would be just one way to develop instead of another, it would sound like there is nothing wrong with traumatizing children, then they just grow different way and that's fine.

With trauma comes suffer. It has to be recognized as well. But yeah, it could be called something like dysfunctional environment survivor type 1d.

It's not a disorder, unless it is causing you problems or distress or interfering with your daily life. Being multiple on its own is not a disorder.

In our case, what makes this a disorder for us, is the memory loss, and the possibility that we may have more splits in the future.

We don't want to be 'cured' if that means fused or integrated or otherwise becoming a singleton.

We just want better trust & communications amongst ourselves so we don't have amnesia, and to learn other coping skills so we don't always just rely on dissociation if we run into stress or whatever in the future.

-V2

I think differently. It's not possible for someone to be so badly traumatized you couldn't develop an identity, but just be happy about it. It's the severest version of trauma, it can't be there without any other symptoms. The multiplicity symptom as itself tells severe dissociation is happening all the time. It means you are badly violated and you do need and deserve help with that. Dissociation is there so you don't need to feel the pain. It doesn't mean the pain doesn't exist. It has been VERY painful to become multiple. To me it sounds offensive for someone to say it's not a problem.

After therapy you may be able to be happily multiple. But it's like if someone had his leg amputated. He might be happy and have a good life, he doesn't have to want his leg back, it might become his new identity just have one. He's not lesser person than the ones with two legs, or lesser person he was. It still is a disability. You can live good life with disorder or disability, after they have been properly treated, and you might feel it's the way you are supposed to be. And that's fine. But you can't tell it's OK someones limb exploded, if it doesn't hurt anymore.

I'm getting triggered so I'll go away.

the way I see it... it's a disorder because it is coping that is not needed anymore today, but we can't stop it. it was super adapted back then. today it is causing trouble while it is rarely helpful.
but a lot of the problems are rooted in trauma, not being multiple, or in dissociation, not parts themselves.
not being oriented in time and space is not adaptive coping today. neither is amnesia.

and V2 is right, things are considered disorders when they cause suffering. do you suffer?

"the dissociative identity disorder sourcebook" has a whole elaborate chapter about the questions.

PlanetIcarus wrote:After therapy you may be able to be happily multiple. But it's like if someone had his leg amputated. He might be happy and have a good life, he doesn't have to want his leg back, it might become his new identity just have one. He's not lesser person than the ones with two legs, or lesser person he was. It still is a disability. You can live good life with disorder or disability, after they have been properly treated, and you might feel it's the way you are supposed to be.

I apologise if this comes off as an attack, I don't mean it to be. I just take exception to this, especially the two bits I've bolded.

If you're a happy multiple, then you do not have a disorder. Multiplicity alone is not a disorder. I do not think that someone who is happy with their multiplicity is in any way similar to someone who has come to terms with / accepted a tragic disability like that.

I, personally, am quite happy with who I am and I am happy with having other parts. Older violet is like a big sister to me, I like all our littles I've met. All our parts in fact, I wouldn't want to lose any of them, in any way. I'm not limited or handicapped or disabled, in any way.

I won't say we've achieved 'healthy multiplicity' though, because I know that some of the others aren't as accepting or as happy as me. Eg, V1 still has anxiety issues, and we still have in-system struggles to work through.

Being multiple isn't a handicap or a tragedy. Like the OP said, it's a wonderful and creative coping mechanism that helped us to survive some unthinkable situations. It's a gift, not a curse.

-V2

p.s. sorry if I got ranty. I didn't realize how strongly I felt about this.

Hi everybody <3

I think we all have the 'right' to label this (in our own case) the way we want!! And I honestly and to the bone understand why it feels totally wrong to call this a disorder, as if you are the problem in stead of having a problem caused by óthers. Victim blaming all over, agáin.

And I am truelly happy for the ones who feel happy being this way. I don't. I am a walking minefield of triggers which will make 'spontanious' in any way not possible for others towards me and for myself for a long time untill I've figured out in exactly how much creative ways the abusers damaged me. Not happy with that at all.

