no betty we are not in a debate. we are talking about this part of the op's post.....

"During my last session my T was saying things like "... There's this part of you, she feels afraid. Is that right?" "There's a part of you that is the protector. I'm wondering if she could come out and tell you what it is that she is protecting you from? What do you think she would say?" "Do you remember when she first started protecting you?" "At anytime if any of your parts want to say something to me, I hope they feel comfortable doing so."

That made me feel like she thinks that I have DID, yet she has said before that I don't. If any one knows what I am trying to express and has some thoughts, could you please share them?"

the therapy approach in this paragraph is called IFS therapy.

I am telling the op what IFS is and how its done and why it doesnt work for me and how my therapist and I tried it on one of my dissociation symptoms.

I used dissociation symptom because its the dissociative forum and a normal problem that in IFS language is called a part, just like if I was posting in the emotions forum about it being used with anger my example would have been anger because IFS calls the angry feeling a part. I did not use one of my alters to show the process because

1. the original poster has posted they are ....not.... DID

2 I know that another poster would probably want to show the process with an alter because sometimes it is used with DID.

this way the op gets to see how the two uses are different and wont feel so alone.

in other words we are on topic discussing the paragraph where the poster had concerns about the therapy that they are doing.