| Borderline
personality disorder (BPD) affects as many as six
million Americans. It accounts for about 25% of
all psychiatric hospitalizations. As many as thirteen
percent of males and seven percent of females commit
suicide (Stone, 1990). Approximately, 69% of people
with BPD are also substance abusers (Miller et al.,
1993). The causes of BPD are not well understood.
Therapist folklore often labels people with BPD
as difficult and treatment-resistant patients.
This article outlines a clinical
model of BPD. The model is based upon the clinical
practice of the authors and the research literature
concerning the correlates of BPD. The model identifies
the roles played by traumatic environmental conditioning,
its effect on neurobiological processes, and biological
vulnerabilities in the development of BPD. In this
regard, the model postulates two factors which can
lead, singly or in combination with equifinality,
to BPD: early childhood Psychotraumatic Stress (PTS)
exposure (Factor I) and Biologic Vulnerability (BV)
(Factor II).
Equifinality is a systems theory
concept (Miller, 1978) which means "that a
final state of any living system [borderline personality
disorder] may be reached from different initial
conditions [Factor I, Factor II or both] and in
different ways [antecedent or consequent biological
and family system dysfunction]." The bracketed
illustrations were added by us.
The purpose of this model is
to serve as a heuristic guide to clinical
intervention, treatment, and research as well as
to stimulate creative thinking about borderline
personality disorders.
We first review the evidence that
supports Factor I initiation of BPD followed by
a review of Factor II evidence. These two sections
are followed by a description of the Equifinality
Model of BPD. The article closes with a brief discussion
of research questions generated by the model and
clinical implications of the model.
FACTOR I SPD: Psychotraumatic
Stress (PTS) Exposure in Childhood
A number of authors have suggested
a role for environmentally mediated aversive events
in the development of BPD. Kroll (1988) suggested
that BPD symptoms rather than being psychotic come
closer in appearance to those of post-traumatic
stress disorder. He wrote, "I am suggesting
that many borderline symptoms, especially the ones
that have the appearances of ‘brief psychotic episodes’
and which I have included under the heading of cognitive
disturbances, are no different from the symptoms
seen in post-traumatic stress disorder." Kernberg
(1975) observed that "A frequent finding in
patients with borderline personality organization
is the history of extreme frustrations and intense
aggression (secondary or primary) during the first
few years of life." Linehan (1993) postulated
that in addition to being biologically vulnerable
people with BPD are exposed to invalidating environments
"in which communication of private experiences
is met by erratic, inappropriate. and extreme responses
In other words, the expression of private experiences
is not validated; instead, it is often punished,
and/or trivialized."
Perry et. al's Neurobiological
Analysis of Early Trauma
Perry et al. (1996) have presented
a neurobiological analysis of childhood trauma exposure.
In it they outline the effect trauma has on the
human "fight or flight" and "freeze
or surrender" systems, and the implications
that repeated psychotraumatization has for a developing
child's brain systems. Perry et. al describes the
effects psychotrauma can have on a child's brain
as follows:
- The brain regions involved in the threat-induced
hyper-arousal response play a critical role
in regulating arousal, vigilance, affect, behavioral
irritability, locomotion, attention, the response
to stress, sleep, and the startle response .
. . Initially following the acute fear response,
these systems in the brain will be reactivated
when the child is exposed to a specific reminder
of the traumatic event (e.g., gunshots, the
presence of a past perpetrator). Furthermore,
these parts of the brain my be reactivated when
the child simply thinks about or dreams about
the event. Over time, these specific reminders
may generalize (e.g., gunshots to loud noises,
a specific perpetrator to any strange male).
In other words, despite being distanced from
threat and the original trauma, the stress-response
apparatus of the child's brain is activated
again and again.
The pattern described above reflects
both stimulus and response generalization processes
which have been exhaustively studied by behavioral
researchers for some time (Mackintosh, 1974; Nevin,
1973). This body of research has established that
a primary generalization effect is an increasing
function of the number of shared elements between
the original stimulus and the test stimulus (Nevin,
1973). This research provides support for Perry
et al.'s analysis of childhood trauma by identifying
the empirically validated operant and respondent
processes that are responsible for conditioning
all types of behavior including trauma responses.
Perry goes on to explain that the
neurobiological effect of traumatic experiences
delivered by environmental contingencies is governed
by two principles of neurodevelopment: the use-dependent
development/organization of the brain and critical
and sensitive periods. They point out that during
the early childhood years the brain requires (critical
periods) or is more sensitive (sensitive periods)
to certain types of organizing experiences. These
experiences literally format some of the child's
developing brain structures and functions: "Experience
can change the mature brain-but experience during
the critical periods of early childhood organizes
brain systems . . . [it] can result in mal-organization
and compromised function in brain mediated functions
such as humor, empathy, attachment and affect regulation."
