There are different ways one could categorize different parts within a dissociative system. None is them is inherently bad, they all describe part of the experience, but they are also all lacking, they can’t describe the whole experience. We think it is wise to know different ways to express things, so we can choose our categories depending on the situation we are in. Some categories are more fitting in certain situations.
ANP/EP
The most basic categories for parts are the apparently normal part (ANP) and the emotional parts (EPs). ANP usually means the part who is fronting most often, there can be several ANPs within a system and the ‘normal’ is relative, it doesn’t mean these parts don’t have mental health problems. They just don’t know a lot about trauma. The EPs are parts who know about trauma but little else and show intense dysregulation and emotion. While this differentiation is extremely rough it can serve its purpose when our situations don’t need more of an explanation.
Control
Another rough categorization that is especially helpful for systems with a strong pattern of over-control is between over-controlled and under-controlled parts. Over-controlled parts are usually ANPs and certain protectors who try to limit the effects of under-controlled parts. Under-control is marked by strong emotions, impulses and needs that lead to impulsive behavior, other protectors might belong to this category. One of the basic struggles within systems is that between needy parts and those who try to shut them down because their needs seem dangerous. Note that over-control means more than just ANPs here.
Roles
Some like to categorize along the lines of roles and jobs within the system. The most common roles are host, protector, persecutor, inner helper and various child parts. These seem to be natural categories that are easy to recognize and to work with. One could argue that if we take a closer look all of these parts are protectors, that is what they do, all in their own way. Sometimes roles can become limiting, especially when they keep parts in a role when they are changing and growing out of it.
Survival behavior
Newer literature that includes neurobiology guesses that parts can be categorized according to the survival behavior they usually tend towards. Survival behaviors are
- attachment (help) seeking (needy, dependent, scared of losing caregivers)
- submission (compliant, eager to please, unable to set boundaries)
- flight (creating distance, avoidance, addiction)
- fight (angry, aggressive, attacking, feeling threatened, drawing closer for conflict)
- freeze (shutting down, numbing, dissociating, helpless, hopeless, ashamed, passive)
Note that these include physiological stress responses as well as social responses to high stress/threat. These categories are helpful to explain vastly different reactions to the same trigger that cause major distress. Parts in DID might not have a ‘home’ in only one of these responses, but it is still valuable to check where everyone is at to see where the inner conflict takes place and why parts are working against each other.
I expect you have heard about the first few categories; if you weren’t living under a rock until now you know all this. What I want to show you today is how to solve a complex inner conflict using the categories of survival behaviors.
[CN example includes money issues]
Let’s imagine there was a relational rupture with our T when she had to bring up billing issues. Suddenly everything is in chaos, kids are crying, others are yelling, you are sure you can’t return to therapy ever and someone is angry that you have to pay for it at all, some are scared of losing the therapist, others want to give her everything she wants and more, you should probably bring a gift, then others get aggressive because you cannot ever give them a gift. By now someone might suggest that suicide is the only way out and while all this happens at the same time, the tension is only growing and it becomes impossible to function enough to pay the bill. We have a big fat knot inside that seems impossible to solve. These situations often end in impulsive behavior that doesn’t serve us long-term.
If we approach this as if it was only ‘me’ experiencing all that, we will get stuck. It is clear that some part got triggered and their triggered response then triggered other parts. We need to untangle the responses of different parts, so it doesn’t feel like it is all happening to ‘me’. To figure out where to start with our intervention we can take a piece of paper and sort our inner responses into the categories of survival behavior.
Those who are scared of losing the therapist probably belong to the attachment seeking group.
Those who want to make amends and do whatever they have to do might be submitting.
The ones who would like to run and never return there or who want distance, so gifts feel way too close, are probably in flight mode.
Those who are angry and yelling or devaluing the relationship because it is paid for might be in fight.
The host and some of the scared ones might go numb or dissociate because all this is overwhelming, and they don’t see a way out of the situation.
When we draw all this, we can start to figure out where it all started and who got triggered by whom. Then we could see that the attachment seeking parts got scared because a numb part thought that there was no way to solve the issue, so they thought that they would lose the therapist. Another part might have gotten triggered by the attachment cry because they always think that dependency is dangerous and needy feelings should be silenced. The flight part might react to the aggression or maybe to the hopeless part in shutdown and think it would be safest to get away to avoid punishment. As we try to follow the chain of our reactions over several parts we might identify where it all started. Who was initially triggered by the situation? In this case the first part who got triggered might be one who is stuck in TraumaTime where poverty was a huge issue and they sank into shutdown the moment the money topic came up again. The others reacted to that hopeless feeling.
Once we know who might be the key part we can start to explore what they might need and how we can help them to regulate. In this case the part might need reassurance that poverty is not a huge issue anymore and that times have changed. We might even show them that we saved money for therapy. Once that is taken care of and this part is more regulated and feels seen and taken care of we can turn to everyone else and see if they are still triggered or if maybe by reducing the initial stress we eliminated their reasons for getting into their survival behavior response. Without the hopelessness of paying a bill parts wouldn’t have to be afraid of losing an attachment partner and there would be no reason to run away or even kill themselves. One after the other we can help them to calm down.
The threat we perceive is not always on the outside. Our own survival response might trigger different sets of more survival responses on the inside. To calm ourselves after we got triggered, it is not enough to look at the triggering situation alone, we have to work through the chain reaction inside.
Any part could get triggered. And any survival behavior could trigger other parts. Parts might or might not have a standard reaction, we will only figure that out once we observe the system, using the terms of survival behavior. There are standard situations like the constant struggle between attachment seeking and avoidance of attachment or shutdown spiraling into suicidal thoughts for an escape. The better we get to know how these chains begin the easier it will get to take care of the key part and avoid the big knots that take so much of our energy.
With a lot of the regular disagreements, working with roles will be most effective, But if the problem is about the system being triggered and dysregulated and things are escalating quickly, I would recommend looking at it through the lens of survival behaviors.
Overview how to calm child parts
Leave a Reply