Multiplicity and Personhood

by Charity, Mary, Rachel, Laura, and Allegra

[In a forum discussion on multiple systems and what constitutes "personhood," we responded to the assertion that system members are "limited" when compared to a "fully functioning personality," and that seeing multiplicity as something other than an illness or a disorder is a "minority position."]

We beg to differ. We have been active in the online multiple community for 19 years. The research you mention is not necessarily a position held by all mental health professionals. If anything, more and more MHPs have come to realize that it's in the best interests of the client to let the client's sense of self/ves guide their healing.

Of course members of a multiple system are parts of a collective self (or, in the case of the so-called plurality movement, parts of a collective). But in our opinion, it's far more respectful to expand our concept of what "self" really is: A way of looking at life and at the world. Even the DSM agrees with this.

So, if we widen our perspective, individual selves can coexist with the collective self, and often do. The vast majority of multiple systems that we have known have taken this position and choose to live their lives as such. No disrespect intended to those who choose to integrate, but it's plain even to the MH professional community that integration isn't pursued nearly as much as it was in the past.

Finally, we would like to state that the plurality movement does not necessarily speak for all who believe in the validity of co-existing selves. The plurality movement has a political aspect to it that we personally choose not to take on. We (and others like us) simply identify as many selves sharing a body and a life.