|
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. |