if you want a source for everything i'm going to discuss in this post, please refer to this blog post by carolyn spring, titled "DID or OSDD: Does it matter?". this is more of an aside and an informal discussion with myself than anything else, but i felt it important to clarify some things.

in this handbook, i tend to use "DID" and "major dissociative disorder(s)" rather interchangably, and i understand that in doing so some people may worry that i am blurring the lines between different dissociative disorders, or that i consider them all to be one disorder. this is a fair and accurate assumption, because that is something i believe. more specifically, i believe that the distinctions between DID and the other major dissociative disorders (OSDD in particular, but also to a degree DPDR and DA) is both arbitrary and unhelpful. by all means, of course, if you identify strongly with one of these labels, i am not going to tell you you can't use it. however, i would encourage you to examine what exactly about that diagnosis is meaningfully, notably different from the other three in such a way as to classify them all as distinct experiences and not a continuum.

it is my belief that DID exists on a spectrum of sorts, similar to the autism spectrum, with varying degrees of severity among different symptoms experienced by each different patient. it is unhelpful, as a result, to classify any major dissociative disorder as completely distinct from any other. we have more in common than we have differences, and the dividing lines between us are arbitrary and unhelpful.

it is my goal with this handbook to foster a better sense of understanding of the self among people who have a major dissociative disorder, who are wondering if they have one, who love someone with one, who simply wish to educate themselves, and any/everyone else who stumbles across this site. as such, i use terminology like 'major dissociative disorder' and 'DID' interchangably to provoke people to investigate the question of why different labels are used, who they benefit, and what the actual tangible difference may be. it would be disingenuous for me to do otherwise, or to promote a system of terminology i so firmly disbelieve in.

of course, as i said, come to your own conclusions. i don't care what terminology you use, or how you use it -- if a label brings you comfort and support, if it makes you happy, if it doesn't bring you distress, who am i to strip that from you? all i ask is that you examine the other side of things: if you experience consternation about your diagnosis, there is no obligation (other than perhaps legal paperwork, but the idea of forced diagnosis and the constraints it puts on someone's life is a topic for another day, methinks) for you to self-identify with it.