Talk:Dissociative identity disorder/Archive 4

message: The neutrality of this article is disputed.  Please help by reporting disputed passages and terms on the talk page .
This tag has been added to encourage a discussion of specific issues with this article, and deflect further generalized wrangling among contributors.  Kindly list your concerns in bullet format, so that each may be addressed by the editorial community at large.  Thank you.  Blessings --Mjformica 18:55, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: DragoonWraith 01:53, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This one directs users to the discussion page, and asks for specific concerns. The arguments have gotten off message, and become amorphis. --Mjformica 11:43, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: DragoonWraith 18:54, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My point exactly.  Zora's arguments are agenda driven.  I changed this tag so as to force a conversation re: exact issues.  Again, the controversy is not about dissociation, it is about MPD.  Zora is not seeing the difference. --Mjformica 20:18, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Specific issues to be discussed, cited, or revised 

message: Here is what I did:  (1)I changed the initial definition of DID to the DSM-IV-TR definition.  We can debate causation, explanation, etc. all day long, but nobody can really dispute that the DSM-IV-TR is a guide put out by the Americal Psychiatric Association and their definition of DID is what's linked.  (2)I added a discussion of dissociation, which is a common (and not really controversial) psychological phenomenon, and its relation to DID. (3) I moved all of the text about ego integration, etc. from the definition to the "Theory" section.  This is not the only theory/explanation for DID -- there are biochemical theories as well as the theory of iatrogenesis and I'll add those later.  (4) I changed the "Symptoms" section to "Symptoms Associated with DID" -- the symptoms OF DID are in the DSM definition.  (5)I revised the "Treatment and Diagnosis" section and moved "Prognosis" after it because that made more sense to me. I am missing some links, I know, I just haven't figured out how to do them yet. JenniSue 09:49, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV edits

message: Archiving to avoid dial-in "no fly zone"--Zeraeph 01:13, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Archiving

message: I just wanted to drop a note of thanks to everyone involved in making this article what it is today. In under a year, you've moulded what was once an opinionated slur riddled with irrelevance into one of the most in-depth and technical DID/MPD articles I've seen in any encyclopedia. It's encouraging to see clearly qualified contributors make such a huge improvement to an article. All your efforts are very much appreciated. Jdbartlett
: I think it is even more opinionated now -- it's just that I haven't had time to work on it. Busy with Islam-related articles. But soon ... Zora 00:40, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thanks, all 

message: I tried to fix up the paragraph comparing Jungian personae to MPD. That paragraph was difficult for me to understand and I hope I re-interpreted it correctly. While I don't necessarily think that all my people are Jungian personae, I have long thought that a word other than "multiple" or "multiple personality" should be used to describe the experience of those who don't fit the clinical criteria.
:Sign your posts.  Would someone kindly add the Auto-sign Template here...i don't know what it is.  --Sadhaka 12:15, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that was me. I try to sign things, but I'm getting forgetful in my old age. --Bluejay Young 17:35, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jungian personae and links 

message: Good day.
I started a peer review on Infantilism and because some people within Age Play develope DID, forming a younger child like personailty, I am hoping some of the editors of this article will kindly help in the peer review.
Thank you in advance.
--OrbitOne 17:23, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer reveiw of another article 

message: I have removed the following contribution from an anonymous editor as it is unencyclopaedic, POV and lacking references. If there is anything of use in there, it should be heavily copyedited and sourced.
:People with disassociative identity disorders generally develop some dominant dark hidden corners in their minds which might affect the functioning of the brain. Actually it is the mental interaction of different personalities/ego states. eg. A student trying hard to concentrate on his studies might not be able to do so if suffering with a DID. The harder he tries to concentrate, those hidden webs are disturbed as well which cause a lot of fluctuation and unstability. Such people avoid any sort of a company and end up as introverts, might be geniuses(as is the case with some of the introverts). Normal people have control over their minds but DID patients are controlled by their minds because in every situation they are caught between conflicting responses to stimuli. Such people tend to talk to themselves when they are alone. The other ego state becomes dominant whenever one is alone and it wants to be interacted with. Seen from an optimistic standpoint, DID patients enhance their mental capacities(not intelligence) and emotional quotient compared to normal people but the irony is that they are unable to put it to any good use. Such people should specifically see to it that they dont sit idle for a second and should be involved in some creative activity. They might feel bored pretty soon with that activity but its a trick that the other personality plays with their minds to keep its entity alive in them. 
Rockpocket 00:43, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for a Moment of Zen, anyway! --Bluejay Young 22:55, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anon editor's contribution 

message: Driving down the street and 'spacing out' is normal, everyday dissociation.  It seems like this article isn't clear on that.  Why is this statement in there: "Dissociation describes a collapse in ego integrity so profound that the personality is considered to literally break apart."  I'm not sure a discussion of dissociation per se needs to go on in this article, the word is clearly linked to a better article on the subject.  I would also move the controversy section to the bottom, after diagnosis and treatment.  Definitions, diagnosis and treatment is what most people who would be reading this will care about anyway IMO. P L Logan 03:23, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no proven scientific or statistical basis for believing that multiplicity is caused by dissociation. It is a theory that has been held by some psychologists for about a century. The statement you describe is in there because it is one of the many explanations for multiplicity invented by professionals and laypeople over the years. I tend to think of all theories of multiplicity, from "the mind fractures under stress" to "demonic possession", as holding about an equal amount of water. The truth is very little is still known about ego formation, let alone about how or why some people experience themselves as sharing their body with other minds. The statement should be attributed or taken out. --Bluejay Young 20:48, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Isn't dissociation normal?

message: 1) diagnosis: merge DSM criteria with other diagnostic issues and symptoms
2) if a definition of dissociation must be specifically mentioned, a link to the existing article seems sufficient.
3) separate out the DID in fiction part, moving it to near the end.
4) move the controversies section to near the end.  
Proposed order:
Mention of where to find definition of dissociation (briefly, if needed)
Potential causes
DSM and other diagnosis criteria, including symptoms
Treatment--mention other hospitals (like McLean) here
Prognosis
Controversies
DID in fiction
see also
references
I think this might be clearer.  Any suggestions/comments? P L Logan 22:39, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: proposed changes

message: I request more credible psychological, sociological & psychiatrical sources to be added, if anyone can spend some time working on this article. Many of the statements are not substantiated with a proper reference. As for me, cross-cultural and intercultural studies are of especial interest. Thank you very much in advance! Eli the Barrow-boy 16:42, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources