Are you looking for an innovative approach to healing trauma? Have you heard about Parts Psychology and wondered what it was all about?
According to this approach [and the Internal Family Systems], we all have a number of different personality parts and these parts developed [and continue to develop] as a result of our having to address difficult events in our lives.
The way we express our ambivalent emotions about things in everyday language reflects acknowledgement of our natural multiplicity. For example, a dissatisfied person at work may say: “A part of me is so tired of the politics in the office, but the rational part of me says my livelihood depends on this job.”
Are you wondering what each part of our mind/personality contains? As per Jay, the main content of a part is a “set of autobiographical memories that are linked to each other through one or a small number of themes, such as loss of a loved one, abuse, personal embarrassment, or joyful moments of parenthood.”
Jay Noricks, PhD, MFT, the psychotherapist, author and workshop trainer who developed Parts Psychology, kindly agreed to be interviewed. He is the author of the books Parts Psychology: A Trauma-Based, Self-State Therapy for Emotional Healing
Jay Noricks, PhD, MFT, MA
Without further ado, Jay, could you share with us a bit of your background?
I trained in psychological anthropology at the University of Pennsylvania. The professional papers I wrote reflected my interest in cross cultural psychology. I was doing psychology as an anthropologist. For example, my first published paper was titled “The Meaning of fakavalevale (‘crazy’) behavior in Polynesia.”
There was a point, though, when I wanted to be more directly involved with people at a clinical level, not just a theoretical, societal level. For that I had to go back to school and pick up a clinical degree. Then I began my own psychotherapy practice.
It is my understanding that you based parts psychology on the internal family system model. Could you explain what is parts psychology and how it differs from the internal family system’s model?
Parts Definition
The primary content of a part, or subpersonality, is a set of autobiographical memories that are linked to each other through one or a small number of themes, such as loss of a loved one, abuse, personal embarrassment, or joyful moments of parenthood.
There is at least a minimal consciousness, and sometimes full consciousness with the observing self. There is a sense of personal identity and a desire to continue to exist. Most often there is a consistent self representation, but in cases where no internal visual self representation exists prior to the therapy, a part generally quickly adopts one.
Parts vary considerably in the extent to which they have names prior to therapy. Some insist that they have always had names. Others acknowledge adopting one when first differentiated in therapy. Some do not have names and insist they do not want one, while others don’t have a name but want one. The names and internal visual self representations are often metaphors, but what they represent are real phenomena of the mind.
Parts Psychology Definition
Parts Psychology is the name I chose to represent my particular model for working with parts. However, in a general sense I intend to include within parts psychology [written in lower case] all approaches that make work with parts, subpersonalities, ego states, internal self-states, etc., an important or essential aspect of psychotherapy.
I include Schwartz’s Internal Family Systems, Watkins & Watkins’s Ego State therapy, Stone & Winkleman’s Voice Dialog, Assagioli’s Psychosynthesis, the Parts Therapy included in many hypnotherapy approaches, and more. The essential element is the recognition and work with a person’s normally unconscious self-states to bring about therapeutic change.
Influences
Two theoretical models most influenced the development of Parts Psychology. In addition to the IFS model, the Ego State therapy model of John and Helen Watkins was also crucial in its development.
Schwartz published his major book in 1995, based upon his work from the early 80s; the Watkinses published theirs in 1997, based upon their work since the early 70s. I was heavily influenced by both models.
Additionally, I drew upon Roberto Assagioli’s work in “Psychosynthesis” and Stone and Winkleman’s Voice Dialog. I found the Schwartz and Watkins models much more appealing than others, however, because they seemed to take the phenomena of internal parts (subpersonalities, ego states) at face value rather than interpret them within preexisting theoretical frameworks. (Voice Dialog, for example is interpreted within a Jungian framework).
Another important influence is Francine’s Shapiro’s EMDR approach, in which she suggests that virtually all problematic psychological functioning in adulthood has its origin in traumatic and trauma-like experiences, usually in childhood.
Differences
Parts Psychology, while strongly influenced by Schwartz’s IFS therapy, differs in significant ways from it. First, Parts Psychology views the creation of parts, potentially throughout a person’s life, as an expression of a universal human development process that allows people to adjust to their changing environments, both external and physical as well as internal changes brought about through growth and maturation.
