STANd your ground

Beginning Notes

CDDs are not:

Having multiple people in your head

Your personality changing sometimes

Having "friends in your head"

Silly, funny, cute, or otherwise a positive thing. It is fine to find positives in your life with this disorder, but often people really romanticize and water-down the reality of CDDs, which are trauma-based dissociative disorders.

The most common terms you will hear can be divided into two categories: medical/diagnostic terminology and community terminology. Posts about CDDs tend to focus on the latter.

With diagnostic terms, you will see the following:

Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID)

Partial DID (P-DID)

Other Specified Dissociative Disorder (OSDD) [specifically subtype 1, but many people leave that off]

Unspecified Dissociative Disorder (UDD)

There are a few misconceptions about these terms. UDD is not a separate type of "system disorder" (I have problems with this phrasing but I am using it for clarity) but instead a placeholder for when a specific diagnosis cannot be made.

OSDD1a and 1b are not diagnostic terms, but instead community terms that align with previous subtypes of Dissociative Disorder Not Otherwise Specified (DDNOS) and are not fixed descriptions of OSDD1 presentation.

P-DID is included in the ICD-11 but not the DSM-5. It involves one primary "identity" that has infrequent "intrusions" of other parts.

Complex DID (C-DID), Highly Complex DID (HC-DID) and Polyfragmented DID are not diagnostic terms but are instead used by people with CDDs to describe their experiences. These terms are generally based on descriptions in medical literature, but those descriptions are/can be very different from how they are described in online communities.

DID

Diagnostic Criteria (via DSM-5-TR)

A. Disruption of identity characterized by two or more distinct personality states, which may be described in some cultures as an experience of possession. The disruption in identity involves marked discontinuity in sense of self and sense of agency, accompanied by related alterations in affect, behavior, consciousness, memory, perception, cognition, and/or sensory-motor functions.

This first point of criteria is referring to what is commonly called "parts" or "alters". These distinct personality states can present as different genders, ages, etc., although these differences can often be understood in the wider context of DID as a protective shield against trauma, e.g. "I could've stopped this if I was a strong man," "If I was an adult I could have made it out of this situation." Keep in mind that these are how the child brain *interprets* different types of people. Of course how parts act, talk, present themselves, perceive the world around them, and think can be different.

B. Recurrent gaps in everyday events, important personal information, and/or traumatic events that are inconsistent with ordinary forgetting.

Criterion B is about dissociative amnesia. A person with DID may "lose time," e.g. find themself in an unfamiliar place not knowing how they got there, missing appointments, not knowing what happened in the past days or months, or not being able to recall traumatic events. Dissociative amnesia is obviously an important criteria, and one that I feel online spaces don't talk about as much as other aspects of the disorder.

The last three criteria are the typical causing significant distress (C), not being a part of a cultural or religious practice (D), and not being attributed to substance use or another disorder (E).

OSDD1

There are a few different subtypes of OSDD, only one of which is related to DID.

Excerpt again from the DSM-5-TR.

1. Chronic and recurrent syndromes of mixed dissociative symptoms: This category includes identity disturbance associated with less-than-marked discontinuities in sense of self and agency, or alterations of identity or episodes of possession in an individual who reports no dissociative amnesia.

The "identity disturbance associated with less-than-marked discontinuities in sense of self and agency" is sometimes referred to online as OSDD1a. Reminder that 1a and 1b are community terms and not diagnostic ones. The description of reports no dissociative amnesia is important: it doesn't mean the individual does not have dissociative amnesia, but instead that they don't claim to. The person may not know or notice that they experience dissociative amnesia.

P-DID

Diagnostic criteria via the ICD-11.

1. Disruption of identity characterized by the experience of two or more distinct personality states (dissociative identities), involving discontinuities in the sense of self and agency, is required for diagnosis. Each personality state includes its own pattern of experiencing, perceiving, conceiving, and relating to self, the body, and the environment.

