Does McLean Hospital Have Ties To MK Ultra?

On writing DID characters/stories

I asked a DID friend about writing DID coded characters and stories, because myself and another wanted to make sure our representation was respectful and empathetic. That said, neither story is intentionally depicting DID, but the coding is inevitably there.

Here is their response. This is from one system, and is not the end all be all on DID. My personal recommendation would be to have a sensitivity reader if you are intentionally writing DID, but if your story has DID/multiple personality tropes and not DID specifically, the following is for you.

Are these distinct personalities? Like separate and distinct as in do they identify as separate individuals? Do they communicate? Are there amnesia barriers? Do they have separate thoughts and memories and opinions? Dissociation and fugue states can occur in other conditions. DID is a fairly specific criteria. OSDD a and b are similar but have key differences. Some systems can be as small as two so that’s not really a factor although to be honest I don’t know systems like that.

But is this character going to be like explicitly stated to have DID? If not, then they don’t need to worry about getting terms right or being believable even, it can just be “DID coded” characters. Like The Crystal Gems from Steven Universe are very DID coded to me or the whole series is. I mean Stevonnie is what it’s like being blended co/con which happens often.

It’s not DID but it’s a lot like DID and looking at the fanfic that way may alleviate some pressure. If you just wanna make sure it’s not offensive or something somehow by accident you can check with a sensitivity reader. Jekyll and Hyde is also a well worn trope, so if it's only two personalities you don't need to fret about DID representation.

And it’s just my opinion but like I feel like we have autistic coded and queer coded characters. Coding vs overt spelling certain things out happens for a variety of reasons. I think for things as complex as a condition like DID, overt means you will spend a LOT more time focusing on and explaining the condition and how it affects the character’s life and relationships, whereas keeping it coded is helpful for avoiding all of that and just using their condition more functionally.

Making them have DID flat out means you can’t use it as a simple ploy device, Which is gonna over complicate your story and characters in this instance. But if you do it right then the demographic will still see representation and take it positively and those not in the know will just take it all at face value.

For example, the whole Venom thing is very plural coded but obviously that’s coded and different being it’s a parasite and it’s not trauma based. It works as an analogue and it makes you think about parallels. it’s entirely different when you make a character like Moon Knight or Crazy Jane from Doom Patrol, because then eventually you’re getting into their system functioning, their trauma history, and the actual disorder. Then how it debilitates them as well as empowers them all becomes a huge part of their story.

Again, I myself do not have DID and I am sharing what my DID friend wrote in response to my question. If you have DID, feel free to reblog and respond to agree or disagree or add to it.

I hope this is helpful to anyone writing DID or DID-coded characters.

I learned about compassion fatigue for the first time when I was a 911 operator for two and a half years. Now I’m experiencing it not from a particular job but from moving through life for so many years stuck in the constant “fawn” trauma response. I compulsively gave and gave and gave for so long that I now have literally nothing left. When I first stopped (for survival) compulsively giving to people out of an empty cup I realized I really had no sense of identity outside of helping people... I was overwhelmed with feelings of fear, obligation and guilt... I’m on a journey now of learning to give to myself before I give to anyone else and it’s honesty really hard. It feels “wrong” but I know that’s conditioning from my childhood. I learned I had to abandon myself to survive. Now my body is forcing me to listen to my needs.

why do people say programming doesn’t exist and that it must be false memories? /gen

Lots of reasons.

Most people don't like to think about other people getting hurt. They also especially do not like to think that children are being hurt. And even more they do not like to think that child abuse is occurring while someone else who could have stopped it was there. This is why when child abuse survivors of any kind tell family members/friends who weren't abusive that so and so abused them, the immediate reaction is typically denial. Whether they accept it later on or not, the initial reaction is usually defense and denial. Even when they do accept it there is often a degree of "how could I have missed that" that these individuals express either to the survivor or to their own friends. People want to keep and uphold the view that most people around them are good. The concept of "groups of people who all decided to abuse children together" is contradictory to that worldview so they discard it, but if you ask them about specific things like child soldiers and trafficking that they have probably heard of (and also probably associate with Poor Uncivilized Third World Countries(tm) instead of happening in their own countries), they will usually say that's real.

Another reason is that most peoples' idea of programming is from media, mostly revolving around like...super powers or a person becoming basically a robot or they think it's all like cults in the woods or whatever. They think TBMC is some sci-fi thing, they don't know what it looks like, and they aren't thinking about the abuse part. And I do think that it kind of sucks that MC is the term because it does sound like some sci-fi/dystopian thing just from the name. It sounds very silly if you don't know much about it. In reality it is pretty boringly based in psychological responses to torture.

Another reason is that FMSF was very successful in their smear campaign despite being made up nearly entirely of parents who had gotten successfully sued for child abuse by their children. The fact that academics even marginally acknowledged them was a mistake IMO. Not to say that I'm not like the other girls but if a group of parents like this started making shit up around me I would simply roll my eyes and ignore them. Unfortunately, psychiatric abuse exists and the famous ones kind of screwed everybody else. Most famous one being Sybil. Instead of getting mad at psychiatric abuse occurring it became a focus on how DID itself is fake and abuse memories a person has discussed in therapy is therefore also fake.

Another is a community issue. There are individuals who saw RA survivors getting attention from court cases and decided that they would Also like to get attention and would make up stories which would eventually get debunked OR they sounded so fictional (because they were) that most people then assumed that all RA survivors were like that. There were and still are also survivors who were so desperate to be believed that they would tell their stories in great detail--except their stories usually also included lies that their groups told them which discredited them. Most of these are lies that the average person would find ridiculous and factually incorrect and so nobody would believe the rest of what they were saying.

Lastly, many RAMCOA survivors are simply not palatable. A lot of us are not the cutesy socially acceptable kind of survivors that people feel pity for and want to give a blanket. Many RAMCOA survivors especially when they first get out or first start processing this are aggressive, lash out, behave erratically, make no sense to anyone, have no/low empathy, say very socially inappropriate things, etc. This goes double if isolation from the rest of the world was a big part of the abuse. And to be clear I do not mean like...ghosts their friends or is a little snarky or has a breakdown sometimes in a cute little corner with quiet little sobs. I mean shit that you would get shunned by polite society and get the cops called on you for. The ones that don't escape (either stayed in or the group dissolved/faded over time) tend to be more stable appearing than escapees but they're still not the type of survivor people care about.

As a RAMCOA survivor I don't feel safe in the CDD community or the plural community. Both sides villainize us while also doing performative allyship and pretending to care about survivors. We're evil if we come forward and save our childhood friends and loved ones. We're evil if we share information to help survivors know why they're experiencing what they're experiencing. Our therapist is supposed to magically figure out what exact symptoms were experiencing without us ever voicing anything because we don't have the language to explain it. We're always told to shut up and be quiet and then non-survivors get to walk all over us and speak for us without ever considering that maybe it's not their place to EVER get involved in any form of discourse around what we can do or not. Quite literally this is a case of oppressors speaking for those they oppress. Broader society also wants us to be silent because we're seen as too depressing. Too much. It's seen as normal and okay to encourage survivors to let their programming fully take them other as long as it's not the ones that hurt others or dares to make people see scars on you. Then that's a problem but people like us should just disappear and stay silent like our programmers wanted. That's the message that is given so often when people talk about us. The other message is we would be better off dead than dare speak.

Some Roles within DID/OSDD Systems:

Protectors:

Protectors are alters who assume the responsibility of safeguarding the system from harm, both internally and externally. They may manifest as fierce, assertive, or even aggressive identities, employing strategies such as vigilance, hypervigilance, or assertiveness to shield the system from perceived threats. Protectors may emerge as a response to past trauma, aiming to ensure the safety and survival of the system.

Caretakers/Nurturers:

Caretakers or nurturers within a DID/OSDD system play a pivotal role in providing emotional support, guidance, and care to other alters. They exhibit qualities of compassion, empathy, and tenderness, offering comfort and reassurance to those in need. Caretakers often act as a stabilizing force, fostering a sense of security and nurturing the well-being of the system.

Gatekeepers:

Gatekeepers possess the crucial role of managing access to memories, trauma, or specific information within the system. They act as a protective barrier, regulating the flow of information to prevent overwhelming experiences or triggering events from inundating the entire system. Gatekeepers ensure that the system maintains a balanced and manageable level of awareness regarding past experiences.

Host/Primary Identity:

The host or primary identity is the alter who assumes the role of fronting and interacting with the external world most frequently. They often serve as the primary point of contact and may possess the most comprehensive understanding of the individual's life experiences. The host identity typically manages daily responsibilities, social interactions, and the coordination of tasks within the external environment.

Executive Managers:

Executive managers are alters who possess organizational skills, problem-solving abilities, and the capacity to oversee the functioning of the system. They excel in coordinating tasks, managing schedules, and ensuring efficient communication and collaboration among alters. Executive managers often contribute to the overall stability and productivity of the system.