Trauma, occurring during critical/sensitive periods,
is an experience that is capable of affecting the
organizational development of the brain.
The implication for the traumatized
child is that the more frequent, intense and persistent
the traumatization, the more the brain systems associated
with fear are activated. Such-frequent activation
"builds in" a chronic state of fear in
the child. This state of fear can trigger hyperarousal
(fight or flight) and/or dissociative (freeze or
surrender) behavior in the child With repeated exposure,
elicitation, and generalization this behavior pattern
takes on "trait" characteristics.
Perry identified five factors which
determine a person's specific response to PTS:
- history of previous stressors
- age at onset of PTS
- specific cognitive meaning attached to the
event
- the specific type of trauma
- presence of exacerbating and/or mitigating
factors
To this list we would add (6) intensity
of the PTS and (7) the duration of the PTS exposure.
Perry's analysis identifies
the neurobiological processes that translate environmentally
delivered psychotraumatic contingency effects into
altered neuro-behavioral function.
Trauma histories in BPO
A number of researchers have found
an association between the diagnosis of BPD and
psychotraumatization during childhood. Herman et
al. (1989) found the following rates of psychotraumatization
for BPD patients: 71% had been physically abused,
67% sexually abused, and 62% had witnessed domestic
violence. Histories of early childhood psychotrauma
(under age six) were almost always only found in
BPD patients versus other personality disorder patients.
Famularo et. al. (1991) reported that 79% of nineteen
children ages seven to fourteen who had been recently
diagnosed as having BPD by DSM III-R criteria reported
significant traumatic experiences. Goldman et al.
(1992) found in a sample of 44 children diagnosed
with BPD versus 100 comparison children that BPD
children had significantly higher rates of physical
and physical/sexual abuse rates than the comparison
group. They concluded that the hypothesis that a
history of trauma is associated with the disorder
is supported. Goldman et al. (1993) found higher
rates of psychopathology among family members of
people with BPD. Weaver et al. (1993) found that
rate of childhood trauma (sexual abuse, physical
abuse, witnessing violence) was significantly higher
in 17 BPD females versus 19 non-BPD females. Salzman
et al. (1993), however, found lower than expected
rates of physical, sexual, or combined trauma in
a sample of 31 patients. They found that only 19%
reported such a history.
Stone (1990) in his landmark outcomes
study of BPD found that the factor (in a factor
analysis of 14 outcome moderating factors) which
accounted for the largest amount of variance in
outcomes for his combined sample of male and female
BPD patients was what he termed parental brutality
(physical abuse). This factor accounted for 7% of
the variance with six additional factors accounting
for an additional 5% of the variance. For females
this factor accounted for 6% of the variance and
for males it accounted for 15% of the variance.
He also found the following percentages of psychotraumatization
in his sample (broad definition of borderline):
38% had early loss; 19% of females had parental
incest; 8% of males had parental incest; 13% of
all borderlines had experienced or witnessed parental
brutality.
In a study of 61 male subjects
with BPD versus 60 non-BPD subjects, Paris et al.
(1994) found that the BPD group had significantly
higher rate of childhood sexual abuse, more severe
sexual abuse, a longer duration of physical abuse,
increased rates of early separation or loss, and
higher paternal control score on the Parental Bonding
Index. Childhood sexual abuse and loss/separation
were significant in the muitivariate analysis. They
concluded that trauma and problems with fathers
are important factors in the development of BPD
in males. Waller (1994) found that childhood sexual
abuse prior to age fourteen rather than later in
life was associated with a diagnosis of BPD in 115
eating-disordered females. Silk et al. (1995) reported
a 76% rate of sexual abuse in a sample of 37 BPD
inpatients
Runeson et al. (1991) reported
that BPD patients who committed suicide showed more
early parental absence, substance abuse in the home,
and lack of permanent residence than other patient
groups who committed suicide in a sample of 58 consecutive
suicides of people ages 15 to 29 in an urban community
Berzirganian et al. (1993) found
in a prospective study of 776 adolescents that maternal
inconsistency coupled with maternal over-involvement
predicted the emergence of BPD. Weaver and Clum
(1993) reported that significantly more BPD patients
reported sexual abuse than did non-BPD patients
in a sample of 17 and 19 patients respectively.