As novel and challenging life situations appear in a person’s life, that person develops new parts to cope with the challenges if existing parts are unable to function in the changed environment. Most of these parts-creating moments are negative and painful in some way, but powerful positive experiences can also create new parts. The IFS framework views all parts as present at birth.
Second, IFS emphasizes the importance of the Self (with a capital s), which is characterized by such traits as compassion, courage, confidence, and calm (and more). My guess is that calm neutrality is a better description of the self (small s) once all parts are distanced from the self.
Some traits of the IFS Self, seem to me more like managerial qualities, i.e., parts qualities, than self qualities. IFS emphasizes the development of something called Self energy in patients while Parts Psychology emphasizes neutralizing the power of problem memories.
Third, Schwartz’s brilliant concept of unburdening, which I borrowed directly from IFS, has different emphases in Parts Psychology than it does in IFS. The most recent publications in IFS theory emphasize the importance of “witnessing” (i.e., the patient listens to and validates the part’s story) in unburdening, while Parts Psychology continues to emphasize visualizations by the patient of releasing negative affect as the primary means of neutralizing the burden carried by a given part.
An additional but minor difference is the addition to Parts Psychology of SUD (“Subjective Units of Distress”) and SUE (“Subjective units of Energy”) scales (from 0 to 10), which permit an assessment of when a part is completely unburdened and all its relevant memories are neutralized. In the use of the SUE scale one is concerned to neutralize certain positive memories (e.g., with porn addiction).
How do the subpersonalities that we all have differ from those that persons with dissociative identity disorder may have?
The subpersonalities of those with dissociative identity disorder are the same phenomena as the subpersonalities of dissociatively normal people.
The difference is that DID parts tend to be much more powerful and capable of autonomously taking control of the mind and body of the patient for a period of time, while the parts of normal persons influence from within; e.g., with strong thoughts, urges, and chronic emotions, such as depression.
Additionally, after a DID part releases control of a person and the normal self returns, that self experiences amnesia for what happened during the control by the part.
How long would you say is your average treatment with clients? And how does this vary by type of mental illness?
Parts Psychology is an extremely efficient therapy in terms of the amount of time a patient needs to invest to achieve his or her goals.
In my little book, For Women Only, Book 1, we needed just six sessions for the patient to feel that she had healed her postpartum depression. With a current patient, however, we are still working on related issues after 20 sessions, although her postpartum depression went into remission after 12 sessions.
In my book, Parts Psychology, the average number of sessions for the 11 patients I described there was 20 sessions. They ranged from six sessions for the treatment of extreme jealous anger to 42 sessions for several issues including depression and body image concerns.
One patient with “lifetime depression and anxiety” required 28 sessions. Two patients with eating disorders and childhood physical or emotional abuse required 23 and 24 sessions. The treatment of porn addiction required 23 sessions and relief of low sexual desire took just 10 sessions. Dissociative identity disorder, not discussed in the book, can take years with this or any other approach.
Could you share a simple case example illustrating how you draw a person’s parts out and employ your treatment protocol?
Parts Psychology Protocol:
1) Define the problem. The more specific the problem the easier it is to locate the relevant internal part and begin processing.
For example, a patient who defines her problem as “low self-esteem” hasn’t yet been specific enough to guide us to the part that carries the problem. Further questioning is necessary to help her be more specific.
For example, she might say she lets her husband` control her because he convinces her that he knows best. When asked for an example of this she might talk about an incident where she and her husband were in conflict over a vacation choice but she gave in because he showed her that her idea was “stupid.” Later, she felt badly because she would have enjoyed her choice but not her husband’s. Here we could zero in on the part who felt stupid as an important player in her sense of low self-esteem.
2) Find the part that carries the problem.
We might be able to find the stupid/low self-esteem part by having her recall the incident and feel again the sense of being stupid. When she locates that feeling in this or another memory, we can ask the part who feels stupid to give the patient an image of itself in the patient’s mind.
More than 50 percent of patients in my practice are immediately able to visualize the “stupid part” through this simple request. We can increase the probability of the appearance of an image of the part in several ways. One would be to ask the patient to speak to her feeling of being stupid and request that it increase the intensity of the feeling of being stupid. Then again ask for an image of the stupid part.
In the absence of a freestanding image of the internal part, we could ask the patient to think of a disturbing memory in which she felt really stupid. We could ask her to visualize the memory in as much detail as possible and then guide her in beginning a conversation with herself as she appears in the memory scene. There are a large number of other techniques that will allow the therapist to guide the patient in locating the part that carries the problem.