Child Alters:

Child alters represent younger aspects of the individual's personality. They assume childlike roles within the system, embodying innocence, vulnerability, and curiosity. Child alters may hold memories, emotions, or experiences from specific developmental stages and may require nurturing and support from other alters within the system.

Communicators:

Communicators serve as mediators, facilitating internal communication among alters within the system. They bridge gaps in awareness, mediate conflicts, and ensure that information and experiences are shared effectively. Communicators contribute to the cohesiveness and integration of the system, fostering understanding and collaboration among alters.

Helpers:

Helpers are alters who possess specialized skills, talents, or knowledge that contribute to the overall functioning of the system. They may excel in areas such as creativity, problem-solving, artistic expression, or specific domains of expertise. Helpers contribute their unique abilities to support the system and aid in individual and collective growth.

Conclusion:

Roles within DID/OSDD systems showcase the multifaceted nature of the identities that exist within an individual. Protectors, caretakers, gatekeepers, hosts, executive managers, child alters, communicators, and helpers all play vital roles in the internal dynamics, functioning, and healing of the system. Recognizing and understanding these diverse roles is crucial for fostering empathy, facilitating effective communication, and promoting integration within the individual's journey towards wholeness and well-being.

Human Bill of Rights

GUIDELINES FOR FAIRNESS AND INTIMACY

1. I have the right to be treated with respect.

2. I have the right to say no.

3. I have the right to make mistakes.

4. I have the right to reject unsolicited advice or feedback.

5. I have the right to negotiate for change.

6. I have the right to change my mind or my plans.

7. I have a right to change my circumstances or course of action.

8. I have the right to have my own feelings, beliefs, opinions, preferences, etc.

9. I have the right to protest sarcasm, destructive criticism, or unfair treatment.

10. I have a right to feel angry and to express it non-abusively.

11. I have a right to refuse to take responsibility for anyone else's problems.

12. I have a right to refuse to take responsibility for anyone's bad behavior.

13. I have a right to feel ambivalent and to occasionally be inconsistent.

14. I have a right to play, waste time and not always be productive.

15. I have a right to occasionally be childlike and immature.

16. I have a right to complain about life's unfairness and injustices.

17. I have a right to occasionally be irrational in safe ways.

18. I have a right to seek healthy and mutually supportive relationships.

19. I have a right to ask for a modicum of help and emotional support.

20. I have a right to complain and verbally ventilate in moderation.

21. I have a right to grow, evolve and prosper.

http://www.pete-walker.com/humanBillofRights.htm

What are some common consequences of being neglected as a child? source: r/emotionalneglect

Pete Walker identifies neglect as the "core wound" in complex PTSD. He writes in Complex PTSD: From Surviving To Thriving,

"Growing up emotionally neglected is like nearly dying of thirst outside the fenced off fountain of a parent's warmth and interest. Emotional neglect makes children feel worthless, unlovable and excruciatingly empty. It leaves them with a hunger that gnaws deeply at the center of their being. They starve for human warmth and comfort."

Self esteem that is low, fragile or nearly non-existent: all forms of abuse and neglect make a child feel worthless and despondent and lead to self-blame, because when we are totally dependent on our parents we need to believe they are good in order to feel secure. This belief is upheld at the expense of our own boundaries and internal sense of self.

Pervasive sense of shame: a deeply ingrained sense that "I am bad" due to years of parents and caregivers avoiding closeness with us.

Little or no self-compassion: When we are not treated with compassion, it becomes very difficult to learn to have compassion for ourselves, especially in the midst of our own struggles and shortcomings. A lack of self-compassion leads to punishment and harsh criticism of ourselves along with not taking into account the difficulties caused by circumstances outside of our control.

Anxiety: frequent or constant fear and stress with no obvious outside cause, especially in social situations. Without being adequately shown in our childhoods how we belong in the world or being taught how to soothe ourselves we are left with a persistent sense that we are in danger.

Difficulty setting boundaries: Personal boundaries allow us to not make other people's problems our own, to distance ourselves from unfair criticism, and to assert our own rights and interests. When a child's boundaries are regularly invalidated or violated, they can grow up with a heavy sense of guilt about defending or defining themselves as their own separate beings.

Isolation: this can take the form of social withdrawal, having only superficial relationships, or avoiding emotional closeness with others. A lack of emotional connection, empathy, or trust can reinforce isolation since others may perceive us as being distant, aloof, or unavailable. This can in turn worsen our sense of shame, anxiety or under-development of social skills.

Refusing or avoiding help (counter-dependency): difficulty expressing one's needs and asking others for help and support, a tendency to do things by oneself to a degree that is harmful or limits one's growth, and feeling uncomfortable or 'trapped' in close relationships.