This is essentially the same as criterion A for DID.

2. One personality state is dominant and functions in daily life, but is intruded upon by one or more non-dominant personality states (dissociative intrusions). These intrusions may be cognitive, affective, perceptual, or behavioral. These experiences are experienced as interfering with the functioning of the dominant personality state and are typically aversive. 3. The non-dominant personality states do not recurrently take executive control of the individual's consciousness and functioning to the extent that they perform in specific aspects of daily life. However, there may be occasional, limited and transient episodes in which a distinct personality state assumes executive control to engage in circumscribed behaviors (e.g. in response to extreme emotional states or during episodes of self-harm of the re-enactment of traumatic memories).

I don't have much to say about this one, except that the defining feature of P-DID is that the other parts of the personality intrude infrequently and not in everyday life. Remember that P-DID is only listed in the ICD-11.

Formation

The foundation of dissociative identities is thought to be divisions or dissociations within the individual at the level of identity or the personality. Dissociation or a breakdown of integration between psychobiological aspects and systems that make up the totality of the person's functioning can occur at the level of sensation (e.g. temporary/functional blindness), cognition (e.g. amnesia), affect (e.g. numbing), behavior (e.g. temporary/functional paralysis), and consciousness (e.g. ego-observing depersonalization, among others. Yet, when all these systems come together to underpin and maintain a person's identity, and dissociation occurs at this (identity/personality) level, it creates dissociative identities. Here, separate organized systems of functioning, each with their own unique perspective on the world and who they are, appear to co-exist within the individual. Each of these identities has their own first-person perspective or experience of self-consciousness. Consequently, each of these identities report their own subjective experiences and memories, their own sense of agency and will, and their own perspective on who they are. They often report being unaware of other identities or report amnesia for experiences that presumably occurred when other identities were engaging in executive actions.

From Revisiting the etiological aspects of dissociative identity disorder: a biopsychosocial perspective, 2017.

The current model used to describe dissociative parts of the personality is the theory of structural dissocation. This theory posits that every person has multiple "ego states" in young childhood, and that without disruption those states integrate into one cohesive personality.

In those with CDDs, that integration was disrupted by trauma. Repeated trauma up to the ages of 6-9 can cause this lack of integration if the child uses dissociation as a coping mechanism. These separated ego states then go on to develop as "parts" or "alters" that are seen in CDDs.

More about parts

What do these dissociated parts do? In the theory of structural dissociation, there are two types of parts:

Apparently Normal Parts (ANPs): alters that do everyday tasks such as work, school, socializing, shopping, etc. Typically these parts are trauma-averse, meaning they avoid anything that could be related to their trauma or their disorder.

Emotional Parts (EPs): alters that are "stuck" in a past trauma or feelings, and often accompany flashbacks.

There are also other more specific terms used, mostly within online spaces:

Host: the part that has executive control most of the time, typically an ANP. Some people with CDDs may have multiple.

Caretakers: parts that soothe other parts, or do calming tasks.

Protectors: parts that can be aggressive or avoidant in order to protect the person.

Child alters/littles: parts that appear young or regressed. They often are EPs, but not always.

Introjects: parts that take on ideals, behaviors, and other traits from an outside source. Most often these parts will be based on abusers or other close real-life figures, e.g. a kind babysitter or a protective sibling. Introject parts can also come from a fictional source, however this is not as common as people online would lead you to believe. Fictional introjects are incredibly overrepresented in online spaces.

There is also the commonly-used term "gatekeeper", but I'm hesitant to explain it due to the popular notion that gatekeeper parts are all-knowing or have full control over other parts. Gatekeepers are essentially parts that can exert some control over other parts.

Other terms

Some other terminology you may see:

Fronting: describes when a part has executive control.

Switching: describes a part taking executive control.

System: all of the parts of a person with a CDD.

