I'm holding all my blood inside this skin

[ex-khailitha846.livejournal.com]

Greetings to all!

I have a question.

Seems that almost every multiple I know has at one time or another dealt with a self-destructive system member that cuts, or engages in activities that are similarly dangerous to the body. The multiples I know have all been involved in trauma's of some sort (the most interesting one had for a father one of Fidel Castro's ex-bodyguards - serious freakiness there, but I digress).

Since interacting with this community, I have been introduced to the phenomenon of natural multiples, which makes sense to me and, I think, addresses some of the unanswered questions about why many horribly abused kids don't develop DID but use other coping mechanisms. I don't really want this to turn into a big discussion about the natural vs. trauma thing, but I am curious...

How many systems here deal or have dealt with self-destructive members and do you think is this an experience more closely linked with trauma-involved multiples or is it a trait shared equally across the full spectrum of all multiples? +edit: Or, do you think self-harm and multiplicity have no intrinsic connection, given the number of singlets who also engage in self-harming activities.

All comments and experiences would be greatly appreciated.

Sending good vibes to all!

Jess

Comments

Re: Must be said

[ksol1460.livejournal.com]

A natural multiple is one whose multiplicity did not arise out of childhood abuse or trauma, but who was simply born that way.

Re: Must be said

[poespretty.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the response. I kinda figured something along those lines, but again, you hear so much about the multiples stemming from trauma that I've never really explored this type of multiplicity.

I'm guessing this is why a natural multiple may dislike the term MP Disorder or DI Disorder since their state of being is not a disorder but just their way of life.

again, thanks for answering.

Brianne

Re: Must be said

[ksol1460.livejournal.com]

Precisely. Like many multiples who did actually split due to trauma, but then organised an operating system and live multiple without undue difficulty, they find indiscriminate use of the word disorder as applied to all multiples to be irritating, since it doesn't describe their situation.

Once again, being multiple in and of itself is not the disorder. The disorder involves things such as lack of communication and a way to maintain responsibility and activities of daily living... not the bare fact that there are several minds in one body.

Re: Must be said

[poespretty.livejournal.com]

Exactly. Anything that is considered a "disorder" can only be qualified as such, in proportion to it's hindrance of functioning. If there is a working system present and they are indeed working together, what is disordered about that?

(As opposed to my SO's system that up until a few years ago couldn't agree on one thing at all. THough they are better about it now, I'd still consider them 'disordered' because they haven't quite gotten to a level of communication that affords them any real cognitive continuity. They need to learn how to cooperate better for the good of the system or even their individual sanities.)

I think that with natural and trauma based multiples, there is too much emphasis from outsiders on 'trying to integrate into one'. Sometimes I just have to ask "Why??". A system has survived, and not just survived but actually lived for quite sometime. Where is the need to revamp them to fit better into someone else's idea of 'whole'? Kind of an "if it ain't broke don't fix it kind of attitude".