3) Elicit the memories that are the foundation for the problem.
We want to find the memories that have influenced the patient to believe she is stupid. In the great majority of cases we can locate the earliest of these memories simply by asking the patient to ask the part for its “earliest disturbing memory.”
Because a part’s memories are thematically linked to the problem, any early memory is likely to be one that we can immediately begin processing to heal the patient of the problem of feeling stupid. (The part probably has no knowledge of experiences that might indicate it is not stupid–such as getting a high grade on a paper or graduating from high school.
That information would be carried within the content of a different part’s set of memories.) Healing a part’s disturbing memory is a significant step in healing the patient of the problem.
Healing all of the part’s disturbing memories will likely heal the patient of the presenting problem–unless there are other parts with additional memories that contribute to the problem. If so, we would move on to the next part that carries the same issues.
Typical memories in a case like this might be memories of an older sibling speaking for the patient as a child and not permitting the child to speak for herself. Another set of memories might be observations by a parent that it is a good thing the patient is pretty because she certainly isn’t smart enough to go to college. Another set of memories might have to do with the school setting in which the patient felt that the teacher never called upon her (because her answers were probably wrong).
4) Neutralize the problem memories through visualizing the part releasing the negative emotions and sensations attached to the memories.
By neutralizing the negative energy of disturbing memories, the therapist ends the patient’s continuous amplification of current issues through the triggering of her past experiences. Neutralizing autobiographical memories changes them from painful experiences to narratives that can be usefully compared to a dry history book that describes the details of historical events but without any emotional content.
Rituals for neutralizing painful memories can be elaborate or simple, depending upon the patient. What is important is that the relevant internal part carries out the intervention, aided by the patient’s guiding self. Some patients do well with simple interventions.
For example, one patient of mine became impatient with my attempt to describe an elaborate ritual for getting rid of negative emotional material, and interrupted to say she had just “grabbed the negative emotions and threw them over the horizon” like she would throw a softball.
Here is an example of a richer metaphor that many patients feel helpful to the process of healing painful memories:
“Visualize the part standing in a waterfall and notice how sometimes there are drops of water and sometimes mist and sometimes a powerful pouring of water. Let the water flow over, around and through her.
Notice how the part’s hair is plastered to her head and her clothes are stuck to her skin. Ask her to locate where it is within her that she stores the problem memory and then ask her to feel the water dissolving the pain and negative emotions connected to the memory.
Notice how the negative emotions dissolve in the water and the water washes them out of her. You may even notice how the water around her is discolored as the dissolved negative emotions are washed away.
As the water continues to wash away her anger [or fear, sadness, etc.], you may notice how it gradually becomes clear again as the memory is washed clean.”
Neither the part nor, in most cases, its purpose disappears through healing (neutralizing) painful memories. For example, healing the painful memories that underlie extreme anger leads to a more centered (better integrated) angry part. We all need the capacity to be angry in order to help us stand up for ourselves and assert our righteous positions.
In light of the fact that the primary content of a subpersonality is its memory set [its negative memory set], does the purpose of the subpersonality disappear once you have released the negative feelings to that part? Does this enable reintegration?
What we don’t need is overwhelming anger or rage that is destructive in its effects on those around us. Sometimes, however, an internal manager that sought to help the patient with a constant stream of debilitating criticism needs a new description of its role.
For example, it might better serve the patient through being a kind of internal cheerleader for the positive actions of the patient. Or, a part that incessantly worried about all the things that could go wrong in life and which kept the patient in a constant state of anxious agitation, might require a redefined role into something like a wise internal advisor that gently reminds the patient when important calendar events approach. Thus, healing painful memories leads to increased integrated functioning by the patient.
Moving onto Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID), it is rather rare with a prevalence rate of 1-3% among the general population. Furthermore, only about 6% of those with DID present with visibly distinct identities. In light of this, how do clients with DID typically present and what methods do you use to assess for this diagnosis?
Please excuse my correction, but a rate of 1-3% for DID in the general population would not indicate a rare condition. In a population of 300 million, one would expect between three and nine million cases.
Additionally, Therapists utilizing a “Parts” approach have little difficulty assessing for dissociative disorders. This is so because the phenomena of parts in normal persons and the phenomena of parts (alters) in dissociatively disordered persons are the same phenomena, just different degrees of extreme in their presentations.
