How to Talk to a Borderline Paperback – 23 April 2015

The book is useful because it provides a realistic analysis of borderline subtypes. Having had experience with bpd I know that it does present with traits of other personality disorders.

Un livre qui promet beaucoup et ne tient pas grand-chose. Son auteur, qui prétend instruire le monde psychiatrique de l’art de communiquer avec des patients borderline, prend son public pour un ramassis d’idiots qui auraient appris leur métier en coloriant des bandes dessinées. En réalité, cette dame n’est que de ces thérapeutes qu’agite le prurit de la notoriété, et qui ne font des livres que pour mettre leur propre excellence en scène – Mais si, cela existe !! Et de fait, au final d’une lecture en attente perpétuelle de révélations, on se retrouve à n’avoir rien appris de la manière de parler à un borderline ; en revanche, l’on sait tout des performances et exploits de Madame Lachkar, adepte d’une thérapie qu’elle qualifie de « dialectique », qu’elle elle se garde bien d’exposer, mais que l’on finit par soupçonner de n’être que du Marsha Linehan recuisiné par ses soins. Enfin, Madame Lachkar, qui s’affirme non seulement psychohistorienne mais encore spécialiste du terrorisme, nous étourdit d’un intéressant chapitre où elle nous explique que les terroristes et les dictateurs sont des borderline qui n’ont pas eu l’immense bonheur de bénéficier de ses curatives lumières. Amen.

I'm a Master's level clinician who is currently reading my way through every book I can find on BPD (10-15 at this point) and I have to agree with the reviews that say there is very little of practical value in this book. I'll save you the read and say the best thing I got out of, which I hadn't heard from any other sources, was that "BPD individuals bond over pain." Brilliant idea that gets almost no development beyond what you can likely figure out on your own from the statement.The book had a lot of promise but my main criticism is that while it appears to present a unique conceptualization of BPD, that foundation was never really described or argued for. It doesn't sound like she holds to mainstream interpretations, other than the perfunctory DSM references, but at the same time I really have no idea what her conceptual framework is. She does use a lot of Freudian language which may, if I were more familiar with psychoanalysis, add some cogency but like others I have a hard time subjecting myself to an outdated theoretical system so diametrically opposed to Occam's razor.One specific example: she mentions Ted Bundy as an example of BPD (which I knee-jerk reject) but never actually argues this position based on his behavior or character. She then mentions his narcissistic and anti-social traits as if they are examples of BPD which really leaves me struggling to wrap my head around what she's trying to say. Honestly it seems incoherent or possibly like she doesn't have a full grasp of the subject matter / distinctions between disorders. My best interpretation is that she believes personality disorders have a very high co-morbidity / crossover and is comfortable placing a BPD label on someone based on their early childhood experiences (Bundy) rather than their actual presentation ... not something I'm comfortable with.Instead:* Stop Walking on Eggshells - Mason & Kreger (Practically useful guide in dealing with BPDs for both therapists and family members - wonderfully realistic.)* Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment of Borderline Personality Disorder - Marsha Linehan (Dialectical Behavior Therapy)* Minding the Child - Nick Midgley (Mentalization Based Therapy)* A Dissociation Model of BPD - Russell Meares (different conceptualization with an amazing literature review and GREAT scholarly depth)* Personality Disorders and Eating Disorders - Sansone and Levitt (AMAZING coverage of the topics)* Lost in the Mirror - Moskovitz (Best popular introduction to the disorder / self-help I've read so far.)

I was very disappointed in reading this book. Despite its title, I could find nothing of use which could be used to facilitate communication with a Borderline. The book purports to be written for the clinician rather than the general public. This is puzzling since the author seeks to redefine Borderline Personality Disorder, even going so far as to greatly expand the criteria given in the DSM-IV. This in effect steers the clinician down a false path away from the vast body of resources available to treat the illness. The author also tries to categorize BPD sufferers into eight different categories which are not true categories but merely a reshuffling and blending of existent illnesses into Borderline Personality Disorder. In effect, nearly everyone who is mentally ill becomes a Borderline. One annoying trait which occurred throughout the book was the reference to and numerous examples of men as BPD sufferers. My clinician friends, upon finding a male BPD, usually introduce him to the entire staff just to show that they exist. BPD is predominately a female illness. In this author's view, most BPD sufferers seem to be men. There is an underlying anti-Islamic tone to the book which I also found offensive and the suggestion that terrorists are Borderlines is ludicrous. For the record, I would like to state that despite what the book says, Charles Manson is not a Borderline, nor was Osama Bin Laden, nor was Saddam Hussein. I do realize that when you are discussing the spectrum of personality disorders there is a strong degree of concomitance, but BPD is the least of Charles Manson's worries and I would suggest that treatment for BPD with him would fall far short of realizing any positive outcome.

A bit difficult for a lay person to follow but interesting and informative.