Inner world: a created space that can be used in therapeutic settings to attempt communication between parts. I cannot emphasize enough that inner worlds are not exclusive to people with CDDs, nor are they actually real places where parts go. It is a visualization tool.

Co-fronting: when more than one part has some executive control.

Co-consciousness: when more than one part is "conscious" but they do not have control.

Possessive switch: a switch experienced as a part taking total control.

Non-possessive switch: a switch experienced as a part "becoming" another part rather than totally taking control.

C - Currency When was the information published or posted? Has the information been revised or updated? Does your topic require current information, or will older sources work as well? Are the links functional?

R - Relevance Does the information relate to your topic or answer your question? Who is the intended audience? Is the information at an appropriate level (i.e. not too elementary or advanced for your needs)? Have you looked at a variety of sources before determining this is one you will use? Would you be comfortable citing this source in your research paper?

A - Authority Who is the author/publisher/source/sponsor? What are the author's credentials or organizational affiliations? Is the author qualified to write on the topic? Is there contact information, such as a publisher or email address? Does the URL reveal anything about the author or source?

.ac.uk = Academic institutions in the UK .com = Commercial sites .edu = Educational institutions .gov = Government .nhs.uk = Health information services in the UK .org = Non-profit organizations .mil = Military .net = Network.

A - Accuracy Where does the information come from? Is the information supported by evidence? Has the information been reviewed or refereed? Can you verify any of the information in another source or from personal knowledge? Does the language or tone seem unbiased and free of emotion? Are there spelling, grammar or typographical errors?

P - Purpose What is the purpose of the information? Is it to inform, teach, sell, entertain or persuade? Do the authors/sponsors make their intentions or purpose clear? Is the information fact, opinion or propaganda? Does the point of view appear objective and impartial? Are there political, ideological, cultural, religious, institutional or personal biases?

keep in mind this test doesn't at all look at whether or not methods for conducting experiments or studies are effective and valid, but at some point i'd also like to make a post about verifying credibility for academic studies specifically.

What is this? Here is a list of sources, citations, and explanations for each of them aimed at debunked claims surrounding the ISSTD and their foundation- more specifically their controversial SRA, RAMCOA, OEA, and other terms section.

SRA, later becoming the RA in RAMCOA, stands for Satanic Ritual Abuse. This terminology was created during the Satanic Panic, a period in the 1980s-90s where public officials, law enforcement, and otherwise regular individuals held a widespread belief and panic over the idea of Satanic Cults running amok in the United States. This panic was taken advantage of by various people as a way to spread their own agenda, and was later disproved as a conspiracy theory by the government, several times. (X)(X)

The ISSTD was founded in 1983 during the Satanic Panic to study DID, SRA, and the connection between the two of them. “In the 1980s, Braun became a leading proponent of the satanic ritual abuse theory, and appeared on TV promoting it. According to this theory, thousands of children were being subjected to organized acts of murder, torture, human sacrifice, cannibalism and sexual abuse throughout America, in elaborate ceremonies performed by Satan-worshippers.”(X) (X) Braun, whom at the time still possessed his license, went on to directly link the formation of all DID with the occurrence of SRA, he would then go on to attempt to have this added to the DSM as a diagnostic criteria, publishing articles and other research on it to oppose his colleges who did not buy in to the panic, going as far to accuse those who did not agree with him were in fact perpetrators/members themselves. (X) Each of Brauns claims have been debunked over the years including a police and government effort that investigated over 12,000 official documented claims of SRA. (X) Braun has been sued twice by former patients for his malpractice, and has been accused on multiple accounts of feeding his conspiratorial beliefs to them. His license was suspended twice before it was revoked and he was expelled from the Illinois and American Psychiatry Societies.(X) He continued to play a central role in the ISSTD until 2021.