The key questions are whether the patient’s parts take autonomous control of the patient and whether the patient experiences periods of amnesia following such bouts of autonomous control. If there is no amnesia experienced by the patient in these situations, the patient is not DID.
If there is amnesia with autonomous control, then the patient is DID. The most widely used assessment tool for dissociative disorders is the Dissociative Experiences Scale (DES) by Carlson and Putnam. It is in the public domain and readily available.
How do you work with clients with DID? Do you work with them in the same way as you do with non-DID clients or do you have another treatment protocol?
The Parts Psychologist works in the same way with DID patients as with non-DID patients: through healing the painful autobiographical memories that are the foundation for the problem. However, DID patients generally require more time and patience from the therapist.
DID alters often require more negotiation before they are convinced a particular course of therapy is safe to undertake. Additionally, because of the extreme trauma or neglect such patients have suffered during their childhoods, therapists must pay close attention to how they are responding to interventions in order to be sure they are safe between sessions. Sometimes, it may take weeks or months before the patient is stable enough for direct healing of painful memories.
Would you say that a fully fused or integrated personality is the treatment goal for most DID clients? How effective a treatment is parts psychology vs other treatments for these clients ?
A “fully fused personality” is definitely not the treatment goal for DID clients within a Parts Psychology perspective. A fused personality would be a personality without parts and because having parts is normal, it makes little sense to get rid of parts by fusing them into a single entity. I would expect that even with such fused personalities, the patient would soon begin creating new parts as life experiences presented new challenges for which the patient is not prepared.
An “integrated personality” in the sense that parts work harmoniously together would be an appropriate goal for DID patients. Parts Psychology is an effective treatment for DID patients, as with almost all other patients, because treatment is directed at healing the problem autobiographical memories that are the foundation for the current difficulties.
Can you provide a case example in which you are working with a DID client to establish rapport with him/her and one or more of his/her alternate identities?
A case example would take more space than is available here. However, I believe the best approach would be to work with the observing self–or the managing part that presents itself to the therapist–to create an atmosphere of trust and calm understanding. This would work in the same way that therapists achieve rapport with any other patient.
Over the long run, a good strategy is to work with individual parts through the observing self. Thus the observing self is the guide and the instrument of healing, ultimately directed by the therapist. Sometimes, extreme parts will switch into control of the patient and insist upon direct communication with the therapist.
When this happens the therapist may choose to directly guide the part in the healing of its painful memories, but this course of action might only be appropriate after months of work on trust and safety issues. Ultimately, there needs to be a consistent observing self. Consequently, whenever possible, the extreme part should be gently coaxed to communicate with the therapist through the observing self.
When that happens, the standard techniques for neutralizing (healing) painful memories within a Parts Psychology framework are applicable. As a part heals, it learns to trust the observing self and to do its influencing from within, just as with normal parts. Eventually, when extreme parts no longer autonomously switch into control of the patient, we have begun to achieve integration (not fusion).
How are a person’s different parts [in a non DID client) or identities (in a DID client) usually viewed by one another and do they typically make life difficult for the client?
In either case, there is great variation. Sometimes life moves on in a pleasant and positive way. In these times, parts are working together harmoniously, but they are still there. However, if you examine your own life history–or your current experience–you will find times when you are conflicted about what to do, who to trust, or what to believe. These are times when parts of you disagree.
If you did not have parts, you would never doubt a course of action. Right or wrong, helpful or harmful, you would follow a narrow path. Thus parts permit you to be a complete human being. All parts, at least at the time they are formed, intend to help you.
Often, however, parts do not recognize that you have grown up, and that the original ways they tried to help you no longer apply. This is true for normal or DID patients. The major difference between the normal and the DID patient is the greater autonomy of DID parts; in particular, their ability and propensity to take control of the patient and to choose their own course of action, regardless of the intent of the observing self.
With one to three million persons diagnosable as DID, it would seem to follow logically that most DID parts serve to help patients rather than make life difficult for them. For dissociatively normal persons, the same logic applies: our parts aim to protect us, not make life difficult for us.
Lastly, what types of training are available for mental health professionals interested in working with parts psychology?
I regularly conduct trainings for therapists in Parts Psychology in Las Vegas, Nevada. For information contact me at jaynoricks@gmail.com. By invitation, I will travel to other cities. I have done Parts Psychology workshops in Nevada, Arizona and West Virginia.