They also found that BPD families were significantly
more controlling than were non-BPD families and
that this factor significantly predicted dimensional
borderline score even after controlling for sexual
abuse.
Finally, Briere (1997) reported
that the Trauma Symptom Inventory, a 100-item test
designed to measure both acute and chronic PTSD
symptoms, correctly identified, in a psychiatric
inpatient sample. 89% of those patients independently
diagnosed with BPD.
Neurotransmitter and EEG Findings
in BPD
Other studies have reported neurological
and neurotransmitter differences in people with
BPD and people with psychotraumatic exposures. Bower
(1995) reported that researchers found in MRI scans
of 20 females with histories of prolonged sexual
abuse before age 15 that, in comparison to 18 non-abused
woman, the abused woman had markedly smaller hippocampal
volume (the hippocampus is implicated in short term
memory). A second study by Yale researchers confirmed
this result in seventeen women who suffered severe
childhood sexual abuse. Yale researchers also found
that these abused woman scored significantly lower
on a test of verbal short-term memory. Bower reports
that similar MRI results (decreased hippocampal
volume) have been obtained with male Vietnam veterans
suffering from PTSD.
Hollander et al. (1994) reported
results which suggest that males with BPD have serotonergic
dysfunction as compared to non-BPD males based upon
a challenge with a single dose of m-chlorophenylpiperazine
(5-HT serotonin postsynaptic agonist). De Vegvar
et al. (1994) summarized a series of studies linking
serotonin functioning and impulsive aggression.
In general the findings support a hypothesis linking
serotonergic dysfunction to impulsive aggression
toward others or self. Yehuda et al. (1994) reported
a series of studies on peripheral catecholamine
(epinephrine, norepinephrine, and dopamine) functioning.
They concluded, "The fact that catecholamine
metabolism in BPD is similar to that in PTSD in
preliminary studies may reflect the role that chronic
stress and trauma appear to play in the etiology
of many symptoms found in these disorders."
Perry et al.'s (1996) analysis implicates the catecholamine
system as one of the systems effected by traumatic
exposure
In a very interesting study, Teicher
et al. (1994) argued that the limbic system, in
particular the hippocampus and amygdala, may be
affected by experiences which create posttraumatic
stress disorder. They reported on the results of
a study which compared a history of early abuse
to symptoms of limbic system dysfunction. They devised
a 33 item Limbic System Checklist (LSC-33) questionnaire
to assess this latter effect. They evaluated 253
outpatients with the Life Experiences Questionnaire
to assess abuse history. Their results showed that
as compared to patients who reported no history
of abuse, patients with physical but not sexual
abuse scored 38% higher on the LSC-33; patients
who were sexually but not physically abused scored
49% higher, and patients who were both sexually
and physically abused scored 113% higher. The effect
was the same regardless of sex. All differences
between the abused patients and non-abused patients
were significant. Abuse prior to age 18 had greater
impact than abuse after age 18. Patients who were
physically or sexually abused after the age of 18
had LSC-33 scores that were not significantly different
from those of the non-abused patients. They concluded,
"Our specific hypothesis is that early abuse
can lead to a variety of neurodevelopmentai abnormalities
with different behavioral sequelae."
Based on the findings reviewed
above and our clinical experience we offer the following
Factor I BPD postulate:
Factor I BPD reflects the
neuro-behavioral effects of psychotraumatic stress
(PTS) exposures mediated by dysfunctional family
interactions (DFI). The PTS exposures occur prior
to the age of 18 and have the following characteristics:
(1) they are of sufficient aversive intensity, duration,
and frequency to provoke fear (2) they occur during
critical or sensitive developmental periods, and
(3) they are psychologically salient, personal and
meaningful. Consequent to these exposures, the child
experiences neurological, cognitive, and behavioral
dysfunctions which, if unmitigated or untreated
(or inadequately treated), progress to borderline
personality disorder The presence of a pre-existing
biological vulnerability is not required for the
occurrence of these effects.
FACTOR II BPD: Biological Vulnerability
The other factor which may initiate
the development of BPD is a pre-existing
biological vulnerability (BV). To qualify, a BV
must biographically pre-date the occurrence of any
psychotraumatic stress and may be expected to affect
limbic system functioning and/or attention control.
A BV that is caused by the effect psychotraumatic
stress has on the developing brain would not qualify
in our model as an independent biological cause
of BPD. Potential independent BV's might include
a genetic defect, an intrauterine neuro-toxin, or
another psychiatric disorder of early childhood.
Torgerson (1994) reviewed published
and unpublished studies of the genetic transmission
of BPO. Torgerson concluded that there is little
current evidence to support a genetic transmission
model of BPD.
