Separating fact from fiction : an empirical examination of six myths about dissociative identity disorder

dc.contributor.authorBrand, Bethany L.
dc.contributor.authorSar, Vedat
dc.contributor.authorStavropoulos, Pam
dc.contributor.authorKruger, Christa
dc.contributor.authorKorzekwa, Marilyn
dc.contributor.authorMartínez-Taboas, Alfonso
dc.contributor.authorMiddleton, Warwick
dc.date.accessioned2016-08-19T12:47:18Z
dc.date.available2016-08-19T12:47:18Z
dc.date.issued2016-07
dc.description.abstractDissociative identity disorder (DID) is a complex, posttraumatic, developmental disorder for which we now, after four decades of research, have an authoritative research base, but a number of misconceptualizations and myths about the disorder remain, compromising both patient care and research. This article examines the empirical literature pertaining to recurrently expressed beliefs regarding DID: (1) belief that DID is a fad, (2) belief that DID is primarily diagnosed in North America by DID experts who overdiagnose the disorder, (3) belief that DID is rare, (4) belief that DID is an iatrogenic, rather than trauma-based, disorder, (5) belief thatDID is the same entity as borderline personality disorder, and (6) belief that DID treatment is harmful to patients. The absence of research to substantiate these beliefs, as well as the existence of a body of research that refutes them, confirms their mythical status. Clinicians who accept these myths as facts are unlikely to carefully assess for dissociation. Accurate diagnoses are critical for appropriate treatment planning. If DID is not targeted in treatment, it does not appear to resolve. Themyths we have highlighted may also impede research about DID. The cost of ignorance about DID is high not only for individual patients but for the whole support system in which they reside. Empirically derived knowledge about DID has replaced outdated myths. Vigorous dissemination of the knowledge base about this complex disorder is warranted.en_ZA
dc.description.departmentPsychiatryen_ZA
dc.description.librarianhb2016en_ZA
dc.description.urihttp://journals.lww.com/hrpjournalen_ZA
dc.identifier.citationBrand, BL, Sar, V, Stavropoulos, P, Kruger, C, Korzekwa, M, Martinez-Taboas, A & Middleton, W 2016, 'Separating fact from fiction : an empirical examination of six myths about dissociative identity disorder', Harvard Review of Psychiatry, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 257-270.en_ZA
dc.identifier.issn1067-3229 (print)
dc.identifier.issn1465-7309 (online)
dc.identifier.other10.1097/HRP.0000000000000100
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2263/56427
dc.language.isoenen_ZA
dc.publisherLippincott Williams and Wilkins (open access)en_ZA
dc.rights© 2016 President and Fellows of Harvard College. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND).en_ZA
dc.subjectBorderline personality disorderen_ZA
dc.subjectDissociationen_ZA
dc.subjectDissociative disordersen_ZA
dc.subjectIatrogenicen_ZA
dc.subjectTraumaen_ZA
dc.subjectTreatmenten_ZA
dc.subjectDissociative identity disorder (DID)en_ZA
dc.titleSeparating fact from fiction : an empirical examination of six myths about dissociative identity disorderen_ZA
dc.typeArticleen_ZA

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Brand_Separating_2016.pdf
Size:
387.74 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Article

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.75 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: