Cultic Studies Journal, Volume 17, 2000, Page 145
Living with MPD indeed. Having a diagnosis that some might consider farcical adds a unique
twist to the usual stigma associated with mental illnesses. In other words, not only are you
crazy, but you could be perceived as even crazier (or naïve and foolish) to accept such a
diagnosis. Consider how confusing it must be for patients to be told that they have Disease
A by Doctor Jones, while Doctor Smith says that Disease A doesn‘t even exist. What is the
patient to do when the experts disagree, and in the case of MPD, quite vehemently so? This
experience, in itself, may be crazy making. The patient simply wants an explanation and a
course of action that will help.
Thus, part of the experiences described in this book have to do with the stigma of the
diagnosis, not being believed, and the feelings engendered by such experiences. For
example, one self-identified mental health practitioner writes the following:
My greatest wish is that there was more acceptance of Dissociative Disorder
among mental health professionals. Contrary to some survivors, I feel that
this IS a ―disorder.‖ If it were simply a creative response to horrible
circumstances, then I wouldn‘t be overwhelmed so much of the time with
feeling suicidal, profoundly depressed and wishing to harm myself. Since
there is so much skepticism within the field of mental health regarding even
the occurrence of the disorder, I find that in a long list of deep secrets, the
fact that I suffer from MPD is just one more.
Other writings are phenomenological, trying to communicate what it feels like to have a
bunch of different selves sharing one body. For example:
It is very difficult not to think of ourselves as individuals or separate. We
have to be reminded frequently that we are a part of Susan. I also have to
keep telling myself that there are other parts of me. Accepting this is
accepting the experiences and all the feelings that come with them.
In other cases, poems describe the psyche recovering from unspeakable trauma. Still
others discuss the responses of therapists, family members, and significant others—good
and bad, ideal versions and worst-case scenarios.
In light of its own goals, I think that this book succeeds. Since it is a well-organized book,
replete with a section of resources, a glossary, and an excellent index, it can be used as a
learning tool by anyone interested in the subject and holding the book's perspective. It will
not, however, inform one about the great debate. Those who strongly doubt the diagnosis
itself will probably view the authors as misguided patients who don‘t know what they are
talking about. But for those who believe in this diagnosis and who work with this clientele,
have a friend or family member with this diagnosis, or perhaps believe that they have MPD,
this book could be an excellent resource, with something for everybody.
Andrea Bloomgarden, Ph.D.
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
These reviews are an electronic version of reviews originally published in Cultic Studies Journal, 2000, Volume 17,
pages 189-227. Please keep in mind that the pagination of this electronic reprint differs from that of the bound
volume. This fact could affect how you enter bibliographic information in papers that you may write.
Living with MPD indeed. Having a diagnosis that some might consider farcical adds a unique
twist to the usual stigma associated with mental illnesses. In other words, not only are you
crazy, but you could be perceived as even crazier (or naïve and foolish) to accept such a
diagnosis. Consider how confusing it must be for patients to be told that they have Disease
A by Doctor Jones, while Doctor Smith says that Disease A doesn‘t even exist. What is the
patient to do when the experts disagree, and in the case of MPD, quite vehemently so? This
experience, in itself, may be crazy making. The patient simply wants an explanation and a
course of action that will help.
Thus, part of the experiences described in this book have to do with the stigma of the
diagnosis, not being believed, and the feelings engendered by such experiences. For
example, one self-identified mental health practitioner writes the following:
My greatest wish is that there was more acceptance of Dissociative Disorder
among mental health professionals. Contrary to some survivors, I feel that
this IS a ―disorder.‖ If it were simply a creative response to horrible
circumstances, then I wouldn‘t be overwhelmed so much of the time with
feeling suicidal, profoundly depressed and wishing to harm myself. Since
there is so much skepticism within the field of mental health regarding even
the occurrence of the disorder, I find that in a long list of deep secrets, the
fact that I suffer from MPD is just one more.
Other writings are phenomenological, trying to communicate what it feels like to have a
bunch of different selves sharing one body. For example:
It is very difficult not to think of ourselves as individuals or separate. We
have to be reminded frequently that we are a part of Susan. I also have to
keep telling myself that there are other parts of me. Accepting this is
accepting the experiences and all the feelings that come with them.
In other cases, poems describe the psyche recovering from unspeakable trauma. Still
others discuss the responses of therapists, family members, and significant others—good
and bad, ideal versions and worst-case scenarios.
In light of its own goals, I think that this book succeeds. Since it is a well-organized book,
replete with a section of resources, a glossary, and an excellent index, it can be used as a
learning tool by anyone interested in the subject and holding the book's perspective. It will
not, however, inform one about the great debate. Those who strongly doubt the diagnosis
itself will probably view the authors as misguided patients who don‘t know what they are
talking about. But for those who believe in this diagnosis and who work with this clientele,
have a friend or family member with this diagnosis, or perhaps believe that they have MPD,
this book could be an excellent resource, with something for everybody.
Andrea Bloomgarden, Ph.D.
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
These reviews are an electronic version of reviews originally published in Cultic Studies Journal, 2000, Volume 17,
pages 189-227. Please keep in mind that the pagination of this electronic reprint differs from that of the bound
volume. This fact could affect how you enter bibliographic information in papers that you may write.