Codependency (the 'fawn' response): excessively relying on other people for approval and a sense of identity. This often takes the form of damaging self-sacrifice for the sake of others, putting others' needs above our own, and ignoring or suppressing our own needs.

Cognitive distortions: irrational beliefs and thought patterns that distort our perception. Emotional neglect often leads to cognitive distortions when a child uses their interactions with the very small but highly influential sample of people—their parents—in order to understand how new situations in life will unfold. As a result they can think in ways that, for example, lead to counterdependency ("If I try to rely on other people, I will be a disappointment / be a burden / get rejected.") Other examples of cognitive distortions include personalization ("this went wrong so something must be wrong with me"), over-generalization ("I'll never manage to do it"), or black and white thinking ("I have to do all of it or the whole thing will be a failure [which makes me a failure]"). Cognitive distortions are reinforced by the confirmation bias, our tendency to disregard information that contradicts our beliefs and instead only consider information that confirms them.

Learned helplessness: the conviction that one is unable and powerless to change one's situation. It causes us to accept situations we are dissatisfied with or harmed by, even though there often could be ways to effect change.

Perfectionism: the unconscious belief that having or showing any flaws will make others reject us. Pete Walker describes how perfectionism develops as a defense against feelings of abandonment that threatened to overwhelm us in childhood: "The child projects his hope for being accepted onto inner demands of self-perfection. ... In this way, the child becomes hyperaware of imperfections and strives to become flawless. Eventually she roots out the ultimate flaw–the mortal sin of wanting or asking for her parents' time or energy."

Difficulty with self-discipline: Neglect can leave us with a lack of impulse control or a weak ability to develop and maintain healthy habits. This often causes problems with completing necessary work or ending addictions, which in turn fuels very cruel self-criticism and digs us deeper into the depressive sense that we are defective or worthless. This consequence of emotional neglect calls for an especially tender and caring approach.

Addictions: to mood-altering substances, foods, or activities like working, watching television, sex or gambling. Gabor Maté, a Canadian physician who writes and speaks about the roots of addiction in childhood trauma, describes all addictions as attempts to get an experience of something like intimate connection in a way that feels safe. Addictions also serve to help us escape the ingrained sense that we are unlovable and to suppress emotional pain.

Numbness or detachment: spending many of our most formative years having to constantly avoid intense feelings because we had little or no help processing them creates internal walls between our conscious awareness and those deeper feelings. This leads to depression, especially after childhood ends and we have to function as independent adults.

Inability to talk about feelings (alexithymia): difficulty in identifying, understanding and communicating one's own feelings and emotional aspects of social interactions. It is sometimes described as a sense of emotional numbness or pervasive feelings of emptiness. It is evidenced by intellectualized or avoidant responses to emotion-related questions, by overly externally oriented thinking and by reduced emotional expression, both verbal and nonverbal.

Emptiness: an impoverished relationship with our internal selves which goes along with a general sense that life is pointless or meaningless.

Help for those who constantly apologizing:

So, I am what I like to call a ‘serial apologizer’, I have been known to get stuck inside a ring of ‘I’m sorry’ over things that are totally unnecessary (bumping into things, making too much noise, or even simply being even close to in someone’s way, etc). I have had pretty much every reaction to this habit of mine from kind to extremely rude. Some people have found it endearing, cute or a sign that I am just that polite. While other people found it to be attention-seeking, dishonest, awkward, or just plain annoying. It took me a long time to realize that none of these explanations are really true at all. After a pretty enlightening conversation with a friend in a treatment center, I realized just why I was apologizing all the time. She pointed out that my apologizing was because I was scared to upset anyone, or even take up space. I had never realized or been told that feeling this way was abnormal and that is why I decided to post about it, in hopes of helping others with this problem. 

So here’s a list of the things I have learned since the conversation:

Constant apologizing is a reaction to feeling or having felt that: you aren’t allowed to take up space, you shouldn’t vocalize your needs, you don’t have valuable input. This tick or habit is a direct response to one or several factors: high anxiety (whether social or otherwise), trauma (particularly at the hands of people you cared about), or low self-esteem.

Constant apologizing is NOT attention-seeking, rude, or necessary to be seen as polite.

A lot of the time the apologies is a preventive measure to protect you from rejection, conflict, or awkward situations. It’s actually a defense mechanism.

A lot of common reactions received from people who don’t understand can actually continue this cycle, or make it difficult to resist continuing the cycle.

So with that basic information, I am going to move on to some reminders (Bonus: if you change you to I these double as some pretty nice affirmations)

You do not need to apologize for taking up space. 

