[CBDMeditator]

As should surprise no one, I'm not a psychiatrist, psychologist, therapist, counselor, or psych-industry professional of any kind, and am probably not even as informed on most "disorders" as the average self-styled expert, or armchair psychiatrist. It's a fun little detail that bears mentioning if for no other reason than as a disclaimer. I only speak for myself.

I just wanted to go on the record to address something that has been bothering me recently on the issue of DSM classifications, particularly as they relate to personality "disorders" within the communities of those who are diagnosed or waiting to be.

Classifications and diagnoses have their place. They're great for guiding medical professionals to an established treatment protocol. They can also be empowering to people looking for answers. Treatment protocols, however evolving, are fine tuned through years of trial and error for showing overall benefit for a handful of traits or features. However, as these labels relate to you and me in any absolute, all-encompassing sense, they fail, and are at least as oversimplifying as the Myers-Briggs types (studies have shown situational variation and overlap between "types" that limits the instructive power of Myers-Briggs). Their power to encapsulate people with a single label is reliably hampered, because that isn't their purpose.

In my trips between several forums, social networks, and message boards, I've been helplessly colliding with a lot of people who are either desperate to hear someone else tell them who they are, or are already unnecessarily carrying the weight of their particular label like it was a dead elephant. I don't say this to be deliberately provocative, and I realize many people are understandably relieved to put a name to their neurochemical imbalances, psychological habits, or routine coping mechanisms, but it's important to keep in view that these names are for those mechanisms, not you as a person.

My therapist calls this "pathologizing yourself," and he warned against it. "There's no good reason to make yourself feel trapped by a word," he would say. Initially I rejected this warning, dismissing it an empty suggestion meant to soften the blow of confronting this new reality of a category I had just been assigned. But as I started reading several self-help books, specifically on ego defenses and personality "disorders" written by industry PhDs, PsyDs and psychiatrists, I began to recognize a common denominator in almost all of their reference to labels. Many of these professionals furrow their brow at the term "personality disorder." The problem is that defining yourself by the limited clinical descriptions of a handful of traits is both unethical to yourself, and grossly inaccurate. Not only can this mistake compound matters, bringing undue anxiety and depression, it can can actually negatively influence your behavior.

Among the books I've read are Why Do I Do That?: Psychological Defense Mechanisms and the Hidden Ways They Shape Our Lives by Joseph Burgo Ph.D. Burgo refers to "disorders" in quotes (as I now do), explaining that everyone uses defense mechanisms, including himself, and with people who use "disordered" coping, they're frequently motivated by the same reasons as everyone else, but just in ways that can be more destructive than others, or sometimes to more extreme degrees. Early traumas can force certain coping strategies where healthier responses weren't an option. But this idea that they're "disordered" people doesn't often scale with the evidence. Most of the people diagnosed with these classifications are treatable, including those with physiological abnormalities. Other books such as the classic, A Guide to Rational Living, and How To Stubbornly Refuse To Make Yourself Miserable About Anything-yes, Anything by Albert Ellis Ph.D describe how damaging it is for people to assume the identity and narrative of clinical labels. He explains one of the first steps in conquering bad coping mechanisms is to stop saying "I have [random "disorder"]" and instead, more accurately say "I use [random disorder's coping mechanisms]."

You might be tempted to say, "well it's all fine and good that you have this opinion, but you're not a professional, and those are just a few books. What about the people who actually write the DSM's diagnostic definitions?" It's a valid question. It's true I'm not a professional, but as I mentioned, every therapist I've encountered recognizes the limitations of labels. Maybe the DSM themselves can shed some light on this confusion. In a NYTimes article written in 2012 (Thinking Clearly About Personality Disorders), a team of experts appointed by the psychiatric association, looking to revise and update the DSM's diagnostic system for personality "disorders" concluded the following:

"The most central, memorable, and knowable element of any person — personality — still defies any consensus.

Some experts argued that throwing out existing definitions was premature and reckless. Others insisted that the diagnoses could not be simplified so much. And some complained that the effort to anchor the disorders in traits had not gone far enough.

"You simply don’t have adequate coverage of personality disorders with just a few traits,” said Thomas Widiger, a professor of psychology at the University of Kentucky.

