DID vs Abuse

DID does not make someone abusive. Harmful behavior still matters, but diagnosis is not a moral verdict. ^{1 2 3}

Main ideas

• People with DID can cause harm, like anyone else, especially when symptoms are unmanaged or safety is poor.
• Abuse is a pattern of coercion, control, or harm; it is not caused by having parts.
• Accountability works better when it targets behavior and impact rather than demonizing a diagnosis.

Questions for reflection

• What behavior needs to stop or be repaired?
• Is the label being used to explain care needs or to excuse harm?
• How can safety be protected without stereotyping DID?

Clinical note

DID is not an excuse for harm, and it is not proof of harm either.

Footnotes

1. Brand, B. L., Sar, V., Stavropoulos, P., Kruger, C., Korzekwa, M., Martinez-Taboas, A., & Middleton, W. (2016). Separating fact from fiction: An empirical examination of six myths about dissociative identity disorder. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 24(4), 257-270. Abstract and overview of six myths. Text-fragment link to the article's summary claim. ↩

2. Reinders, A. A. T. S., et al. (2012). Fact or factitious? A psychobiological study of authentic and simulated dissociative identity states. PLOS ONE, 7(6), e39279. Psychobiological comparison study. Open access PLOS ONE article. ↩

3. Pietkiewicz, I. J., Banbura-Nowak, A., Tomalski, R., & Boon, S. (2021). Revisiting false-positive and imitated dissociative identity disorder. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. Differential diagnosis article. Open access diagnostic caution article. ↩