Dissociative identity disorder, formerly referred to as multiple personality disorder, is a condition wherein a person's identity is fragmented into two or more distinct personality states. People with this rare condition are often victims of severe abuse. https://www.psychologytoday.com/con...entity-disorder-multiple-personality-disorder How might D.I.D begin? According to Psychology Today, people with this disorder are often victims of severe abuse. I have another theory. People with this disorder might be people who had too much time on their hands. If as a child I began talking to imaginary people, speaking to imaginary ghosts, communing with imaginary 'outer space people' and even just thinking myself to be something I was not; eg. 'I am a martian from planet Zeedo', I can begin to let my own identity go. The more time I spend with myself doing these things, occupying my time with 'imaginary' notions, I might be more prone to develop D.I.D. And so why the distinct differences between 'personalities'? Why the distinct differences of voice? Each imaginary person I was involved with, with speech, with listening, with obeying, etc,, would have had their 'own distinct' personality. I might have been friends to many 'different' imaginary people.. And it might be these 'imaginary people' whose characteristics I took on to myself. That is why some people with D.I.D have 'normal people' as their disassociations. Others have 'demons'. People who spend time with 'imaginary' people will begin taking on their characteristics, each with their own personality specialties. And a child who 'thinks himself/herself a demon' will probably more likely than not, be communing with some 'demon-like' imaginations.... These people may be spending more time with their 'imaginations' than with reality..
So if a person begins 'communing' with such 'imaginary things', they might have some hallucinations which are not being treated. These hallucinations might become just as 'real' as reality.
Why is this nonsense in the Science section? Go look up the science established by Psychology if you want to understand dissociation and why we don't exorcise people with it.
Science Discuss physics, chemistry, astronomy, oceanography, medical advances, etc. sorry.. got lost I guess.
Yeah, you're definitely lost in the forums. Don't be surprised to find this thread mod moved. Has it never occurred to you that such results could be the results of various causes, i.e. any two randomly picked DID sufferers (and I do use that term rather lightly as there are those who handle their DID quite well.) might not have their DID caused by the same thing. DID also manifests in various ways. I know two such people personally. In one, no one in their system is aware of what the others are doing when fronting, save for what the gatekeeper might pass on. The other, they can't separate away from each other. It is like they are all in the same control room and the one that sits in the command chair is the pone fronting. But everyone is subjected to alll the stimuli at the same time. The first person I am willing to bet was due to trauma, but they never talk about or admit it, and frankly I don't push. The second has no idea where the others came from, and well your theory is about as possible as anything. I'm known them (in the singular non gender specific sense) long enough to know trauma is not the source, at least nothing overt. The others just gradually came into being and got stronger until they were distinct.
if you are interested, maybe asking them, the 'real' person, if you know who the real person might be, if he/she dabbled in childhood role playing with imaginary friends or beings which others would have said were 'hallucinations'. At least this way you and I can get a direct answer rather than theorizing. When I say 'role playing' it can also include 'speaking' with such 'one(s)' outloud as if speaking to someone who is truly present, such as a physical parent or physical sibling..
You do realize that pretty much all kids do this, right? They have imaginary friends that they talk to. Maybe not 100%, but it's pretty common. What would you suggest is a point to start looking as far as when it becomes a source? Are you including RPG role play in this? Especially given how popular RPG's have gotten in the last couple of decades. And you don't seem to actually address the trauma source. Your OP seems to indicate that you believe that trauma is not a cause of DID.
I most definitely would have to disagree. I do not believe that most kids speak to things which are not there as if they were. Not in the quiet confines when they are alone with the so called imaginery ones. Holding conversations which they would with other humans, out loud or even within their minds, with something that is not there, I would say, is not the majority.
It is pretty common and well recognized. https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/growing-friendships/201301/imaginary-friends https://www.todaysparent.com/kids/school-age/why-kids-invent-imaginary-friends/ https://www.babble.com/toddler/imaginary-friends-early-child-development-imagination/ https://www.sciencefriday.com/articles/the-truth-about-imaginary-friends/ http://www.cyh.com/HealthTopics/HealthTopicDetails.aspx?p=114&np=122&id=1979 The articles range in number between 1/3 and 2/3 of children having imaginary friends, with most being in the upper numbers. And that is just a small sample of the articles on imaginary friends. You also avoided the RPG and trauma parts of my post. Did you avoid them for a reason?
my idea of why any person might begin doing such things as having and engaging with imaginary friends and such as well as beginning to partake in drug activity, etc, is because of 'boredom'.