I am exhausted 24/7 because of severe insomnia that I wouldn't have if I wasn't damaged by others. I'm 37 and I have to raise tons of littles who exist because of damage caused by others. I NEVER got to develop my sexuality in a healthy way because it was not only taken away from me, people messed with it it for their own entertainment. I call that a problem. The only thing female about me, is my body because of damage caused by others. Can you imagine the confusing influence this has on EVERY aspect of your life? I bet you can, because of damage caused by others.

I knów I can't see many, many things as they are, realisticly, just because of damage caused by others. I am a smart person, we all are, peeps, and we just can't see stuff for what it is because of damage caused by others. If only we could reach all of our talents at the same time, right? Guess why we can't. Oh yes, for me personally; I am disabled. And who has to do the hard work to heal? Not the abusers. And who has to deal with victim blaming, people who don't believe in DID or in ritual abuse, people who get uncomfortable when I switch or even just tell that this happens, the embárrassment when a little comes out in public, people who might even be scared because this still is so unknown, people who don't see me as an equal and never will, ETC; me.

I opt for DICT; dissociative identity caused by trauma. Edit; DIT; Dissociative Identity caused by Trauma.

VioletFlux wrote:

PlanetIcarus wrote:After therapy you may be able to be happily multiple. But it's like if someone had his leg amputated. He might be happy and have a good life, he doesn't have to want his leg back, it might become his new identity just have one. He's not lesser person than the ones with two legs, or lesser person he was. It still is a disability. You can live good life with disorder or disability, after they have been properly treated, and you might feel it's the way you are supposed to be.

I apologise if this comes off as an attack, I don't mean it to be. I just take exception to this, especially the two bits I've bolded.

If you're a happy multiple, then you do not have a disorder. Multiplicity alone is not a disorder. I do not think that someone who is happy with their multiplicity is in any way similar to someone who has come to terms with / accepted a tragic disability like that.

I think that I view it more as PlanetIcarus does, but I also think your disagreement may be more a matter of semantics. Someone who has one leg because of a physical trauma, especially one that happens early in childhood, let's say, because that would be the comparable analogy, views themselves as having a difference and can go on to have a happy and fulfilled life--excel in a sport beyond many with whole bodies, for example, or whatever. They would probably NOT call it or consider it a disability, and maybe feel as if certain paths or experiences would never have been available to them if they hadn't lost a leg. They adapt in a healthy way to the damage that was done to them physically, but they are never the same as someone to whom that never happened.

It's exactly the same as DID, I think. We have coped creatively with damage that was done to us, but it will never be as if the damage didn't happen. It's not visible, like a missing leg, and we may get to the point where it doesn't interfere with having a full life. But we will always be people who were severely abused or neglected in childhood.

the Gang

If I swallow something toxic and then vomit, that is highly adaptive, a good thing. If I swallow food and then vomit, and as a result I am malnourished, that is a disorder.

Same with DID. There are aspects of my capacity to dissociate that are very adaptive. They serve me well in my life. But there are other aspects, aspects previously far beyond my control, that put me in great danger. So my DID, for me, is a disorder until I gain such control that it no longer causes distress or dysfunction.

{Max} (With input from Rex): There actually is a concept of healthy multiplicity, which would fit with what you're describing. I could link to some articles about if you're curious, but the gist of it is that multiplicity is not inherently a disorder and not everyone who is multiple would fit the criteria of DID or OSDD.

A lot of it comes down to individual experiences. Not every system functions the same way and some get along very well with little problems in daily life. That's not to say there aren't any, but it's not enough to be considered a disorder. There are also multiples who haven't formed from trauma, and regardless of what you may think about that they generally wouldn't be considered to have DID.

The reason we consider parts of our multiplicity to be a disorder is that we do struggle with dissociation. We do very much love and care for each other in our system but the problems we experience together make it so that we could be considered to have DID even if we get along.