For those unable to join me, I suggest IFS training. Richard Schwartz’s website is at selfleadership.org and information is available there about IFS training. I also recommend Ego State therapy with students of John and Helen Watkins. These founders no longer practice, but googling Ego State therapy will help you locate trainings in your area.
Thanks so much, Jay, for this wonderful introduction to parts psychology!
Please share any of your questions or thoughts below. We’d love to hear what they are. 🙂
Artwork published with the kind permission of artist:
Nancy-Lee Mauger is a 50 yr old woman diagnosed with DID in 2010. She uses art on a daily basis to help her navigate and cope with her mental illness. To see and/or purchase her art, you may contact her through https://www.facebook.com/NLMauger or paintingsilove.com.
“IFS emphasizes the importance of the Self (with a capital s), which is characterized by such traits as compassion, courage, confidence, and calm (and more). ….. Some traits of the IFS Self, seem to me more like managerial qualities, i.e., parts qualities, than self qualities. IFS emphasizes the development of something called Self energy in patients.”
This makes no sense to me. I feel the concept of IFS really needs to be updated or changed im order to be more effective with the traumatized individual.
“Parts Psychology emphasizes neutralizing the power of problem memories.”
This sounds exactly like what needs to be done in working with those who have trauma related disorders like PTSD, OSDD, and DID.
This is such a great blog post. I just want to clarify a couple of things so people don’t get the wrong idea. I know Dr. Noricks knows this stuff well.
“The difference is that DID parts tend to be much more powerful and capable of autonomously taking control of the mind and body of the patient for a period of time, while the parts of normal persons influence from within; e.g., with strong thoughts, urges, and chronic emotions, such as depression.”
I just want to add here that those with DID, as you know, also feel the influence of parts from within.
“Additionally, after a DID part releases control of a person and the normal self returns, that self experiences amnesia for what happened during the control by the part.”
If I may I want to clarify a point, and that is that not all parts in those with DID take over fully resulting in amnesia.
This entire post is brilliant. Dr. Noricks these basics of therapy seem like magic until you understand what is going on in the mind. I think it really helps people to know these steps. I know for me it calmed me, but not until I finally understood them!
This is so well stated:
“By neutralizing the negative energy of disturbing memories, the therapist ends the patient’s continuous amplification of current issues through the triggering of her past experiences. Neutralizing autobiographical memories changes them from painful experiences to narratives that can be usefully compared to a dry history book that describes the details of historical events but without any emotional content.”
This is so misunderstood! Great point and good points on integration work.
“Neither the part nor, in most cases, its purpose disappears through healing (neutralizing) painful memories.”
I was going to make a similar comment Dr. Noricks!
“a rate of 1-3% for DID in the general population would not indicate a rare condition. In a population of 300 million, one would expect between three and nine million cases.
3-9 MILLION~! That’s a whopping number of folks!
This is my last question for a bit. I love the entire article I had no idea your offered training. That should be broadcast far and wide. Thanks for this article Dorlee and Dr. Noricks!
Thank you a lot for sharing this !
Nique
Thanks so much, Quentin, for your kind feedback and thoughtful comments.
I’ve alerted Jay so that he may have a chance to respond in more detail.
Disjanique,
I’m so glad that you found this interview helpful 🙂
Thanks, Quentin, for your kind comments. Just a couple of responses. I do not agree that IFS needs to be updated. It is complete in itself and Richard C Schwartz continues to refine his ideas. My comparisons with Parts Psychology were intended purely to clarify the differences between the two approaches. While I personally am uncomfortable with the concept of “Self-energy,” I am aware that a very large number of others feel very comfortable with it. It is clear that whatever is meant by the term, the result for the patient is a greater sense of integration. And that’s a good thing.
My other comment relates to your reminding us that not all influence from DID parts means amnesia for the observing self or other frequent manager. You are quite right, of course. As you know there can be amnesia, control by the switching part with coconscious by the observing self, and a simple change in mood or orientation of the same sort that normal people experience in everyday life. Than you for your observations here and overall!
Jay
Hi Dr. Noricks,
Thank you for the answers to my questions. I have more. I am full of them. You brought up amnesia and I have many questions there. I have not read much about it, so what I am about to say is how it makes sense to me and I wonder if I am right. I know you know all this, but I wrote in a sense that others could follow me.
