Deconstructing DID

The author contends that a psychoanalytically informed approach to the patient with dissociative identity disorder (DID) can be very useful. However, there are difficulties in conceptualizing this condition without extending existing theory or applying in new ways what is already known. It is also difficult to put DID in a proper context relative to all the other disorders known to occur in the human mind. Depending on one’s clinical experience, level of skepticism, and appreciation of history, DID may be seen as either: a) the psychological “missing link” that realizes Freud’s goal of uniting the psychology of dreams with psychopathology, or b) a fraudulent condition that is wittingly or unwittingly manufactured in the therapist’s office or c) a population of disturbed and disturbing patients, once the subject of great scientific interest, which, exiled like a “Lost Tribe,” is now back in the fold of legitimacy. The author has had extensive clinical experience with psychic trauma, and bases his own views of DID on three assumptions: 1. that dissociation may be seen as a complex defense; 2. that DID may be thought of as a “lower level dissociative character”; and 3. that there is a unique psychic structure, the “dissociative self” whose function is to create “alter personalities” out of disowned affects, memories, fantasies, and drives. This “dissociative self” must be dissolved in order for integration of “alter personalities” to occur. A clinical vignette is offered to illustrate how he addresses some of the challenges of developing a therapeutic alliance at this end of the dissociative-character-pathology continuum, and how he grapples with the difficulty of integrating clinical phenomena, such as the appearance of “alters,” with the psychoanalytic model of the mind.