Dr. Widiger compares the process of reaching a consensus on personality to the parable of the six blind men from Hindustan, each touching different parts of the elephant. “Everyone’s working independently, and each has their perspective, their own theory,” he said. “It’s a mess.”

“It’s embarrassing to see where we’re at. We’ve been caught up in digression after digression, and nobody can agree,” Dr. Millon said. “It’s time to go back to the beginning, to Darwin, and build a logical structure based on universal principles of evolution."

Not exactly the holy grail of cohesion many hold the DSM up as. They couldn't agree with each other, and were often confused by the high degree of overlap with other "disorders."

I'm not saying there isn't utility in having a direction to look for in treatment of certain types of coping mechanisms, emotional instability, disordered thinking, ego defenses, or whatever else, but just do yourself a favor and make sure you aren't blindly consigning yourself over to a paragraph that a bunch of people continue to argue over. Who needs the undue stress? Not this guy. We're all people, not disorders. We may currently be using some clunky coping mechanisms at the moment, but that's it. Put down the stigma bag. That's for the uninformed.

[shakespeare47]

Thank you. Well said.

I've also noticed that there are many who almost seem to think that they are their diagnosis, and are basically helpless to do anything to change that fact. So, for them, it's self-fulfilling prophecy after self-fulfilling prophecy. They really are ______. It's been confirmed over and over.

Why not rather focus on changing whatever the behaviors problems are? I would think that is the reason for being diagnosed in the first place.

And I'm reminded of this episode of Science Friday about the DSM manual. http://www.npr.org/2013/05/31/187534...ychiatry-bible

The new edition of the DSM, the so-called "Bible" of psychiatry, is out. But many psychiatrists and psychologists say the manual's approach is outdated, boxing mental illness into discrete categories like schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, when very little is known about the underlying causes of disease.

Here are some quotes from the transcript.

It's not abstruse and philosophical when people go into a doctor's office, get a diagnosis of a mental illness, that diagnosis not only follows them around for the rest of their lives, it determines the treatment. It sometimes determines the drugs they're taking, and it determines, often, their identity. It tells people how to think about their suffering in a way that telling somebody they had kidney disease does not, because we're talking about the human mind. We're talking about the self. I don't think that's a philosophical issue. I mean, it is a philosophical issue, but I also think it's a right-on-the-ground, pragmatic, concrete issue.

GREENBERG: But let's add to that, Jeff, that under the current regime, 50 percent of the American people will suffer mental illness in their lifetime and 30 percent, close to 30 percent in any given year. Also, it's important to point out that those two moves which - the deletion of homosexuality and the addition of PTSD, both of which are great moves if you're going to have something like a DSM. Both took place by expert consensus on - basically on the basis of a vote. In fact, in the case of homosexuality, a referendum. And this is the problem of the DSM. It is that - it is presented to us as a scientific text, and yet in what other medical field are scientists voting on what a disease is?

[gayleggg]

I haven't asked my pdoc or therapist about a possible personally disorder for the reason I don't feel that it would be helpful for me to have another label, however, I have kind of wondering if I have one. It's just that I don't know if it would help me to know. I have some traits but I figure they can be handled individually instead of as another label. I think I'm happier not knowing.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[shakespeare47]

I'd also like to recommend 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology: Shattering Widespread Misconceptions about Human Behavior.

Available in pdf form here.

[CBDMeditator]

Not that anyone suggested this, but I just wanted be clear that I don't mean to say the DSM is useless. My post wasn't meant as a tract on the failings of Psychiatry or Psychology. These institutions have their utility. I actually believe in therapy and will always support self-help literature. Drugs, for all of their usefulness, failings, or abuses, do have a place for many.

I just want people to recognize the DSM's limitations, not to get to caught up in the stigma sodden narrative fostered by societal ignorance. These diagnoses were never intended to be prescriptive about a diverse span of entire personalities.

Originally Posted by shakespeare47

I've also noticed that there are many who almost seem to think that they are their diagnosis, and are basically helpless to do anything to change that fact. So, for them, it's self-fulfilling prophecy after self-fulfilling prophecy.

Exactly this. I've never understood how coping or emotional processing 'habits', for good or ill, have been equated with terminal brain cancer for some people.

The stigma, social constructs, and uninformed baggage of personality "disorders" has done a lot of heavy lifting for the way people react to these diagnoses.