Gasperini et. at. (1991) concluded
that a diagnosis of BPD predicts a higher rate of
mood disorders in family members of people with
BPD even in the absence of a mood disorder in the
BPD person. Silverman et al. (1991) found greater
independent risk of affective and impulsive personality
disorder traits in 129 relatives of people with
BPD than in people with other personality disorders
or with schizophrenia. Korzekwa et al. (1993) concluded
that dexamethasone suppression test, thyrotropin-releasing
hormone test, and sleep studies indicate that BPD
is not related to depression but that serotonin
studies point to links with suicidal, aggressive
and impulsive behaviors.
Muller (1992) suggested that a
disruption of interhemispheric communication within
the brain from 18 to 36 months of age may
create a neural template for the borderline symptom
of splitting. Towbin et al. (1993) defined a complex
developmental syndrome which they hypothesize may
be involved in the development of BPD and childhood
schizophrenia. The criteria of this syndrome include
disturbance of affect modulation, social relatedness,
and thinking. Ogiso et al. (1993) compared EEG findings
of 19 females diagnosed with BPD to 21 females without
a BPD diagnosis. They failed to find EEG results
that were characteristic of the BPD group. However,
they did find that patients who scored high on the
Impulsive Action Pattern of the DIB (Diagnostic
Interview for Borderlines) did show EEG abnormalities.
This effect cut across the two groups and was not
solely characteristic of the BPD group. Zanarini
et al. (1994) found that EEG abnormalities, while
nonspecific to people with BPD, did affect 46% of
the BPD subjects in the sample. They reported that
these findings were not correlated with a childhood
history of abuse. However, 40% of their BPD subjects
had a confounding history of head trauma
(62% of subjects who were physically abused also
reported head trauma) and 12% had a confirmed history
of grand mal seizures.
In our clinical practice we have
seen a high rate of comorbid ADHD in males with
BPD. In a sample of 26 males diagnosed as having
BPD according to DSM-IIIR or DSM-IV criteria and
treated by us from 1994 to 1996, 54% of them had
a childhood diagnosis of ADHD in their records.
Many ADHD symptoms such as impulsivity, affective
lability, and anger outbursts are similar to BPD
symptoms.
Childhood bipolar disorder (Biederman,
1997) is an under recognized disorder whose
symptoms include unstable moods, distractibility,
impulsiveness, severe aggressiveness, and hyperactivity.
Unlike adult bipolar disorder, childhood bipolar
disorder symptoms are chronic and continuous, This
disorder is also correlated with ADHD. The two disorders
may be genetically linked. All of its symptoms,
especially impulsiveness and aggression, overlap
with those of BPD. It is possible that untreated
or ineffectively treated childhood bipolar disorder
and/or ADHD could predispose the child to later
develop BPD.
Based on the results reported above
our Factor II BPD postulate states:
Factor II BPD is a set of biological
vulnerabilities (BV) which either alone or in combination
can cause early childhood neurobehavioral dysfunction.
This results in hyperreactivity to stressors which
conditions affective instability, impulsive
actions, aggressive tantrums, and impaired interpersonal
relationships. If unmitigated and untreated, the
S V induced neuro-behavioral dysfunctions progress
to BPD. This result does not require the prior occurrence
of DFI mediated psychotraumatic exposure.
The Equifinality Model of Borderline
Behavior
The diagram on page ten models
the flow of events hypothesized to initiate and
condition borderline behavior. The two factors are
depicted along with their influence pathways. The
model's equifinality assumption states that either
factor can produce BPD despite starting at different
points and following different paths to that end.
The model has organized borderline symptoms into
five groups: relationship control phobia (DSM-IV
BPD criteria 1 and 2 are included here), self-image
dysfunction (criteria 3 and 7), stress hypersensitivity
(criteria 6, 5, 9), dependency on immediate gratification
(criteria 4 and 5), and lifestyle mismanagement.
The Factor I Pathway
The Factor I pathway maps the effects
of multiple stress/alarm reactions elicited by DFI
mediated psychotraumatic stress exposures. The model
defines DFI (dysfunctional family interaction) as
the exchange of aversive communication behaviors
and consequences (often unpredictable) among members
of a family at a rate that is in excess of norms
for that family's society and culture. PTS
is defined as an aversive event which triggers a
fear response capable of causing a person to become
concerned about his or her psychological or physical
safety while effectively inhibiting the person's
ability to protect him or herself by terminating
or escaping the aversive event.
