How do you know if a HPD person tells the truth?

The Peter Pan syndrome?
It should really be on the list of defining criteria for HPD: efforts to continue a teenage lifestyle into adulthood and even middle age.
When you get down to it, the "steady" partner is expected to act the role of a soft parent -- loving, forgiving, supporting, enabling -- and is excoriated, in best spoiled-teenager fashion, for failing to live up to that expectation.
The lying of course too -- you could see that simply as a continuation into adulthood of guilt-free teenage-to-adult lying.
Even badmouthing the person they claim to love: teenagers do that as well, badmouthing their parents to everyone else.
But how charming that Peter Pan part of the HPD seems to a man when he first gets to know her!

I guess the only difference is that a teenager usually recognizes wrong doings, and has guilt when they have done something wrong. In these extreme HPD's it's not their fault, and they quickly dismiss the "parental" figure when they are no long in need. Almost like an NPD in that sense.
Does anyone notice any type of transgression as the HPD gets older? Trying to take on adult type responsibilities, or saying so, at an earlier age, then as they get older they tend to rebuke those ideals/roles and go for something with less responsibility.
For example, I've seen HPD's get into corporate world at an early age, and then as they got older left and took jobs as a barista. Seems a bit backwards.

not sure if I've ever heard of that, stars.. but then, I haven't known 'a lot' of HPD's, just one. LOL. And from what I know now, she seems to be an extreme case, because she had literally zero introspection and zero guilt.

I can't say she ever 'did something' with her life and then regressed. she's pretty much always floated from dead-end job to dead-end job, living off lovers and off her mom, with long stretches of unemployment between her dead-end jobs.

you're right compton.. the partner does become the parent, really. the partner has to soothe the HPD's past wounds, try to get them to take some kind of responsiblity.. ect, ect.

Compton wrote:When you get down to it, the "steady" partner is expected to act the role of a soft parent -- loving, forgiving, supporting, enabling -- and is excoriated, in best spoiled-teenager fashion, for failing to live up to that expectation.

Compton that is brilliant!

Your direct observation seems to totally illustrate what Dr. Kernberg drives at repeatedly. Borderlines have split internal objects. And they project fragments of those out to other people, while retaining a fragment inside as “them”.

To all, if you take anything away from this next discussion, take away Kernberg’s BPD conception of caricatures. It very clearly illustrates what he envisions has happened inside a BPD’s mind, and it explains a lot! BTW - this is not condescending to adult BPD sufferers, the reference here is to what may have happened as a child. In general psychoanalysis of pretty much everyone (nons, pds, everyone) they routinely speak of fixations and getting "stuck" at a certain stage of development: oral, anal, phallic, etc. This is not meant to be an insult, it's just illustrative.

Kernberg speaks of cartoon like caricatures (a picture, description, etc., ludicrously exaggerating the peculiarities or defects of persons or things). Not a real photo of a person but a cartoon character, as seen through a child’s eyes. In Compton’s most excellent example above the BPD would have a split (I.E. two wholly independent) internal models of a “parent” (in Kernberg’s world called an object, here it is two split object fragments).

Imagine a child back at the age where cartoons seemed VERY REAL! The “white” (polar positive extreme) object fragment for parent might be this cartoon character of “the perfect parent ( remember this is exaggerated as through the eyes of a 3-5 year old!) As Compton well illustrates – “a soft parent -- loving, forgiving, supporting, enabling” – imagine a Disney animator creating a cartoon caricature of this character i.e. “ludicrously exaggerating the peculiarities”. What’s more, that cartoon character never acts “out of role” (Roadrunner is never caught by Wile E. Coyote.) Now store that inside the BPD as still 100% in existence today. THAT IS REALITY FOR THEM – an ingrained “pattern” of themselves and another interacting with a specific strong affect attached – i.e. a “burned in” memory that is easily accessed as an adult. A pattern to be used when the situation warrants it – easily called right up from memory and nearly instantly applied.

Of course a “black” (polar negative extreme) object fragment would also exist for the corresponding “bad parent” (again, through the eyes of a 3-5 year old). Again, go to Disney and have their best animation artist make you up that caricature. (Yes the bad parts are really EXAGERATED!) Once again the bad character is alive, 100% available to come into “existence” inside the BPD today. It’s a model of how three things work in a giving situation: self, another person (object), and both linked with a specific strong affect.

Instead of those two caricatures merging into a nice, realistic, part good/part bad integrated whole, they remain separate, and completely un-integrated. Had there been normal maturation a solid realistic single object would now exist. But it doesn’t, two separate object fragments exist, both of which “vie” for being “it” (the truth) at any point in time, inside the BPD’s mind. The two polar extreme caricatures compete for who will represent reality in the current situation. Voting occurs quickly and the majority totally takes over consciousness. The other polar opposite is 100% unavailable to consciousness.

The switch can flip quickly, neatly, without distress (in the BPD) [engineers think intense square waves, at seemingly random or more accurately, situation specific, intervals – like semiconductor logic gates almost] - based on how the voting is going, at any particular time. Yet, only one fragment can be “entertained” in consciousness at a time. And, BPD’s are themselves consciously totally unaware of any flip.

The fact the two fragments exist independently is likely the most disquieting feature to everyone around the BPD. (i.e. very distressing to see / be subject to as a normal). When the switch is flipped, THE BPD doesn’t realize it at all as jarring. The other fragment is neatly tucked away or projected out onto you. Here is the disorder in a nutshell: both caricatures are “right” to the BPD, but only one can be present in “me” or “you” consciousness, at any specific instance. The other is projected (not me) or suppressed (not me). [IMHO the unconscious is wise to all this switch flipping on some deep level. It drives BPDs “crazy” in the subconscious. However, that trivial bit of my own opinion is radically speculative!]

One minute you are perceived as “a soft parent -- loving, forgiving, supporting, enabling” and they are doting all over you as a child. The next minute they see you as “the horrible parent, fully deserving to be excoriated, in best, three-to-five-year-old fashion, but since they have grown up, they can do the excoriating in the best spoiled-teenager fashion, or even as the incredibly mature and sophisticated, full adult gasligher / calculated sadist fashion. Trust me, the excoriating will be on target, tailor made just for you; just as the serious doting above will be full “adult strength”, and custom made to make you feel really great!

Here are other common fragment “phenotypes” you can memorize. With practice you can see them frequently played out when a BPD interacts with an intimate significant other (or with a professional therapist).

[Note to Alice – don’t read this or go any further, wait for your “real” therapy….If you ruminate its possible to trigger!]

Source: Kernberg, et al 1989 Psychodynamic Psychotherapy of Borderline Patients

• destructive, bad infant (punitive, sadistic parent)
• controlled, enraged child (controlling parent)
• unwanted child (uncaring, self-involved parent)
• abused victim (sadistic attacker)
• sexually assaulted prey (rapist)
• deprived child (selfish parent)
• out-of-control, angry child (impotent parent)
• naughty, sexually excited child (castrating parent)
• dependent, gratified child (doting, admiring parent)

The left column [statement] reflects the common self representation, the right column [parenthetical statement here] the common object representation; it must be remembered, however, that the role pairs alternate constantly. The Therapist [or, significant other in any intimate relationship] and the patient become, in rapid turns, the depositories of part self and part object representations.

[In every instance of parent above note] Often the parents are not clearly differentiated as a mother and a father, but are merged as a single parent fragment.

Yep..my ex always said..she wonders if she will ever grow up.

She is still stuck in the abuse of coming of age and never got beyond it. She really is just still teenager. Right down to the teenage crushes, self centred, internal lack of confidence and wanting to be excepted.

Go figure