Rewire Your Brain by John B. Arden Ph.D really underscore how much more mechanical we are than we we want to think. We can be habituated to new thinking virtually as easily as removing bad code causing errors in software. We're talking about bad habits ultimately.

Originally Posted by shakespeare47

It is that - it is presented to us as a scientific text, and yet in what other medical field are scientists voting on what a disease is?

This just reinforces this deepening problem for anyone left who still might view DSM classifications as all-encompassing. It's so intuitively not. And it's not even the DSM who are saying this. The DSM aren't like twirling their mustaches about this saying, "Muhahaha here is your new identity." Remember this quote from before: "The most central, memorable, and knowable element of any person — personality — still defies any consensus."

An argument could be made there are of course bottom line interests in the psychiatry field. Selling prescriptions is big business. But that's more another discussion. Here we're talking about people who, as you say, "think they are their diagnosis" and there's simply no good reason to.

-

[CBDMeditator]

Originally Posted by gayleggg

I haven't asked my pdoc or therapist about a possible personally disorder for the reason I don't feel that it would be helpful for me to have another label, however, I have kind of wondering if I have one. It's just that I don't know if it would help me to know. I have some traits but I figure they can be handled individually instead of as another label. I think I'm happier not knowing.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I can appreciate the not wanting to know. I'm like this about the 23 and Me test. But for me the analogy isn't the same.

With this, given what we now see about how the DSM works behind the curtain, my view is that it's little demystifying of DSM definitions. The labels themselves don't hold that kind of power to me knowing no one intended for their use to be all-encompassing, and more still at the picture of several old academics complaining over it. Certainly not so much power that I would never want to know the therapy.

The therapy for what they're calling "disorder" does appeal to me. Because the therapy still matters. That's what's useful. I don't need to believe labels are all encompassing to want to know more about how to treat coping mechanisms that aren't helpful. I just don't call it a personality disorder.

I agree with the aforementioned authors. It's not a "disorder," it's a unique set of coping mechanisms we happen to be using at the moment. And of course I'd want to alter them if they make me or someone else feel crappy.


-

[lavendersage]

Originally Posted by CBDMeditator

I can appreciate the not wanting to know. I'm like this about the 23 and Me test. But for me the analogy isn't the same.

With this, given what we now see about how the DSM works behind the curtain, my view is that it's little demystifying of DSM definitions. The labels themselves don't hold that kind of power to me knowing no one intended for their use to be all-encompassing, and more still at the picture of several old academics complaining over it. Certainly not so much power that I would never want to know the therapy.

The therapy for what they're calling "disorder" does appeal to me. Because the therapy still matters. That's what's useful. I don't need to believe labels are all encompassing to want to know more about how to treat coping mechanisms that aren't helpful. I just don't call it a personality disorder.

I agree with the aforementioned authors. It's not a "disorder," it's a unique set of coping mechanisms we happen to be using at the moment. And of course I'd want to alter them if they make me or someone else feel crappy.


-

Originally Posted by CBDMeditator

As should surprise no one, I'm not a psychiatrist, psychologist, therapist, counselor, or psych-industry professional of any kind, and am probably not even as informed on most "disorders" as the average self-styled expert, or armchair psychiatrist. It's a fun little detail that bears mentioning if for no other reason than as a disclaimer. I only speak for myself.

I just wanted to go on the record to address something that has been bothering me recently on the issue of DSM classifications, particularly as they relate to personality "disorders" within the communities of those who are diagnosed or waiting to be.

Classifications and diagnoses have their place. They're great for guiding medical professionals to an established treatment protocol. They can also be empowering to people looking for answers. Treatment protocols, however evolving, are fine tuned through years of trial and error for showing overall benefit for a handful of traits or features. However, as these labels relate to you and me in any absolute, all-encompassing sense, they fail, and are at least as oversimplifying as the Myers-Briggs types (studies have shown situational variation and overlap between "types" that limits the instructive power of Myers-Briggs). Their power to encapsulate people with a single label is reliably hampered, because that isn't their purpose.

In my trips between several forums, social networks, and message boards, I've been helplessly colliding with a lot of people who are either desperate to hear someone else tell them who they are, or are already unnecessarily carrying the weight of their particular label like it was a dead elephant. I don't say this to be deliberately provocative, and I realize many people are understandably relieved to put a name to their neurochemical imbalances, psychological habits, or routine coping mechanisms, but it's important to keep in view that these names are for those mechanisms, not you as a person.