Wow, completely and utterly different things. Sadly for you, you are not the professional, and you have been shown the reality of it. The odds of imaginary friends being a source for DID is slim to none, and I think I see Slim heading for the door.
I could get behind the idea that if a child has additional personalities develop, that it could manifest similar to having an imaginary friend and thus go unnoticed. It just doesn't work the other way around, or at least very rarely. But then I am one who believes that a given condition can have multiple vectors and our research gets bogged down because we want a single cause.
It's not an idea. It's part of the diagnostic criteria found in the DSM now version 5. Well still poorly understood and not even completed accepted, one can't really make that or any diagnosis about a mental disorder without utilizing criteria. Imaginary friends from childhood DO NOT lead to DID. This territory has been gone over very well by experts in that field of study.
Reread what I said. I wasn't saying that imaginary friends lead to DID. I said I could see DID manifesting initially as an imaginary friend. Especially if the personalities were not of the type that remain unaware of each other. The new personality might even think it is an imaginary friend. In other words, when the initial secondary personality emerges in a young child, if it doesn't suppress the original personality, then the original might treat it as an imaginary friend even though it isn't.
Yes, you are saying imaginary friends can lead to DID if that does exist. That's exactly what you're saying. It's been gone over although they aren't thru with it. Stay tuned as it may well exist. But imaginary friends in childhood aren't part of the criteria at present. I suppose that could change. Give it 10-50 years.
You keep reversing what I say. I am not saying having an imaginary friend leads to DID. I am saying that if a child were to develop DID, one of the additional personalities, probably the first one, might seem as if they have an imaginary friend. I am saying that maybe the disorder is masking as a common childhood trait at first, and might go unnoticed. This especially might occur if the two personalities are not separate from each other, i.e. they can interact even though only one is fronting.
Ok, well this is the same as saying somehow an imaginary friend may somehow get embedded. That's excluded by the current diagnostic criteria, right or wrong. I don't know how to say this any better so I won't say it again. As far as the 'disorder' is concerned then you can go read about it. There is a lot of work by a lot of people going into that. But they have been wrong before so.......
there is a difference between 'imaginary' and 'factual'. When children believe their 'imaginary' friends are 'factual' persons, it can be considered a psychosis.
Not until they're old enough to know better and it's very unlikely they develop schizophrenia early on. Very early onset schizophrenia prior to age 13 and after age 7 (generally) is unusual without a positive family history. These children generally have auditory and not visual even internalized hallucinations. They have a lot of other symptoms making the diagnosis not extremely difficult although there is crossover esp with autism. So their imaginary friends are not so imaginary but very real to them and by virtue of their interactions with the patient they seem much different than 'ordinary' imaginary friends. The child often believes they must do or not do what they are told by these voices. These secondary symptoms as well as auditory hallucinations are absent with imaginary friends. DID is much more related to a personality disorder, especially BPD, than to a psychosis anyway. Childhood psychosis is devastating esp in children while even BPD traits is difficult to catch early on esp in boys. In fact making that diagnosis early on is fraught with danger and difficulty. BPD is generally reserved for at least young adults as it takes that long for the abnormal behavior patterns esp social to identify and declare itself. DID is likely part of BPD or emotionally unstable personality disorder. That is debatable and there is a DSM diagnosis code for DID. Many just aren't so sure about it. I understand (maybe) your interest in this topic but you don't have enough training or experience to understand this on a level you'd like. I don't mean that harshly. Neither do I and I'm much more qualified to discuss this professionally.
I remember reading somewhere, that one thing they notice among a lot of those with schizophrenic is that they sub vocalize a lot. For some reason, they can't tell when they are subvocalizing and thus they think they are hearing voices, when they are actuallly hearing their own. I'm not sure where this line of research went, but it's stuck with me as interesting.
That's interesting. But the voices they hear, in the main, they recognize as not of themselves. The problem is they often act on the voices believing they must obey. They are not subvocalizing their inner voices but hearing voices clearly coming from 'others'. They are not a part of the patients personality.
