A reader of my blog asked me a private question about whether or not alters age (or remain stuck mentally at their age) even though it appears that they are able to do some adult tasks. This is an interesting and important question that I did not address in either Volume 1 or Volume 2 of Engaging Multiple Personalities.
I did not address this question in those volumes because my experience in DID therapy was focused on treating the alters as they presented. My recommendation is always to address the issues that are being presented by the alter or alters that are presenting them. I did not, nor do I recommend, that therapist try to “dig” into the background of a DID patient. In other words, I did not treat each alter as an individual for in-depth psychotherapy. If an alter’s problem was panic with hyper-vigilance, then that was the problem to be treated.
The age of an alter, like the color of a client’s hair, is not a feature we need to focus on. There is no therapeutic advantage in seeking to convert an 4 year old alter into a mature woman of the system’s chronological age, say 40, because the age of the alter is not the problem.
Given that I never sought to help an alter “age” or “mature”, my thoughts on this question are somewhat speculative.
First and foremost, it is quite clear that alters arise as part of the dissociative process in order to allow the system to survive early childhood trauma. However an alter arises, it is tied to that particular trauma. I don’t see why there would be any need for such an alter to age, given that it served and may continue to serve a protective function should the system perceive the same or similar trauma environment. I see every reason for the system to permit the alter to remain as they arose in order to have that mode of dissociative protection available if and when needed.
I do not say that the alters don’t change. It is my experience that they do change. However, for my patient’s, the alters didn’t change their age. What did change was their ability, with therapy, to remain ever more grounded in the present so as to more properly distinguish danger from the ordinary ups and downs one encounters in life.
In other words, the hyper-vigilance was tamped down. I did not encourage eliminating vigilance as there remain dangers both ordinary and trauma related. It is the hyper-vigilance that was interfering with their life.
Second, I think it is a conceit of those who do not have DID, that have a unitary ego structure, to think that the “correct” or “healthy” result of therapy is that the alters age to the system’s chronological age. It would be far better for therapists to appreciate the brilliance of dissociation as a protective mechanism that arises in the fiery cauldron of early childhood trauma. Knowing its roots in that horrific early childhood trauma, one can have a much deeper appreciation for the strength of the system that enabled survival through dissociation and the consequent alters.
Third, my approach to therapy was always to encourage cooperation among the alters. I think this occurs to some extent all the time, but in times of stress, when unprocessed trauma simply erupts through the appearance of one or more alters, therapy is critical. In DID therapy, we seek to eliminate the internal conflicts that prevent such cooperation. Eliminating the conflicts allows for greater cooperation and a more clear experience of co-consciousness. This limits the hold that the past trauma has on one’s present existence.
In fact, I often encouraged systems to designate alters within that could comfort each other when no therapist is available, to provide an empathetic ear to listen to frightened or angry alters, and to help communicate across amnestic barriers. As cooperation was enhanced, the systems were generally able to use that cooperation as a way to strengthen their ability to remain grounded and healed.”
As their lives become more peaceful (less roller coaster like, and less stormy) the system’s need for different alters to violently seize control, as opposed to cooperatively working with each other, will diminish. We are definitely not asking them to disappear, but they seem to lose the need to insistently take charge. Instead, they will begin to behave in a non-disruptive way.