My therapist calls this "pathologizing yourself," and he warned against it. "There's no good reason to make yourself feel trapped by a word," he would say. Initially I rejected this warning, dismissing it an empty suggestion meant to soften the blow of confronting this new reality of a category I had just been assigned. But as I started reading several self-help books, specifically on ego defenses and personality "disorders" written by industry PhDs, PsyDs and psychiatrists, I began to recognize a common denominator in almost all of their reference to labels. Many of these professionals furrow their brow at the term "personality disorder." The problem is that defining yourself by the limited clinical descriptions of a handful of traits is both unethical to yourself, and grossly inaccurate. Not only can this mistake compound matters, bringing undue anxiety and depression, it can can actually negatively influence your behavior.

Among the books I've read are Why Do I Do That?: Psychological Defense Mechanisms and the Hidden Ways They Shape Our Lives by Joseph Burgo Ph.D. Burgo refers to "disorders" in quotes (as I now do), explaining that everyone uses defense mechanisms, including himself, and with people who use "disordered" coping, they're frequently motivated by the same reasons as everyone else, but just in ways that can be more destructive than others, or sometimes to more extreme degrees. Early traumas can force certain coping strategies where healthier responses weren't an option. But this idea that they're "disordered" people doesn't often scale with the evidence. Most of the people diagnosed with these classifications are treatable, including those with physiological abnormalities. Other books such as the classic, A Guide to Rational Living, and How To Stubbornly Refuse To Make Yourself Miserable About Anything-yes, Anything by Albert Ellis Ph.D describe how damaging it is for people to assume the identity and narrative of clinical labels. He explains one of the first steps in conquering bad coping mechanisms is to stop saying "I have [random "disorder"]" and instead, more accurately say "I use [random disorder's coping mechanisms]."

You might be tempted to say, "well it's all fine and good that you have this opinion, but you're not a professional, and those are just a few books. What about the people who actually write the DSM's diagnostic definitions?" It's a valid question. It's true I'm not a professional, but as I mentioned, every therapist I've encountered recognizes the limitations of labels. Maybe the DSM themselves can shed some light on this confusion. In a NYTimes article written in 2012 (Thinking Clearly About Personality Disorders), a team of experts appointed by the psychiatric association, looking to revise and update the DSM's diagnostic system for personality "disorders" concluded the following:

"The most central, memorable, and knowable element of any person — personality — still defies any consensus.

Some experts argued that throwing out existing definitions was premature and reckless. Others insisted that the diagnoses could not be simplified so much. And some complained that the effort to anchor the disorders in traits had not gone far enough.

"You simply don’t have adequate coverage of personality disorders with just a few traits,” said Thomas Widiger, a professor of psychology at the University of Kentucky.

Dr. Widiger compares the process of reaching a consensus on personality to the parable of the six blind men from Hindustan, each touching different parts of the elephant. “Everyone’s working independently, and each has their perspective, their own theory,” he said. “It’s a mess.”

“It’s embarrassing to see where we’re at. We’ve been caught up in digression after digression, and nobody can agree,” Dr. Millon said. “It’s time to go back to the beginning, to Darwin, and build a logical structure based on universal principles of evolution."

Not exactly the holy grail of cohesion many hold the DSM up as. They couldn't agree with each other, and were often confused by the high degree of overlap with other "disorders."

I'm not saying there isn't utility in having a direction to look for in treatment of certain types of coping mechanisms, emotional instability, disordered thinking, ego defenses, or whatever else, but just do yourself a favor and make sure you aren't blindly consigning yourself over to a paragraph that a bunch of people continue to argue over. Who needs the undue stress? Not this guy. We're all people, not disorders. We may currently be using some clunky coping mechanisms at the moment, but that's it. Put down the stigma bag. That's for the uninformed.

I agree with your post and subsequent ones in this thread for the most part. However, I think it's human nature to want to "put names to the demons that torment you". Especially if you may have been laboring for years trying to figure out what in heck was going on with you. Or had been under the impression you had one thing for a long time, been treated for it unsuccessfully, then found out that you actually had something else entirely.

