I always find posts about "parts" here on PC intriguing, mostly because I am unable to truly grasp it in an emotional way, other than knowing about dissociation (not from personal experience) and finding it as an interesting symbolic way to understand the self and our many different motivations. Internally, I do tend to feel that approaching problems via designating them to parts in cases that do not involve serious dissociation and trauma can easily become a way of avoiding responsibility, so I am not a fan of this approach personally. But, as I said, I admit that I don't really have a good grasp as I never really felt there were child parts or other fragmented entities inside me - usually I see the many facets of my feelings, motivations, self-sabotage etc as elements of the same whole one person, myself. If it is meant to be perceived as those elements, then I understand it. But I tend to disagree with using this approach to claim someone is not responsible because it's some of these less developed parts of elements doing things. I kinda tend to feel that therapy encouraging that thinking could compromise one's integrity even further. Again, this is from the view of someone who has not experienced dissociation and severe childhood trauma. I did experience bullying by other kids that indeed led to conflicting motivations about myself earlier in my life and sometimes desire wanting to eradicate so of them (unsuccessfully), but they grew and evolved with every stage of my life and did not remain childlike or isolated. I find approaches like IFS work a very interesting metaphoric way to understand someone but I would not like Ts who use it to encourage clients to fragment blame and see things in black&white ways.