As PTS exposure is repeated and
generalized, neurobiological changes (as specified
in Perry's 1996 analysis) begin to take place. According
to some of the findings reviewed earlier, changes
in catelcolamine functioning and serotonin functioning
may occur. At the same time a relationship control
phobia develops in response to the PTS emitted by
members of the child's family. Basic trust, thought
to form within the first years of life (Erikson,
1950), is compromised. As relationships, through
generalization (the generalization dimensions appear
to be intimacy and authority), become viewed as
threatening, the child also develops a negative
image of him or herself. Chronic aversive treatment,
especially at the hands of loved ones, condition
a negative self-image that leaves the child feeling
that he or she is "bad." The core self-image
of "badness" progresses to one of self-hatred.
These core beliefs condition the development of
other distorted cognitive beliefs and errors in
thinking (e.g., black and white thinking).
The emergent neurobiological dysfunction
further sensitizes the child to similar, stressful
experiences (stress hypersensitivity) which trigger
hyperarousal and/or dissociative behavior. Withdrawal,
aggressiveness, and mood instability are postulated
to be a product of this sensitization process.
Stress hypersensitivity (and dysfunctional
neurotransmitter mediation), relationship problems,
and a negative self-image combine to create dysphoric
and labile emotional states which arrange negative
reinforcement contingencies that shape and reinforce
a variety of impulsive gratification (or escape)
seeking behaviors. Addictive activities (such as
drug and alcohol abuse, eating problems, or self-injury)
develop that reduce the dysphoric states and negatively
reinforce their continuing--and often escalating--use.
Suicidal behaviors emerge as an albeit extreme form
of negatively reinforced escape behavior. The repetitive
and manipulative nature of BPD suicidal actions
take on an addictive quality because of this negative
reinforcement control.
As the child grows through adolescence
into adulthood, lifestyle functioning is impaired
in work, relationships, play, and education. Lifestyle
failures further intensify the person's self-hatred
and add to his or her dysphoria, which motivates
further escape and avoidance behaviors of the impulsive
and addictive type. This process creates the hallmarks
of borderline living: self-inflicted crisis and
self-inflicted psychotraumatization.
The childhood and later-life effects
of PTS can be mitigated by several factors: strong,
positive social support, personal skills and attractiveness
(Stone 1990), low levels of ambient psychosocial
stress, and reinforcement contingencies (structure)
for healthy behavior. For example, if a child is
exposed to PTS by one caregiver but another is able
to maintain a warm and loving relationship with
the child, the effect of the PTS will be reduced.
A borderline adult living in a very supportive setting
will function better than one living without any
close support or structure.
The Factor I pathway of the model
postulates that any child exposed to sufficient
and critically timed PTS will develop chronically
dysfunctional behavior patterns and will, in the
absence of timely and sufficient treatment and/or
mitigation, develop borderline behavior patterns
and/or BPD. A second postulate states that the stress
hypersensitivity a person experiences will be under
discrete stimulus control defined by the stimulus
parameters of their early psychotraumatization.
The Factor II Pathway
The Factor II pathway to BPD involves
the presence of a BV that at the neurobiological
level impairs the child's ability to develop age
appropriate behavioral self-control in the areas
of impulse control, mood stability, and aggression
modulation. At present there does not appear to
be a consensus BV candidate, The possibilities we
reviewed included untreated attention deficit disorder,
untreated childhood bipolar disorder, EEG abnormalities,
genetic transmission, familial affective/impulse
control dysfunction, or a complex developmental
syndrome.
The BV is hypothesized to work
by impairing the child's neurobiological functioning
by presumably disrupting limbic system development
and/or functioning. This then predisposes the child
to becoming hypersensitive to his environment and
its stressors. The child's moody, impulsive, aggressive.
irritable, distractible, oppositional, and/or withdrawn
behaviors initiate the model's stress hypersensitivity
pathway. The model postulates that this behavior
becomes aversive to the caregivers and other members
of the child's family and creates dysfunctional
interaction patterns within a previously functional
family. In the absence of timely and sufficient
mitigating or treatment factors, the DFI worsens
the child's behavior and creates significant distress
for caregivers and other family members. The child's
self-image is impaired by the conflict their behavior
causes at home and/or in school. Impulsive gratification
emerges for the same reasons as it does in Factor
I BPD.
The model postulates DFI as a consequence
of BV in Factor II BPD. It also postulates the existence
of a historical period, framed by a functional family
environment, during which the child's behavior was
observably and significantly dysfunctional.