Plus, it acts as a communication short-hand. "I have BPD" is just quicker than your longer way of putting it.

I always (or try to always) say, "I have" as opposed to "I am"; I agree with you that a label cannot define me or or anybody. Labels are too....small and box-like. People are more complicated than that.

[BrokenButterfly32]

Thank you. I needed to read this. I have been so obsessed with diagnosing myself lately. I don't know why I feel like I need a label. Maybe I just want an explanation as to why I have been the way I am my whole life. That it's an actual illness and that I'm not just a big weirdo!! I really enjoyed your post and totally agree that it's not good to categorize yourself into a box. Every person is different, every personality is different. It's about recognizing what thoughts and behaviors are hurting relationships with ourselves, our loved ones, and those around us and learning how to manage and improve those relationships. I need to make sure I am seeking therapy for the right reasons. Thank you for the reminder.

[Atypical_Disaster]

I've been diagnosed with several PD's over the years... Borderline is the one that has always "stuck" as far as being on my psychiatric records and staying there at the end of the day. I have traits of quite a few PD's though. Personality disorder diagnoses are tricky at best, and you can end up with the wrong label and it can totally **** things up. I try to focus more on what symptoms are negatively impacting my life instead of obsessing about what label they fall under. To me personally the label doesn't matter unless it's a matter of getting the right kinds of treatment or not. Getting proper treatment is the only reason I have ever cared about having the "right" label. Other than that? I don't care. I think it's unhealthy to put so much stock into a label you've gotten, I've seen way too many people just force themselves into a box to fit whatever label so they feel like they "count" somewhere or other reasons and it can really harm people instead of help them. If a label helps you understand yourself better, then that's great! But I always try to gently encourage people to not put too much stock in labels if it seems like they have an unhealthy attitude about whatever label it is. Anyways I'm rambling on as usual heheh.

[crosstobear]

Everyone has traits of every personality disorder. They are after all, traits and defenses that become disordered when they are in the extreme and affect daily living and relationships. For me- I got a diagnosis of PD-NOS, Complex PTSD and BP II. However, at one point I was given the diagnosis of BPD and BP II. I don't fulfill all the criteria of BPD and with tons of therapy and just plain old growing up I've lost much of those traits. I've also lost a lot of my narcissistic traits, which I had a LOT of back when I was younger. I tend to have a very utilitarian approach to life and though the emotions are raw and raging at times, I manage to keep it in. I've got a lot to work on, but giving back to the field has helped a lot.

Why look at it as a "disorder"? Brain plasticity leads to our brains developing a certain way over time to help us adapt to a certain environment. Someone growing up malnourished in the hood with gangbanger parents will likely develop a brain that mirrors that of someone with antisocial personality disorder. Someone growing up with constant invalidation and inconsistent parenting, maybe some abuse can grow up with a "borderline brain". And just as you develop these brains, you can develop new neural networks and "unlearn" many of these traits, or at least come to manage them over time. It's difficult as hell, but it's possible. Putting yourself in a "disorder" label leads to rationalization, even adopting traits that you didn't have before. It can kill the self-esteem and dehumanize the individual.

Narcissism was about to be taken out of the DSM-5. Passive-Aggressive Personality Disorder is a thing of the past, but was a real disorder not too long ago. Just goes to show you. It's far healthier to take things one symptom or one problematic trait at a time, and learn to manage those through therapy and practice. You see it as a "disorder" and you'll lock yourself into a type of mindset which makes change very difficult. That's just my two cents.

And don't ever, ever disclose having a PD to anyone IRL! LOL- they'll box you into the category and there goes your soul and humanity. You'll be seen as a construct, more or less.

It is only a personality DISORDER if it causes distress for you and other people. Personality traits are on spectrum, like everything else.

[Atypical_Disaster]

Originally Posted by crosstobear

Everyone has traits of every personality disorder. They are after all, traits and defenses that become disordered when they are in the extreme and affect daily living and relationships. For me- I got a diagnosis of PD-NOS, Complex PTSD and BP II. However, at one point I was given the diagnosis of BPD and BP II. I don't fulfill all the criteria of BPD and with tons of therapy and just plain old growing up I've lost much of those traits. I've also lost a lot of my narcissistic traits, which I had a LOT of back when I was younger. I tend to have a very utilitarian approach to life and though the emotions are raw and raging at times, I manage to keep it in. I've got a lot to work on, but giving back to the field has helped a lot.