You do not need to apologize for making small, mistakes that haven’t hurt anyone.

You do not need to apologize for existing  

You are allowed to make mistakes

You are allowed to show emotions/vulnerability.

You are not obligated to apologize for being yourself or acting human.

Now on to some tips that are helping me overcome this habit (I still struggle with this cycle but I swear these can help out.)

Use positive affirmations to raise your self-esteem and relieve anxiety. (The ones above work and I have a post of confidence-building ones on this blog)

Try (when it makes sense) to use “Thank you.” instead of “I’m sorry” 

Examples:

“Thank you for understanding,” rather than “I’m sorry for *small mistake/ lateness*

“Thank you for making me feel so welcome,” rather than “I’m sorry, you don’t have to do that.”

“Thank you for listening to me. It’s nice to feel heard.” instead of “I’m sorry for being emotional.”

Be gentle with yourself for slipping up. It’s way more beneficial to be kind to yourself rather than self punish.

If you can try to talk to people in your life you feel comfortable/ safe around about the apologizing. 

“I struggle with apologizing all the time, I’m trying to change this habit but it can hard for me. I hope you can understand”

“I’m trying not to apologize as much. Can you give me a gentle reminder/code word when I do I apologize unnecessarily?”

For people who have loved ones who struggle with this habit

 Try to respond kindly with things like:

“It’s okay, you don’t need to apologize for *cause of apology*”

“You seem anxious. Is everything okay? Did something make you uncomfortable?”

“I am not angry or annoyed with you for making a mistake or taking up space. You are allowed to make mistakes”

Have a calm, understanding conversation about the pattern

Be respectful and understanding of the cause of this pattern. This isn’t meant to be a high-maintenance, guilt trip or annoying. In fact, it’s a direct result of being made to feel that way.

I hope this post is helpful for any fellow ‘serial apologizing’ or someone who loves or cares for one.

R

Definition of Polyfragmented (in DID)

Dictionary definition: Poly = A prefix meaning “many, Fragmented = adjective. reduced to fragments. existing or functioning as though broken into separate parts; disorganized; disunified

Polyfragmentation is unusual in that there is no actual definition for the term. There are many definitions out there, but no definition is agreed upon by a majority either within academic realms or socially.

We see this sometimes with other DID/OSDD terms such as “integration” being used to mean two (almost opposite) things.

With polyfragmentation there are many different definitions, with some focusing on number of parts, some on internal system structure, etc. But even those who insist that the definition revolves around numerical value (the number of alters/parts), there is no accepted and agreed upon number. And so, we will look at the possible definitions, socially vs scientifically/medically.

Keep reading

i’ve been told by a lot of people that robot alters who do what they’re told are from programming only. this is really scary to me because i did not experience that despite having an alter like that. i think if i had heard this as a younger system it would have made me very scared and convinced me of things that didn’t happen. can you share your thoughts on this?

Hi,

Blaming any presentation of DID or alters strictly on programming is a horrible idea. You're right that these kinds of claims are a major risk for false memories of ritual abuse, especially for young, newly diagnosed systems who are struggling immensely, still coming to terms with their symptoms and abuse history, and might be overly quick to take anything that older and seemingly authoritative systems claim at face value. I've heard of these types of claims going around for polyfragmentation, subsystems, internal worlds, and non-human alters. None of them are true. 

There are many reasons that someone could have a robot alter that does what it's told. It could be a metaphor for feeling like one's parents treated them like a robot instead of a child. It could have arisen from feeling like one's parents would have loved them more or punished them less if they were an obedient robot instead of a disobedient child. It could have been influenced by media that struck a cord regarding how robots were shown being treated or viewed by society. There's no reason whatsoever to assume robot parts or any other type of part automatically indicates any organized abuse, let alone programming.

There is no single or even combination of factors that can definitively indicate that someone experienced ritual abuse, programming, or any other type of trauma. Only actual memories (preferably continuous or spontaneously recovered, not recovered through hypnotherapy, creative writing, dream interpretation, or other potentially suggestive processes) or external corroboration of abuse can be trusted. No one should ever retroactively make assumptions about one’s abuse experiences based on adult symptoms, and no one should ever deny or downplay adult symptoms because they don’t have any of the causes that the individual has come to expect. That isn’t how mental health or DID/OSDD-1 work. That is how the Satanic ritual abuse panic got so incredibly out of hand. 

I’m glad that you were able to recognize that your robot part doesn’t indicate programming, and I appreciate you alerting us of this and giving us the opportunity to debunk it. 

I hope this helps,

Katherine