Is Visiting Your Child Part Always Bad? An Interesting Experience

[ilovehorses29]

I had a very interesting experience today. I was in the kitchen with my attendant. We were discussing what I wanted for breakfast. I wanted a Joe's Special. My attendant is not from the U.S. She told me this would be too hard for her to cook. I found myself in my child part of myself. But not dysregulated and/or depressed. I found that from this child part of myself I could see things from her point of view. I decided on Eggs and Bacon for breakfast. I usually have them with avocado but my avocado's weren't ripe yet. By this point, I was back in my adult self. I had a wonderful breakfast.

I don't believe in pathologizing the child parts of ourselves. The child part should have it's own voice and be allowed agency along with the adult part. Neither part should of course should be dominate. I've also noticed myself in the child part of myself when I'm engaged in creative persuits such as writing, improvsing on my piano, and drawing. I guess you could say these are healthy parts of my child part.

I would love to know folks thoughts on this

 

[Sideways]

Neither part should of course should be dominate.

Not a huge fan of “should” statements (possibly I’ve just had too much CBT!).

Personally, where there isn’t an underlying condition, I think that for adults, behaving like an adult, and making adult choices, should absolutely be their dominant disposition.

That doesn’t mean ignoring our inner child. Just recognising that, as an adult, we’re inviting unnecessary dysfunction into our lives if we don’t keep our inner child regulated by our actual adult self.

There are situations in our adult lives where it simply isn’t appropriate for our inner child to even be present - like when we have sex, or binge watch the Hostel movies, or meet with our bank manager about refinancing our home.

There’s a time and a place for our inner child. And allowing that inner child some freedom can be incredibly liberating. But it needs the discretion of our adult mind to not become a mental health disorder all of its own.

 

[arfie]

I don't believe in pathologizing the child parts of ourselves. The child part should have it's own voice and be allowed agency along with the adult part.

i had been an adult in psychotherapy for a very long time before that statement could have made a lick of sense to me. even now i balk at claiming i understand it. i'm far more engineer than psychologist. any afternoon talk show disciple can out spurt me in a psycho experting contest.

however, my child self was a throwaway kid and child prostitute with the adult guidance of a feral dog pack. while i work to lead her toward healing, i'm not quite ready to give her the keys to the asylum. for now, i think i'll save the shoulding around for a safer equality.

that said, i am learning to hear and appreciate the voice of my child self. so far, we haven't quite gotten past the too many ways she was hurt.

 

[Weemie]

I don't particularly understand "inner child" stuff, but I have a dissociative disorder, and there are parts of me that are more child-like. They're not human children (more like animated blobs with eyes). They don't have human-children reactions. But they're there. It's my role as an adult "caretaker" of my internal schematics, to ensure that they aren't exposed to harm, and that very few people have the opportunity to meet them. But I'm not perfect and it has happened without my ability to control. Which is always embarrassing and unsettling and very, very evident. Unfortunately.

 

[Rose White]

I've also noticed myself in the child part of myself when I'm engaged in creative persuits such as writing, improvsing on my piano, and drawing. I guess you could say these are healthy parts of my child part.

This makes a lot of sense to me. I noticed something similar. That when I’m feeling playful and creative is typically when my child parts come out. And that is a good thing! And like you if I’m feeling stubborn, resentful, jealous, etc. I check in with myself if my child part is having a tantrum and adult parts need to step in and co-regulate, or if it’s adult parts feeling that way and it’s justified.

Am just realizing in this moment that some of my maladaptive coping mechanisms might be related to me ignoring the needs of child parts (food, rest, play, comfort).

 

[ilovehorses29]

This makes a lot of sense to me. I noticed something similar. That when I’m feeling playful and creative is typically when my child parts come out. And that is a good thing! And like you if I’m feeling stubborn, resentful, jealous, etc. I check in with myself if my child part is having a tantrum and adult parts need to step in and co-regulate, or if it’s adult parts feeling that way and it’s justified.

Am just realizing in this moment that some of my maladaptive coping mechanisms might be related to me ignoring the needs of child parts (food, rest, play, comfort).

Yes!!! This is what I was trying to convay, but you stated it so much better than me. To me it's not an either or issue. But what you say about the adult part steping in and co-regulating makes perfect sense. To give folks here some context to my OP. I'm a youth liberationist. I guess I'm trying to co-regulate my child/teen parts in a liberatory way. Not in a typical way if that makes sense. A perfect example just happened.

One of my attendants needed help with her phone. My teen part has lots of motivation around tech issues. He loves to help and teach elders about their tech. I found myself naturally using his motivation to help my attendant with her phone. This is what I mean by a liberatory approach to part regulation/going between your different parts.

I don't particularly understand "inner child" stuff, but I have a dissociative disorder, and there are parts of me that are more child-like. They're not human children (more like animated blobs with eyes). They don't have human-children reactions. But they're there. It's my role as an adult "caretaker" of my internal schematics, to ensure that they aren't exposed to harm, and that very few people have the opportunity to meet them. But I'm not perfect and it has happened without my ability to control. Which is always embarrassing and unsettling and very, very evident. Unfortunately.

Thank you for sharing. This has enriched me.

 

[whiteraven]

I don't believe in pathologizing the child parts of ourselves

I have DID, and I have never pathologized ANY of my parts. Since they are a part of me, that would mean pathologizing *me*.

 

[Friday]

I have DID, and I have never pathologized ANY of my parts. Since they are a part of me, that would mean pathologizing *me*.

???

You are aware that -literally, not figuratively- having DID means ALL your parts are pathological?

Non-pathological parts (inner-child, inner-warrior, inner-goddess, inner-whatever) do not rise to the level of having a disorder, but are imaginary conceptualisation of facets of our personalities.

Or did you mean demonize, or similar bad mouthing, rather than be clinically significant enough / real & present enough, to rise to the level of a symptom within a disorder?

Not pathologizing one’s parts would mean that there is absolutely nothing extraordinary or abnormal, but a totally baseline human experience that “everyone” (except those with specific disorders that exclude or accentuate) experiences.

 

[whiteraven]

You are aware that -literally, not figuratively- having DID means ALL your parts are pathological?

Yeah...I don't subscribe to the idea of dissociative identity "disorder" as described by the medical community. I only use it because many do, and many have an easier understanding of it in that context.

I was diagnosed a very long time ago, and I understood my *reaction* to my insiders was what made my life disordered. I'm not disordered anymore because I don't react to them like I used to, which was fully because I was taught to relate to them that way.

Non-pathological parts do not rise to the level of having a disorder

Or did you mean demonize, or similar bad mouthing, rather than be clinically significant enough / real & present enough, to rise to the level of a symptom within a disorder?

All of the above!

 

[Sideways]

I only use it because many do, and many have an easier understanding of it in that context.

This is the same kind of irksome as “I don’t have ptsd but I say I have ptsd”.

DID is diagnosed on dysfunction and perception, the same way as other disorders, which goes beyond your relationship with your parts.

To me, saying I have DID (which I do - and it continues to cause significant impacts on my daily functioning) is pretty much the definition of pathologising my parts. It’s the disorder that you have when you have parts which rise to the level of clinical pathology.

While it can be helpful to use words in a way that feels right to ourselves, even if it’s not the exact definition everyone else might use. But using it in the opposite to what the term actually means will (unsurprisingly) mislead the people around you. Here in the online world, words are the only thing we have to communicate what we mean to the people around us.