Why look at it as a "disorder"? Brain plasticity leads to our brains developing a certain way over time to help us adapt to a certain environment. Someone growing up malnourished in the hood with gangbanger parents will likely develop a brain that mirrors that of someone with antisocial personality disorder. Someone growing up with constant invalidation and inconsistent parenting, maybe some abuse can grow up with a "borderline brain". And just as you develop these brains, you can develop new neural networks and "unlearn" many of these traits, or at least come to manage them over time. It's difficult as hell, but it's possible. Putting yourself in a "disorder" label leads to rationalization, even adopting traits that you didn't have before. It can kill the self-esteem and dehumanize the individual.

Narcissism was about to be taken out of the DSM-5. Passive-Aggressive Personality Disorder is a thing of the past, but was a real disorder not too long ago. Just goes to show you. It's far healthier to take things one symptom or one problematic trait at a time, and learn to manage those through therapy and practice. You see it as a "disorder" and you'll lock yourself into a type of mindset which makes change very difficult. That's just my two cents.

And don't ever, ever disclose having a PD to anyone IRL! LOL- they'll box you into the category and there goes your soul and humanity. You'll be seen as a construct, more or less.

I still don't know why my blatantly wrong diagnosis of BPD has lingered on my records even though I've been diagnosed with NPD since then... I think it's just hard to get something like that off your psych records.

This is a good post. I don't tell people about any of my mental health issues period unless they need to know for some reason.

I'm not big on labels either, so there's a name for my particular personality "issues"... So what? It doesn't change anything. I prefer to focus on the symptoms that are negatively impacting my functioning and making modifications to said symptoms(making my "negative" personality traits work for me instead of against me) instead of putting myself into a box. I think that does me a disservice. I am a unique person, a hell of a lot more than simply a personality disorder.

[Atypical_Disaster]

Originally Posted by ValentinaVVV

It is only a personality DISORDER if it causes distress for you and other people. Personality traits are on spectrum, like everything else.

This, exactly. Everyone has traits of a personality disorder or even a few personality disorders. It doesn't mean they have a full blown disorder even if they meet a lot of the criteria, like you said it is all on a spectrum.

[crosstobear]

Originally Posted by Atypical_Disaster

I still don't know why my blatantly wrong diagnosis of BPD has lingered on my records even though I've been diagnosed with NPD since then... I think it's just hard to get something like that off your psych records.

This is a good post. I don't tell people about any of my mental health issues period unless they need to know for some reason.

I'm not big on labels either, so there's a name for my particular personality "issues"... So what? It doesn't change anything. I prefer to focus on the symptoms that are negatively impacting my functioning and making modifications to said symptoms(making my "negative" personality traits work for me instead of against me) instead of putting myself into a box. I think that does me a disservice. I am a unique person, a hell of a lot more than simply a personality disorder.

You know, it's a shame that insurance needs a label to reimburse for therapy. These labels can be very damning. For instance, I knew someone with a BPD label that had a very hard time trying to get into the military. It can prevent you from careers in law enforcement, too. It's ridiculous. Most adolescents and young adults I work with are very high in borderline traits and it's just a phase but for the purposes of treatment they are slapped with a label (we can go on about the ethics of labeling an adolescent or young adult with a personality disorder but oh, it happens a lot!). Then, what about the age limit of psychological "adolescence" being pushed back to the late 20's/early 30's as a result of modernity and the changes in society? People act the way they do because they find it functional to an extent. A lot of problematic behavior can be taken care of with a non-enabling environment that forces the individual to adapt. Over time and with more responsibility and reinforcement for positive steps the person can come to lose, or manage, their problematic traits. But the label lingers over them and causes issues later in life. I wish the system was a different way and that the DSM-5 actually took the spectrum-based diagnostic method, but it stuck to categories instead. What to do about someone with traits of BPD, NPD, ASPD, and Avoidant PD for example? "****ed Up PD"? It's ridiculous, and dehumanizing.

