Let's see Dr. Jaime Marich (who is a DID system with a PHD specialized in dissociative disorders) has said it is possible to have headmates/parts without it being a disorder.
The DSM and ICD both state that the only time multiplicity gets classed as a disorder is when it causes severe negative disruption and struggle in day to day life. You know, the people who write those are all medical professionals who have even said trauma isn't 100 percent needed to cause someone to have parts. It is just the common thing that happens to CDD systems.
I'm going to listen to actual research and not the opinion of someone who thinks plurality = miserable disorder.
So when tumblr users are quoting things there's a good chance they did research on the topic. Tumblr is full of people who have done the research, y'all just whine and complain about "If they posted the link on tumblr it isn't a real source" There are sources and research out there, anti-endos just don't want to read it becsuse they have to process being WRONG.
Because facts state that you're wrong so you form groups with other people who have it wrong and have a circle of misinformation going around because endogenic systems are such a harm to your negative feelings about systems.
Endogenic - a system formed for reasons OTHER THAN trauma, not the LACK OF.
I think some of these points are worth addressing. And Iâm open to peer reviewed sources that support non trauma/stress-based autonomous identity formation.
Tumblr is full of people who have done the research. It's also full of people who don't, who misquote it, who recontextualize it to fit a narrative- and it happens on both sides. Not just talking about endos. Honestly it happens throughout Tumblr in general, topic to topic.
Tumblr posts cite other Tumblr posts, misquote clinicians, or in some cases cite anthropology/spirituality as neuroscience. It is fair that they are not always to be trusted. If a Tumblr post links a peer reviewed study or credible research, just link that.
To my recollection, Dr. Jaime Marich talks about ego states and non-pathological multiplicity, not endogenic alter formation. Those arenât the same thing. If I am incorrect, please direct me to a source where Dr. Marich explicitly refers to and validates non disordered plurality in this context, and if there is any reasoning, anecdotes, research, etc to support this as well or if it's just a statement like "yeah it's a thing" (I will accept that too though as I am unaware of that being said)
When clinicians say âparts donât always equal a disorder,â they are usually talking about ego states, not autonomous dissociative identities. Those are different things. But clinically, it doesn't check out in the ways that it is commonly described.
In the DSM-V, trauma is addressed in the text, not the criteria list.
âDissociative identity disorder is associated with overwhelming experiences, traumatic events, and/or abuse occurring in childhood.â
The ICD-11 is arguably more explicit:
âDissociative identity disorder develops as a result of severe or prolonged stress, typically during early childhood.â
They do not mention multiplicity outside of CDDs. And the disqualifier in the DSM-V "is not part of a broadly accepted cultural or religious practice" does not count as explicit validation of non disordered multiplicity. So I don't believe that these count as sources that support it. Which makes sense when so many endogenics claim to be non disordered.
Genuine question though, and I assure you that I am asking in good faith. Well, questions.
So having alters, experiencing switches, co-consciousness, integration/fusion, functional roles including memory/emotion/affect holding, loss of or partial agency etc caused by trauma, that is a structural dissociation framework as supported by current research. We can agree on this, I hope. I'm describing a CDD, essentially- how it's structured, how it functions. We can also hopefully agree that this is a survival mechanism in the case of CDDs when trauma is involved.
ISSTD Guidelines: âDID is understood to originate in childhood as a response to overwhelming experiences.â
Van der Hart, O., Nijenhuis, E., & Steele, K., The Haunted Self: âDissociation is the division of the personality into subsystems as a result of overwhelming stress.â
WHO ICD-11, 6B64: â...develops as a result of severe or prolonged stress, typically during early childhood.â]
But say someone experiences this or believes themselves to have no childhood trauma to their understanding. They may self identify as endogenic. There are people like this, they are accepted in the endogenic community, cool. Many typically adopt a framework that is essentially identical to CDDs, minus the trauma. In this instance, let's say that there is no disorganized attachment, either. Because disorganized attachment on its own is trauma and can cause DID.
Maybe this person in this example identifies with more inclusive terms, groovy. Now, neurologically, CDDs may not be fully understood but that doesn't discredit current research as there is a lot we do know about trauma, attachment, and dissociation. "We don't know everything about the brain" is a common deflection, so I'm asking about what we do know.
But my question is, without changing any details of the example (as many do say that this is their experience), What is the core mechanism behind this? Like what is the brain actually doing? As someone who has done your research, what would cause the brain neurologically to create most of the primary symptoms and structure that exists in CDDs to adapt in instances of problematic dissociation? Why does it emulate the specific and adaptive trauma framework without the trauma and reportedly appear sometimes nearly identical to a CDD?
Like if someone sees say, a TikTok account, and they post all about their experiences with multiplicity, one would not often know whether or not this person has a CDD unless it is disclosed. Because it is described to be functionally the same.
You say that endogenic plurality forms outside of trauma, for other reasons. I take this to mean that it can not be spontaneous or "natural" so are the people who claim this wrong? How else would this specific mechanism apply? Like can you explain how it works? Why this might occur? Not condescending, genuinely asking.
If you have peer-reviewed sources demonstrating alters forming without stress or trauma, Iâm open to them.