Mixed Factor BPD
In mixed factor BPD both BV and
PTS are independently present. The model postulates
that for a given degree of PTS a more severe form
of BPD develops when BV is also present. We speculate
that Factor I type of BPD is the most common form,
followed by mixed type BPD, and then Factor II BPD.
Based on the childhood trauma prevalence studies
reviewed earlier, about 70 to 75% of BPD is either
Factor I or Mixed type BPD and about 25 to 30% is
Factor II BPD.
Implications for Making a Diagnosis
of BPD
As discussed earlier the symptomatic
behavior of BPD overlaps with other disorders. In
particular it is important to rule out adult bipolar
disorder. In addition to bipolar disorder, attention
deficit disorder and atypical depression should
also be assessed. A rule of thumb that we have found
helpful given the apparently high incidence of psychotraumatic
childhood events in the histories of people with
BPD is to tentatively assume that, in the absence
of a credible history of childhood psychotrauma,
the patient is not borderline and then to assess
him or her for the above-mentioned disorders. When
bipolar disorder has been ruled out, and if ADHD
and atypical depression cannot completely account
for the presenting symptoms, then a diagnosis of
BPD can be applied.
A bipolar disorder differential
should consider the following: (1) A history of
bipolar disorder in the family; (2) It may begin
in childhood as major depression; (3) In early adolescence
look for irritability, explosive anger, sustained
hating, hostility and hypersexuality; and (4) BPD
patient usually does not have family history of
bipolar disorder; decreased need for sleep is not
seen in BPD; flight of ideas is not seen, borderline
does not follow the four phases of bipolar disorder
(depressed, manic-irritability, mixed depression
and mania; hypomania).
Attention deficit hyperactivity
disorder (ADHD) can be distinguished from BPD by
taking a careful developmental history. Of particular
interest is early hyperactivity especially at birth
and even prenatally. Such infants are often hard
to satisfy despite consistent effort to do so. Such
children often have difficulty playing with other
children and making friends. Often they will change
the rules so they can win. In school they cannot
achieve because they cannot sit and attend. They
may have poor fine motor coordination. They can
be very bright and hyper-curious but often have
poor immediate recall. In BPD symptoms become apparent
in late teen years, not at birth. BPD relationships
are unstable. BPD has poor self-image due to rejection,
but ADHD has poor self-image due to failure to achieve.
BPD people hate themselves; this is not the case
in uncomplicated ADHD. In BPD neurological soft
signs are not necessarily present but are often
seen in ADHD.
Clinical and Research Implications
of the Model
Open questions for Factor I BPD:
Does everyone exposed1 during critical
sensitive periods, to a certain intensity, duration
and repetition of psychotrauma develop BPD? If not,
then do they develop some borderline behaviors?
If not, then what inoculates them from doing so?
Could the inoculation come from a biological advantage
of some kind? Would early intervention and treatment
of DFI prevent the development of BPD?
Open questions for Factor II BPD:
What is the biological vulnerability?
Is it a single condition or many conditions? If
it is ADHD or child bipolar, then does it progress
to BPD because of a failure to effectively treat
these disorders? Does the BV progress to BPD in
the absence of DFI or is DFI crucial to the development
of BV initiated BPD? If it is crucial, must DFI
be effectively treated to prevent progression to
BPD?
Other research needs suggested
by the model include the following:
- Studies that can define critical exposure
parameters (the type, severity, duration, age
at onset) of PTS that lead to enduring behavioral
and neurological changes.
- A comprehensive assessment protocol needs
to be developed and studies conducted of people
with BPD to confirm or disconfirm the model's
classification of BPD into PTS-only induced,
BV-only induced, and PTS-plus-BV-induced.
- Studies that assess whether the hippocampus
of people with BPD are reduced in volume.
- Studies which measure neurotransmitter (serotonin
and NE) levels of people with BPD prior to and
after imaginary and role play exposure to their
childhood PTS events to determine whether neurotransmitter
levels are response to simulated exposure.
- Primate studies to asses the effects of PTS
exposure on their behavioral and neurological
development.
- Development of definitions and reliable measures
of dysfunctional family interaction patterns
that produce psychotraumatic events.
- In-depth prospective studies of abused and
neglected children to evaluate the behavioral,
neurological, and learning effects of PTS.
- Development of a database register of psychotraumatic
events complete with operational definitions,
specific examples, relative severity, cultural
modifiers, and measurement instruments.
- Studies that determine the effects of critical
period exposure to PTS versus non-critical period
exposure on the progression to BPD.
- DFI is a potential common link between the
two types of BPD: in Factor I it is the antecedent
of psychotrauma and in Factor II it is a familial
behavioral consequence of biological vulnerability.