Just an example, I knew a 26 year old woman that was very high in BPD, NPD, and histrionic traits and was I believe labeled with BPD. She was one of the most immature, irresponsible, arrogant and mean individuals I have met in my life, more than most people that I've known with a PD label. She couldn't hold down a job for a week without flipping out on coworkers or the manager and getting kicked out- her life was a complete rollercoaster of adolescent immaturity. It's not because of her BPD label. It's because her parents didn't give her the ***-kicking she needed. They enabled her behavior, caved in to her tantrums, and gave her money whenever she needed it to shut her up. Of course such a person would see no need to change. Pavlov's dog.

I like this thread a lot. For fellow PD's, don't let a label limit you. After all, what the **** do they know about your subjective experience. Take from it whatever helps you become a better person, and don't let it prevent you from doing anything positive for your life.

[Atypical_Disaster]

crosstobear, your post is totally on point. Thank you for sharing your thoughts, very insightful and accurate. It's so true that these labels can be so damning. I have been working for a long time to get BPD off my psych records and it's been way harder than it needs to be. Thankfully, the therapist I currently have is working with my psychiatrist to get that label off my records as it is not only incorrect, but as you said totally damning and it's prevented me from getting proper treatment for my NPD for years. I had the BPD label slapped on me when I was a teenager, and yes I am still a tad bit bitter about it I won't lie.

I have a copy of the DSM-5 (and yes, I have read the entire thing) and I am very disappointed that they aren't using the spectrum method to diagnose PD's and just sticking to the categories. The categorical behavioral method of diagnosing these disorders is full of flaws and all the traits listed overlap with each other all over the place. For example one feeling that they are socially inept can be an avoidant trait, but I have a Schizotypal PD relative who talks about the same thing. I think the categorical method of diagnosing PD's is a huge mess and a frankly pathetic excuse for "professional" diagnostics.

Just an example, I knew a 26 year old woman that was very high in BPD, NPD, and histrionic traits and was I believe labeled with BPD. She was one of the most immature, irresponsible, arrogant and mean individuals I have met in my life, more than most people that I've known with a PD label. She couldn't hold down a job for a week without flipping out on coworkers or the manager and getting kicked out- her life was a complete rollercoaster of adolescent immaturity. It's not because of her BPD label. It's because her parents didn't give her the ***-kicking she needed. They enabled her behavior, caved in to her tantrums, and gave her money whenever she needed it to shut her up. Of course such a person would see no need to change. Pavlov's dog.

See, based on examples like this I think that BPD is such an overused label. There are currently ten personality disorders, TEN. Yet most woman in particular get the BPD label slapped on them regardless of their actual symptomology(I was one of those people, I fit NONE of the BPD criteria except having a bad temper, which in the context of NPD makes more sense... It's not just about X symptom with no context, it's about your inner motivations, beliefs, thoughts, and feelings or sometimes lack thereof.) From this description she sounds like she has HPD and not BPD. Also, this description totally reminds me of one of my ex's, heh. My ex could not stand that I would not enable the histrionic behavior and that I was so indifferent about it. I dumped this person and didn't look back once. This person attempted to assassinate my character all over the internet but failed miserably. I did not do any of what I was accused of doing. I'm not saying I'm a saint, because I am a firm believer in logic and I objectively know that my NPD behavior does hurt people sometimes permanently... But this person never mentioned anything that I actually in all likely hood did do. My ex certainly displayed all the criteria for HPD though of course since I am not a professional I can't say for certain that's what it was, I can only go off of what I observed.

I like this thread a lot. For fellow PD's, don't let a label limit you. After all, what the **** do they know about your subjective experience. Take from it whatever helps you become a better person, and don't let it prevent you from doing anything positive for your life.

I think everyone who posts in this section of the forums should read this. You're absolutely correct. A label has its uses, like sure saying I have NPD is a shorthand way to explain my personality "dysfunction", but it is not the be all and end all of who I am. I am not a disorder. I am a person, infinitely more complicated than the nine criteria for NPD that I without a doubt meet. I am not simply a Narcissist and nothing more, there are many non psychiatric labels that I use to define who I am.

[DizzyBritches]

I remember reading Ellis in grad school, and thinking that he sounded more messed-up than I was. What a huge ego, and no scrap of empathy, as I recall. It was 40 years ago, but I still remember the growing feeling of dislike with which I read "A Guide to Rational Living." It went beyond "tough love." Funny I just had to read his name here and it brought back that bad feeling.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk