I grew up, I was born into a sect. In this sect, we did not have the right to criticize, to think, to question, to ask questions ...
It is therefore very important for me to use this right which I have acquired so hard at the cost of many internal struggles. I need to understand. I need to seek and find on my own.
And it is difficult for me to see people on social networks relaying information without seeking the source, without asking questions, without thinking ... Especially since they are not prohibited from doing so. They do not suffer threats, their life, their well-being is not endangered if they do ...
Freedom is important to me. The freedom to express oneself, to make mistakes, to learn, to understand, to question ...
And I think you always grow up doing it. We can have an opinion at a given moment and change it afterwards because we have exchanged with another person, this person made us see things with his eyes and thus our horizon is widened ...
I wanted to publish the following text. This is the questioning of some of my intellectual parts.
But the fear, the fear of being judged, rejected, criticized made me withdraw it.
I had a terrible weekend. Full of internal conflicts, struggles.
Then I realized that I no longer wished to obey these laws, I no longer wished to live in this fear of expressing what one of my parts may think at a given moment.
I am free now. And if what I write angers people or makes them reject me, so be it.
Everyone has the right to ask questions. Everyone in this world has the right to express themselves. And speaking out does not mean that you are against something. Or that we are a "victim who criticizes and seeks to pit the other victims against each other" or that if we do so we "play the game of pedophiles because we divide".
To subscribe to something, I need to read, to find the sources, the research ... I don't want to refer to the belief of one and only one person. Because in my personal experience, it is synonymous with confinement and control. I want to find the same terms, the same explanations in others, in official journals, references ... Without that I'm afraid. I am terrified at the idea of ​​reliving this confinement that I experienced.
Does that make me a "divisive" person? I do not believe. It makes me a self-reflective person. And there is no harm in that.
Here is what I wrote:
It is all well and good to talk about "dissociation" and "traumatic dissociation" but could those who talk about it give a clear definition?
According to what design?
structural
dimensional
everyday language....
You can use the term dissociation for a lot of things!
Under what psychiatric diagnosis?
A person with a schizophrenic disorder may be:
schizophrenic
And if he has been through trauma may have dissociation that can be treated ...
Why specify the term "traumatic"?
Who therefore refers to a trauma ...
OK
What about people with dissociative disorder?
Where are they in this definition?
Why use the term "traumatic amnesia" instead of "dissociative amnesia" as named in the DSM?
Why ?
For fear of being associated with stupid controversies over dissociative identity disorder?
Those who talk about memories induced in DID have CLEARLY never seen DID people !!!
It is time to give clear definitions, to stop the brawls between shrinks and to rely on the research and the evidence that it finds to support the diagnoses!
TIRED of being excluded!
People with dissociative identity disorder are survivors of extreme and prolonged childhood trauma.
Fed up with films that portray us badly, fed up with the implication of induced memories, fed up that we don't name DID!
Tired of being invisible.
The problem with speaking of "traumatic dissociation" is that it implies a "psychiatric diagnosis" which would be called "traumatic dissociation".
Apart from this diagnosis does not exist in the DSM and the ICD. So certainly, this highlights the dissociation due to trauma!
And that's very good!
But I have the impression that it also leads to a lot of confusion and confusion.
In DSM V, we talk about disorders linked to trauma or stressors.
And this brings together several psychiatric diagnoses:
Reactive Attachment Disorder
Disinhibition of social contact
Post traumatic stress disorder
Acute stress disorder
Adjustment disorder ...
And it is also associated with the experience of trauma:
Dissociative identity disorder
Dissociative amnesia
Depersonalization / derealization ...
Suddenly I have the impression that many people confuse psychiatric symptoms and psychiatric diagnoses!
It is important to clarify the definition of dissociation!
Or people with a diagnosis may no longer accept it ... or else self-diagnose and not receive adequate care ...
We must train and be clear!
It takes a long time to be diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder!
A shrink cannot make a diagnosis by seeing a patient just once!
Because many psychiatric symptoms are present in several different diagnoses.
For example :
A person can have depression AND eating problems.
A person can have amnesia AND derealization (feeling alien to reality, cut off from reality).
In DID, we have amnesia, we experience derealization, depersonalization, we have dissociation, we can hear voices (those are our own thoughts that are expressed but we experience them as foreign to us due to our complex dissociation), we can have mood changes (depending on our dissociative part which is present) ...
And not every disorder will require the same treatment or the same approach.
The psychiatrist to make his diagnosis will observe his patient over long months, several years, give him questionnaires ...
Each psychiatric diagnosis has criteria to be met before it can be given. If the criteria are not met, then the diagnosis in question will not be made.
What will change the diagnosis is how the patient describes their symptoms.
It is by observing and listening to the patient that a therapist can make a diagnosis.
Must be distinguished
screenings which give an initial impression
and the formal diagnostic process which involves in-depth information gathering with a psychologist based on the diagnostic criteria of DSM and ICD:
a semi-structured interview,
cross-checking between several questionnaires,
an exploration of the answers given that does not stop at the score obtained ...
What I write will undoubtedly make people angry because the term "traumatic dissociation or traumatic amnesia" is omnipresent in France today.
I find it great that things are changing, that dissociation is known !!! And I am grateful for it! Infinitely!
But why use terms other than those that already exist? Why use different terms that will necessarily divide the psychiatric world and lead to wars when there are already many between shrinks? Why make things even more complicated instead of simplifying them? Why make sources, evidence, research more difficult to link together using other terminologies?
Already it is difficult for a patient to understand his diagnosis given the complexity of the DSM or the ICD, how can a patient navigate?
It took me a long time to understand that I had rights. It took me a long time as a patient to understand that I had the right to choose my shrink. It took me a long time to understand what the different currents are and to find a system of care that would do me good. I am trying to understand my illness. I discovered the complexity and the bag of knots that the pys have fun maintaining concerning the different approaches to care.
Is it wrong of me to tell myself that YES SHIT they piss off!
They piss off new theories every 5 minutes. They piss off each other by shooting each other. They piss off not putting the patient at the center. And that all of this is far too complicated. It took me years to figure out what I had. And it took a lot of effort. What about the people who cannot make the effort? Are we leaving them ignorant? Do we let patients get tossed around from one theory to another? Are we leaving them in the dark?
I am not critical of speaking and making dissociation or amnesia visible. it is an incredible, formidable and brilliant advance!
I criticize the fact of excluding research and knowledge already done in this area by using another word and at the same time not allowing patients to identify themselves and fully understand what disorder they have, and by the blur also exclude some patients.