Studies to confirm this are needed.
The model's implications for the
clinical treatment of BPD include the following:
- Reliable and valid clinical measures of psychotraumatic
events and the symptomatic impact of those events
are needed. There are many psychometric instruments
for the measurement of trauma symptoms and events
(Briere 1997). A consensus diagnostic battery
that meets the needs of clinical settings is
needed to measure the PTS exposure of patients.
- Treatment of BPD depends upon the accurate
assessment of PTS exposure. The presence of
significant PTS history has major implications
for the treatment protocol in theses areas:
- trust issues, need for desensitization/exposure
therapy of PTS effects, PTS motivators of
- addictive activities, the use of medications,
and the role of the family in treatment.
- If the role of PTS, as suggested by this model,
is confirmed, the diagnostic criteria for borderline
personality disorder may require modification.
Summary
The paper presented a heuristic
model of the etiology of borderline personality
disorder. Borrowing the concept of equifinality
from systems theory, it postulated that BPD can
develop if one of two factors is present during
childhood. The data upon which the model is based
were reviewed and the research and clinical implications
of the model were discussed.
References
Berzirganian,, S., Cohen, P., Brook,
J. S. (1993) The impact of mother-child interaction
on the development of borderline personality disorder.
American Journal of Psychiatry. 150 (12) 1836-1842.
Biederman, J. (1997) Is there a
childhood form of bi-polar disorder? Harvard
Mental Health Letter, 13 (9), 8.
Bower, B. (1995). Child abuse leave
mark in the brain. Science News. 147 (1), 395
Briere, J. Psychological Assessment
of Adult Posttraumatic States. Washington, D.C.:
American Psychological Association,
1997
De Vegvar, M. L., Siever, L. J.,
and Trestman, R. L. (1994). Impulsivity and serotonin
in borderline personality disorder. In Silk, K.
R.(Ed). Biological and Neurobehavioral Studies
of Borderline Personality Disorder. Washington,
DC: American Psychiatric Press, 1994.
Erikson, E. Childhood and Society
New York: Norton and Company, 1950.
Famularo, R., Kinscherff, R., and
Fenton, T. (1991). Posttraumatic stress disorder
among children clinically diagnosed as borderline
personality disorder. Journal of Nervous and
Mental Disease, 179(7), 428431.
Gasperini, M, Battaglia, M., Scherillo,
P, Sciuto, G, Diaferia, G, Bellodi, L. (1991) Morbidity
risk for mood disorders in the families of borderline
patients. Journal of Affective Disorders.
21(4), 265-272.
Goldman, S.J., D'Angelo, E. J.,
DeMaso, D. R., Mezzacappa, E. (1992). Physical and
sexual abuse histories among children with borderline
personality disorder. American Journal of Psychiatry.
149 (12)1723-1726.
Goldman, S. J., DAngelo, E. J.,
DeMaso, D. R. (1993). Psychopathology in the families
of children and adolescents with borderline personality
disorder. American Journal of Psychiatry. 150 (12)
1832-1835.
Herman, J.L., Perry;J. C., van
der Kolk, B. A. (1989). Childhood trauma in borderline
personality disorder. American Journal of Psychiatry,
146, 490495.
Hollander, F., Stein, D. J., DeCaria,
C. M., Cohen, L., Saoud, J. B., Skodol, A. E., Kellman,
D., Rosnick, L., Oldham, J.M. (1994). Serotonergic
sensitivity in borderline personality disorder preliminary
findings. American Journal of Psychiatry. 151(2),
277-280.
Kernberg, 0. Borderline Conditions
and Pathological Narcissism. New York: Jason
Aronson, 1975.
Korzekwa, M., Links, P., Steiner,
M (1993). Biological markers in borderline personality
disorder New Perspectives. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry.
38 Supplement (1) 11-15.
Kroll, J. The Challenge of the
Borderline Patient New York: Norton and Company,1988
Linehan, M. Cognitive-Behavioral
Treatment of Borderline Personality Disorder New
York:
Guilford Press, 1993.
Mackintosh, N.J. The Psychology
of Animal Learning. New York: Academic Press,
1974.
Miller, F. T., Abrams, T., Dulit,
R, and Fyer, M. (1993). Substance abuse in borderline
personality disorder. American Journal of Drug
and Alcohol Abuse, 19,491497
Miller, J. G. Living Systems.
New York: McGraw-Hill, 1978
Muller, R. J. (1992). Is there
a neural basis for borderline splitting? Comprehensive
Psychiatry. 33(2), 92-104.