Collin Ross, one of the lead researchers into RAMCOA, was found guilty of medical malpractice, convincing one of his patients that she was impregnated by aliens through a satanic cult, though his license was not revoked. He has also gone on record saying that he, and other people, can shoot energy from their eyes that can be captured. He follows in Braun’s footsteps, and continues to be an active member of RAMCOA research even today. (X)(X) Allison Miller, another ex lead researcher of the RAMCOA sig, is currently unlicensed, and to this day continues to claim that recent criminal investigations have given the results that satanic cults are a widespread global issue.  She, like Braun has linked satanic abuse as an active initiate of DID. One of her main controversies is that she claimed her clients delusions of alien abductions were actually memories “implanted by a satanic cult to make her seem crazy” One of Miller’s main supporters was Neil Brick, who claims he was programmed by the illuminati to be a serial killing spy, these claims were looked into by the FBI and disproven. (X)(X) Tara Tulley, another ISSTD member, had her license revoked for performing exorcisms and other demon revocations on patients with DID, believing that their DID was caused by satanic rituals. (X) Eileen Aveni, an ISSTD SRA specialist, was found guilty on multiple public health code violations, including neglecting her patients, with one documented case of allowing her patient to be sex trafficked, she was put on probation but ultimately returned to her work. (X) George Greaves, a past president of the ISSTD had his medical liscenses revoked for engaging in sexual acts with patients, specifically while they were under therapeutic hypnosis, as well as other ethical violations. (X)

Micheal Sulter, former ISSTD chairman in 2023, continued to parrot disproven conspiracy theories such as the McMartin Preschool tunnels, which was disproven decades ago. (conference documentation on multiple accounts) Sulter has also claimed that there is a psyop or similar group run by enemies and ex ISSTD board members. (No link unfortunately, the social media posts were deleted and the only one with them available is the Grey Faction) Even currently, the ISSTD has not moved away from conspiratorial concepts in their presentations and meetings, they continue to mention that occult holidays such as Halloween or Christmas inspire ritual abuse from Satanic Cults. (X) 

The ISSTD has annual conferences, each being either recorded or documented, several of these being notably controversial. In 1988 they aimed to verify cannibalistic satanic cults who participate in human, specifically child, sacrifices, this was investigated and then debunked by the FBI. In 1989 they included talks of real life Manchurian Candidates, a discredited conspiracy theory based on the novel of the same name. All information available was scrutinized by many in the field, especially in the forensic legality of clinical hypnosis considering the heavy use of it by ISSTD practitioners. (X)(X) From 1990 to 1998 ISSTD conference guest panelists had been accused of being Satanists if they portrayed any skepticism towards the connection between DID and SRA; this is documented in several instances. (No link, An Interview with Frank Putnam, Part II." ISSTD News)(X)

The RAMCOA sig was forced to be rebranded in 2020 to the OEA sig due to “stricter rules for the provision of Continuing Education (CE) and Continuing Medical Education (CME) credits” meaning without the rebrand they would have lost the ability to certify their practitioners. This is because their sponsors said they would refuse to approve presentations discussing SRA mind control conspiracies. They have stated that they are trying to overturn this by finding a new sponsor or becoming self certified so that they could continue such presentations. (X. Yes, this has the Grey Factions name on it however it’s from The Satanic Temple simply discussing a letter that was released by the Grey Faction.) The reason they founded the RAMCOA sig in 2008 was to allegedly separate their SRA research and DID research, however the two still remained linked together as shown by Brauns continued connection.

Additions This document is not even going to touch on the antisemitism of the SRA and blood libel conspiracies that go into the term because there would be way too much to talk about.

