anyone have a recommendation?

[tragic-4.livejournal.com]

Hi people,
I'm not a multiple myself, so I hope you don't view this post as invading the community or anything, but I just wanted to pop in and see if anyone knew of any good books about the subject to recommend to me since I am interested in it. I guess my interest started when I read an autobiography of a man who first figured out he was multiple pretty late in life, freaked out for a while, and then learned to deal with it (I don't remember the title or the author so that description probably isn't very helpful, but I have to leave for work soon so I don't have time to look it up or anything) but yeah, anyways I just saw the book in Borders one day and read it all in one sitting.
So, I guess I would want a book that's a bit more comprehensive than one person's autobiography...and I am a psych major so I don't mind if it's pretty technical, but it would be cool to find something more objective than "this is a horrible disease, and these are the medications" etc. etc.So, yeah, I can always just search stuff, but I thought I would check here to see if anyone had a book that they read themselves and found helpful, or tell people they know to read, or whatever.
Anyway, yes, I will be leaving now. Thanks!
-tragic

Comments

[36.livejournal.com]

http://www.astraeasweb.net/plural/books.html

Most books are about 'damaged' people courageously 'healing' through integration. Early books tended to be written by therapists, later books by the 'patients' themselves.

Apparently The Flock is a reasonably good book on the subject and the ending where they integrate only occurs by accident.

Being a psych major may work against you, the current medical opinion is on the one hand dissmissive and on the other extraordinarily limiting. An article on DID in the DSM IV, http://www.astraeasweb.net/plural/allison.html

There's a lot wider range of people who identify as multiple or plural who are not covered by the 'disorder'.

[tragic-4.livejournal.com]

Thanks, that page should have me reading for years...heh

As far as the whole deal with disorders goes, my personal view is that -*fill in any mental state here*- can either be a disorder or not, depending on how the person/people experiencing it feel(s) about it, and everyone is different. So, if someone feels that being multiple/gay/depressed/anxious/obsessive/manic/happy/whatever causes them a problem or makes them feel bad in any way, they have the right to seek and get help for it. But, if they feel that having the *whatever mental state* doesn't cause any problems and they are fine with it, I don't see why anyone else should have the right, (or really even have the desire to - why should they care?) to lump them into a category and make them change or do anything about it, even if others with the same condition may have wanted to.

The biggest problem I have with psychiatry today is precisely their tendency to want to lump people into neatly predefined disorders and then consult their little booklet to force the medicine which goes with this disorder down your throat. Maybe this medicine did help someone else who appeared similar and wanted to change, but the brain is a very complex thing, and that doesn't mean the next person you see will be anything like the last even if they have some similar characteristics. Obviously, I can't say that every mental health professional is like this, but speaking from the few first hand experiences I have had with them for stuff like anxiety and depression, I would say that on the whole I was unpleasantly surprised.

At this time anyway, I am not planning to go into clinical psychology or psychiatry as a profession anyway, so I will probably avoid getting swept into being a part of these kinds of ideas on a serious scale (unless I ever think that I will have a chance at changing some of the stuff I don't like, which is pretty improbable)

Anyway, I have rambled on much further than anyone probably cares to hear. Goodbye!

[tragic-4.livejournal.com]

But, if they feel that having the *whatever mental state* doesn't cause any problems and they are fine with it, I don't see why anyone else should have the right, (or really even have the desire to - why should they care?) to lump them into a category and make them change or do anything about it, even if others with the same condition may have wanted to.

Addendum: Unless of course the person with whatever condition is causing harm to others - in this case I should hope that others should have both the right and desire to cause the person to change at least this harmful behavior. duh.

[emploding.livejournal.com]

"First Person Plural", By Dr Cameron West, sounds like the one you have read ;)

amd yesh i agree, The Flock is an excellent book.

Just thought id share lol

[lakme.livejournal.com]

I actually didn't think the Flock was that good-it took me ages to figure out where she was going with it. First Person Plural was a great book though.

[storyteller2001.livejournal.com]

"When Rabbit Howls" written by The Troops for Truddi Chase is, in our opinion, really incredible and very unique. It is an autobiography, so just deals with one system. In that regard it doesn't really match what you're looking for. But When Rabbit Howls is the ONLY biography/autobiography that we have read that deals with multiplicity from an inside perspective. The others that we've read pretty much all deal with what the outside sees fairly exclusively. When Rabbit Howls really shows what their inside world is like. how it's set up, some of why. conversations amongst themselves, etc. i guess to us it feels like this book deals with multiplicity within the world of a multiple, whereas all the rest we've read deal with multiplicity from the world of solids.

a warning though, it is EXTREMELY intense at times. and some of the descriptions of their abuse gets somewhat graphic. so, if anyone reads it, and needs to do so, please make sure you're safe.