Nevin, J. A. The Study of Behavior
Illinois: Scott, Foresman and Company, 1973.
Ogiso, Y., Moriya, N., Ikuta, N.,
Maher-Nishizono, A., Takase, M., Miyake, Y., Minakawa,
K. (1993). Relationship between clinical symptoms
and EEG findings in borderline personality disorder.
Japanese Journal of Psychiatry and Neurology.
47(1), 3746.
Paris, J and Zweig-Frank, H. (1992).
A critical review of the role of childhood sexual
abuse in the etiology of borderline personality
disorder. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. 37(2),
125-128.
Paris, J., Zweig-Frank, H., Guzder,
J. (1994). Risk factors for borderline personality
disorder in male outpatients. Journal of Nervous
and Mental Disease. 182(7), 375-380.
Perry, B., Pollard, R., Blakley,
T., Baker, W., and Vigilante, 0. (1996). Childhood
trauma, the neurobiology of adaptation and use-dependent
development of the brain: How states become traits.
In Press: Infant Mental Health Journal.
Reiger, D., Narrow, W., Rae, D.,
Manderscheid, R., Locke. B., and Goodwin, F. (1993).
The de facto US mental and addictive disorders service
system: epidemiologic catchment area prospective
1-year prevalence rates of disorders and services.
Archives of General Psychiatry, 50, 85-93.
Runeson, B., Beskow, J. (1991).
Borderline personality disorder in young Swedish
suicides. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease.
179(3), 152-156.
Salzman, J. P., Salzman, C., Wolfson,
A. N., Albanese, M. Looper, J., Ostacher, M., Schwartz,
J., Chinman, G., Land, W., Myawaki, E. (1993). Association
between borderline personality structure and history
of childhood abuse in adult volunteers. Comprehensive
Psychiatry. 34(4), 254-257.
Silk, K. R. Biological and Neurobehavioral
Studies of Borderline Personality Disorder Washington,
DC: American Psychiatric Press, 1994.
Silk, K.R., Lee, S., Hill, E. M.,
and Lohr, N. E. (1995). Borderline personality disorder
symptoms and severity of sexual abuse. American
Journal of Psychiatry, 152(7), 1059-1064.
Silverman, J. M., Pinkham,
L., Horvath, T. B., Coccaro, E. F., KIar, H., Schear,
S., Apter, S., Davidson, M., Mohs, R. C., Siever,
L. J. (1991). Affective and impulsive personality
disorder traits in the relatives of patients with
borderline personality disorder. American Journal
of Psychiatry. 148 (10), 1378-1385.
Stone, J. The Fate of Borderline
Patients. New York: Guilford, 1990.
Diagnostic and statistical Manual
IV. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press,
1994.
Teicher, M. H., Ito, Y., Glad,
C. A., Schiffer, F., and Gelbard, H. A. (1994).
Early abuse limbic system dysfunction, and borderline
personality disorder. In K. R. Silk (Ed). Biological
and Neurobehavioral Studies of Borderline Personality
Disorder Washington. DC: Amercian Psychiatric
Press, 1994.
Torgersen, S. (1994) Genetics in
Borderline Conditions. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavian,
supplementum. 379, 19-25.
Towbin, K. E., Dykens, E. M., Pearson,
G.S., Cohen, D.J. (1993). Conceptualizing "Borderline
Syndrome of Childhood" and "Childhood
Schizophrenia" as a developmental disorder.
Journal of the American Academy of Child and
Adolescent Psychiatry. 32(4), 775-782.
Waller, G. (1924) Childhood sexual
abuse and borderline personality disorder in the
eating disorders. Child Abuse and Neglect 18
(1), 97-101.
Weaver, T. L., Clum, G. A. (1993).
Early family environments and traumatic experiences
associated with borderline personality disorder.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
61 (6) 1068-1075.
Yehuda, R., Southwick, S. M., Perry,
B. D., Giller, E. L. Peripheral catecholamine alterations
in borderline personality disorder. In K. R. Silk
(Ed). Biological and Neurobehavioral Studies
of Borderline Personality Disorder Washington,
DC: American Psychiatric Press, 1994.
Zanarini, M. C., Kimble, C. R.,
Williams, A. A. (1994) Neurological dysfunction
in borderline patients and Axis II Control Subjects.
In K. R. Silk (Ed). Biological and Neurobehavioral
Studies of Borderline Personality Disorder Washington,
DC: American Psychiatric Press, 1994.
©1997 by The
American Academy of Experts in Traumatic Stress,
Inc. |