Many people say things like “It's a good foundation tied to bad people!” which is more so the opposite. The ISSTD is structured and based off of malignant theories that alienated survivors and fictionalized their situations by embellishing it as part of their conspiratorial agenda. It originated from the twisted belief of a satanic cult underground, and that these cannibalistic sacrificers were giving/creating DID. They are the reason that the FMSF exists, it is due to the fact that so many of their practitioners were found guilty of taking advantage of patients to push their conspiracies. The main reason people claim that DID is purely iatrogenic is because the ISSTD used clinical hypnosis as well as other methods like the fear and vulnerability of victims to create crazy explanations and fake memories. The ISSTD is not a good foundation, there are some genuine and well meaning people there, but time and time again they continue to support SRA conspiracies and spread satanic panic. Many people, purposefully or not, continue to share Braun’s dog whistles: if you don’t remember your cult trauma, it’s because it’s hidden from you, if you don’t want to talk about it then it’s a program keeping you from talking, if you have a violent alter it’s because your cult leader introjected a demon in to you, don’t ever research RAMCOA on your own without a professional, because if you do then you might trigger suicide programming- This is satanic panic. 

I think this quote puts it really nicely, “The ISSTD created the term for the idea of RAMCOA. They did not create it to describe your trauma. They created it to describe conspiracy theories.” It was not made for survivors, it was not even based on the experience of survivors, it was manufactured by people who do not fundamentally understand what organized abuse is, and it is solely based on SRA and MKultra conspiracies. Your abuse is real, your experience is real, but RAMCOA is not. When you identify and label yourself with this term, you are contributing to the stigmatization survivors face in the medical field; there is a reason the term RAMCOA is only recognized by the ISSTD, you are contributing to the conspiracy theories ISSTD members continue to spout. All of the ISSTD conspiracy theories have been disproven, and time after time yet they continue to link survivors and DID to them, when this happens people see survivors and DID as also fictitious, especially those who label themselves as RAMCOA. If they say A and B are connected, when A is proven wrong what are people going to think of B? (in this example A being SRA, and B being people having DID.)

No, this is not a conspiracy, I made sure to not include anything in relation to the Grey Faction because so many people on Tumblr say that the ‘real’ conspiracists are the Grey faction because they ‘made all of these claims up’ which really isn’t true and I wanted to show that no, these claims are not just something they made up- they are well documented, most of the documentation being internally done by the ISSTD themselves.

There are better terms to use now, and more fitting frameworks that are actually created to help people like us. We are not a commodity, we are not fictitious, and our disorders are not something to be taken advantage of as proof of conspiracy. No one should be preyed upon by this as many people have been.

Some other recognized terms include:

Organized abuse

Conditioning

Institutional abuse

Cult abuse/trauma/survivor

Trafficking

Religious/spiritual abuse

Psychological abuse

Emotional abuse

Physical abuse

Sexual abuse

Sadistic abuse

Conditioned abuse

A very small other note is that programming is an intense form of conditioning that takes advantage of dissociative barriers induced by trauma. It is not satanic mind control that turns you into a child soldier- you are not a villain, you are not a killer, you are not a demon or angry spirit, you were a kid who did what you needed to in order to survive. Conditioning is not mind control, one day you are going to be free of it : )

I, the writer of this, am a cult survivor and victim of heavy conditioning. You aren't alone, and I promise you that there are people out there who genuinely care and want to help us, the ISSTD and specifically their RAMCOA now OEA sig is just not one of them, to them our abuse is just a spectacle that can be used to support a defunct theory.

 Some more sources can be found below as I can’t remember if I included them earlier:

https://openaccess.city.ac.uk/id/eprint/11871/

https://archive.org/details/satanicpaniccrea00vict

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3574493/The-people-who-believe-that-Satanists-might-eat-your-baby.html

https://archive.org/details/EvidenceAgainstDr.ColinA.RossVol.1

The last small thing I’ll add in case someone brings it up is that yes, some of the ISSTDs research has been helpful, in the exact same way that some of the Grey Factions research as been helpful- it doesn’t erase the bad things they have done and it definitely doesn’t make up for them. If the ISSTD completely bans their use of conspiracies as well as cracks down on clinicians taking advantage of their patients I would be overjoyed, but the fact of the matter is that many who have abused their authority have not been punished for it, or received a slap on the wrist and continue to work there.