First let’s look at an Adult with DID stemming from childhood abuse
Many memories, and most trauma memories are held by the various distinct parts of the personality in the person with DID. When something cannot be recalled it is not forgot, but instead is held by a distinct part of the personality.
Example: A child named Rick was pushed in front of a moving car by his mother. A part of his personality called Jay knows Rick was pushed into that car by his mother, but Rick has no idea what happened. He knows he is in a body cast, but he cannot recall know why.
In this example Rick has dissociated ‘away’ a trauma memory from consciousness. The part called Jay holds that memory until Rick is ready to recall it and integrate it.
Now let’s look at an Adult with PTSD stemming from childhood abuse. She does not have DID.
A child named Sally is abused and does not recall any memory of abuse. Sally will not be able to recall the memory until the part of her mind that holds it is able to move it from implicit memory to explicit memory or in other words – process it and integrate it.
Note: Parts can be created throughout life that hold trauma memories in both those with DID and those without it.
Note: All human personalities are made up of parts.
Quentin,
I am comfortable with your presentation of how amnesia works with trauma. Just a couple of other comments. Rather than “many” memories, I would say “all” memories are held by parts (subpersonalities). Parts of self are the living containers for the storage of autobiographical memories. The observing self probably does not have any such memories of its own. Often, as I coach my patient to check the SUD (“Subjective Units of Distress”) for a memory we are aiming to heal (neutralize), she/he will say something like “It’s down to a 1 for me but still a 3 for him/her.” This difference in rating on the 0-10 scale is normal. What the observing self feels is a reflection of what the part feels, but the power of the experience is reduced because it is partially dissociated by the part. Occasionally, the patient will report the SUD level to be higher for her/him than it is for the part. This is a sure sign that there is another part (not the observing self) that also holds the memory in question. In such cases, after healing the first part, we seek out and heal the second part also.
Jay
Hi Jay,
I am still confused about this part: Sally is abused as a child and as an adult she does not recall any memory of that abuse. She does not have DID, but she does have PTSD steaming from that abuse. Wouldn’t this be the exact same process as is seen in someone with DID?
Back to DID, I agree that All is a much better term, but I lacked the confidence to use that word. Thank you. I will be more bold in the future.
Let’s look at someone who has many “subpersonalities” in her head and has been watching memories in the unconscious part of the mind the last few weeks. The memories for her appear in the form of life sized, realistic looking people in action with full audio. The Observing part has the ability to pause, stop, fast forward, rewind and play in slow motion all these memories. When paused, subpersonalities are then able to walk around any scene and look around.
The many “subpersonalities” in attendance at the “memory viewing” would certainly give the memories a varied rating depending on their individual tolerance of them. To get audio they have had to remove certain “subpersonalities from the viewing area or take away their hearing”, leaving only the most tolerant with hearing. Who is most tolerant has varied with the memory.
Also, in this person, whichever “subpersonality” is in “executive control” at the moment would always give a 0 rating. No matter which part is in executive control (for this person) it has no awareness of the memory. However, if that same “sub personality” is inside viewing, rather than out as the one in “executive control” then that part will fully feel the memory.
Thank you for your time. Your answers are very helpful to me and I hope to others.
Hi Quentin,
There is little I can say about the case material on DID you present because I do not do therapy in this way. In general I can say that amnesia by the observing self is the result of protective managers that believe the memories are too painful for the self to bear. Often these managers are unaware that the person is now a grownup.
Regarding the process of forgetting in PTSD and DID (as well as in normal persons), it makes sense to me that the “process” is the same. There seems to be a positive dissociative response to painful life experience that involves an internal subpersonality–perhaps created at the moment of the experience–experiencing, wrapping up, and putting away (to varying degrees of success) painful memories in order for the person to function adequately in ongoing, everyday life.
Best,
Jay Noricks
Thanks Dr. Noricks. I will put some thought into your answers.
Dr. Norick,
First of all I’m very excited about your work. I have used a form of parts work for years, even before my degree, as it just felt natural to directly address the emotion. It is so helpful to have a guide to use this with clients!
I’m curious about the process of walking the part through letting go of the emotional pain. You use a lovely waterfall metaphor. This reminds me of mindfulness of emotion scripts (particularly those found with ACT based work).
Have you had any experience with any specific mindfulness based meditations and working with the part? Would you recommend this? Could there be anything that would be re-traumatizing or dangerous for the client about combining this with a mindfulness based script?
Thank you for your time and your work,
Trista Weber, LMFT
Hi Trista, I’m pleased to hear that you do Parts work too. This year, in anticipation of releasing my next book, I’ve changed the name of my model to Parts and Memory Therapy from Parts Psychology. I did so because I wanted to emphasize that the work of the model bases itself on healing painful memories. Parts of self are the storage units of memories.
This leads us to your question. No, I haven’t made use of mindfulness meditations, primarily because it seems to me that these powerful and valuable techniques still focus their power on the conscious self and not the underlying Parts that bring the distress to the conscious self. For my patients who are experienced with such techniques, I encourage them to continue to use them between sessions. But during sessions I’m concerned with “memory reconsolidation,” the process of opening memory circuits, editing the implicit emotional memories (e.g., with a neutralizing waterfall intervention), and then re-locking the circuits after the editing. I can imagine a therapist finding a way to direct a mindfulness intervention at a Part rather than the conscious self during the processing of painful memories, but I personally lack the expertise to do that.
I invite you to take a look at my website, PartsandMemoryTherapydotcom. (Another website under construction HealingAmeliadotcom, will promote the new book Healing Amelia. the site should be up within three weeks.) If you are willing to accept patients in your area who want to do memory healing through work with their inner Parts, let me know and I will include you on the PMT website list among those listed under the tab, “PMT Therapists.” You can contact me here through Dorlee, or write to me at jaynoricksatgmail.com.
Thanks, again, for your interest.
Jay Noricks, PhD
Dr. Noricks,
I’m so pleased to have discovered this site, as so many don’t seem to understand my experience… but I think you will.
I do have DID from childhood trauma at age 4… however, I have some very unique and interesting “parts” within my system. For one thing, the original or “core” personality is inside now (I’m the 5th alter) so she is now considered an alter… even though she is also the original.
By the same token, all the rest of the parts of my brain (physically) and mind/being (non-physically) are also manifested as “parts” of my system.
For example, Hippocampus is an alter… she holds the trauma memories, which are stored incorrectly here instead of where they should be. Once I can become aware of the memories, that will then store them correctly and Hippo will be set free of that burden. Thalamus holds the “programmed” or “brainwashed” part of the controls (because our abuser said he would kill us and kill our whole family, our entire system is based on this and cannot be changed)…
They cannot actually speak, but Super Ego understands and translates for them.
But most important is what I learn from Spirit(soul) ~ you see, I died on the operating table after a car crash in 1995. When I started having memories of my childhood trauma… I also remembered my “near-death-experience.” I use quotes because I think it’s a stupid name… it wasn’t “near-death” it was “temporary death” ~ do you hear the difference?
I was greeted by my paternal Grandparents, Uncle Earl & Aunt Pearl, Aunt Lil & cousin Clydine… but that’s another story.
I think most doctors would be blown away by what I can find out about my own brain, and the human brain in general… somebody should probably be studying me for a major medical journal or something.
Have you ever heard of others with DID having this type of “access” to the parts of the brain?
Hi Crackerjack and thanks for commenting.
Your remarks are difficult to respond to because they differ in a number of ways from accepted understandings of how DID works. So please take my observations with a grain of salt–especially if the way that you conceptualize your system enables you to experience significant progress in healing.
1 Current thinking is that there is no original personality. The self is divided into ego states or self states, or Parts or alters from the beginning. We are all naturally multiple, but we are not normally able to switch executive control between Parts as do persons with DID. What you call the original personality would likely be an early dominant manager, but no more the original personality than those parts who were present at the same time as this manager.
2 I get it that you have a Part called Hippocampus that is an alter and another called Thalamus, but the alters are not the organs. Your alters, like all Parts, hold memories and they specialize in the themes that link the memories together. No doubt your organs were affected by your traumas and in turn the hormones they secreted affected you, but organs do not have a consciousness of their own.
3 Your memories are not stored in the wrong place, but are contained wherever they are supposed to be at any given time. There’s a lot of controversy regarding just where memories are stored, but consensus seems to be forming around the idea that explicit memories are processed in the hippocampus and then stored across the neocortex, while implicit, emotional, memories are stored in or near the amygdala in the mid-brain.
As I said at the beginning, if your way of viewing your internal system helps you to heal, then feel free to disagree with me. Good luck!
Best,
Jay Noricks PhD