Definition of High Functioning BPD for Court

[Rainfoster]

I'm looking for a definition of High Functioning BPD for Court.
Can anyone tell me where I can find a definition that is most likely to be accepted by a Judge? 

[flourdust]

Hi, Rainfoster!

Can you give a little more information about why you're looking for this, and what you want to do with it?

Just as generic advice -- there's a clinical definition of BPD and its criteria from the DSM (the diagnostic manual used by psychiatrists), but informal categories like "high-functioning" aren't based on clinical expertise. A bunch of these taxonomies have sprung up in casual and self-help communities - they often get used here and on other BPD sites but don't appear in the clinical literature (see also Witch, Hermit, Waif, etc.)

I would also add that most of the folks experienced with divorce here would advise that evidence about patterns of dangerous behaviors are more persuasive to judges and evaluators than labels like BPD.

Can you give us some more of your backstory, so we can help?

[Skip]

This is the complete and full definition of BPD as per the DSM. This is the only full text version online to my knowledge.

https://bpdfamily.com/content/borderline-personality-disorder

If you want to actual copies from the text, you can find that here:
https://bpdfamily.com/content/pdfs/DSM-5.pdf

What does high functioning mean? This is not so clear as it is more of a self-help book term, not a clinical term as flourdust points out. Generally what it means is a someone who has traits or BPD but at a severity level that would likely not be diagnosed.  There are other definitions that suggest hfBPD is about the clusters of 5 of 9 criteria that do not include "suicidal or self-mutilating behavior". There are other definitions that suggest that hfBPD is about people with BPD that can "keep it together" in public and work situation and are only problematic in the home or primary relationships.

What's up?

[ForeverDad]

In my experience family courts and the professionals associated with them are very reluctant to point to a Personality Disorder if the individual hasn't been diagnosed previously.  (Maybe it's more likely in murder cases?)  I've concluded the courts prefer having as little as possible "on the record" so (1) there are no clear winners or losers and (2) they have more discretion in their decisions/orders.  Usually those are 'standard' decisions based on the typical outcomes.  And ours are not 'typical' cases.

In my case the Custody Evaluator directly told me he wasn't there to diagnose anyone, just to recommend to the court a custody framework and parenting schedule for the parents and children.  His report described several clinical terms but never put a name to them.

My conclusion is that everyone studiously avoided a diagnosis.  Take alcoholism, for example.  Someone may be a dry drunk no longer drinking, or maybe drinking in private without impacting childcare too much.  Court may not care much about that.  But if the parent drove intoxicated with the kids in the car, then that would be actionable.  See?  It's the degree of impact on parenting.  A blanket diagnostic label wouldn't be meaningful since it wouldn't address what was actionable and what was not.

For that reason give strong focus on documenting the poor behaviors with dates, places, witnesses and other details.  Claiming "he always... ." or "she always... ." without supporting facts and details of the incidents could be ignored as unsupported hearsay.  Since most of us don't get to produce paperwork listing a diagnosis, we have to rely on documenting incidents that demonstrate the pattern of poor behaviors.

[Rainfoster]

Hi,
I'm seeking a definition/explanation of invisible or high-functioning BPD that can be used in court.
Can anyone advise where I can find such a definition/explanation, preferably written by a psychologist so that it will be accepted as truth?
This is to demonstrate to the Court that "all your problems being only with your partner" is actually a symptom of HP-BPD rather that a method to diagnose the absence of BPD (as has been done by an under-qualified counsellor).

[flourdust]

What did you think of the responses to your original post?

[Rainfoster]

I had forgotten that I had already asked the question.
Anyway, this is why I'm asking-
In emails to my ex I had mentioned that I think she has BPD, but have not mentioned it in any legal paperwork, as it has not been officially diagnosed.
Now the ex is trying to discredit me in court by saying that I make false allegations using this one (of BPD) as an example, and is calling her doctor as a witness. Her doctor says she is shocked by the "allegation" and that the ex doesn't have BPD because she's known her for years. Her counsellor says she doesn't have BPD because "all her problems are with her partner" (apparently unaware this is actually a symptom of HF-BPD)(and apparently unaware of all the employment changes due to personality clashes).
There is multiple evidence in the records of fear of abandonment and suicide ideation and other BPD traits.
I am not trying to prove she has BPD, but I am trying to prove that the two diagnostic methods used to exclude BPD are not only made-up, but the latter is actually an indication of HF-BPD, so that the Court see's these two medical professionals for what they are doing - overstepping their bounds of expertise, so the Court doesn't think of me as someone who just makes things up.

[Mutt]

Hey Rainfoster,

What kind of doctor is she talking about a GP, MD or a P (Psychiatrist) I think that the T would discredit him or herself by blame shifting all of the problems of a r/s on one partner or ex partner - I would hope that a judge would see through that.

[Rainfoster]

The Doctor is a GP, the counsellor is a psychotherapist.
My concern is that my understanding of court is that what is said is generally accepted as true unless countered by the other party, hence I need to counter what was said (not interested in proving BPD, just in countering the assertions that BPD isn't there and thereby countering the accusation of making up things to discredit the other party).
Can you please tell me what you mean by 'T' and 'r/s'? thanks

 

[Mutt]

Can you please tell me what you mean by 'T' and 'r/s'? thanks

Yes, T means "therapist" and r/s is short for "relationship" I have another question what kind of court is it family court or divorce court? Can you give us the back story?

[Rainfoster]

Thanks. Its family court primarily regarding custody.

[Mutt]

My concern is that my understanding of court is that what is said is generally accepted as true unless countered by the other party,

I can understand the concern what courts are interested are facts. Family court will do what’s best for the child if she wants to get full custody is that in the best interest of the child? A child has a right to both parents it’s the r/s between child and mom and child and dad. If mom has disdain for the father and doesn’t want the child to have a r/s with the dad is that in the best interest of the child?

My advice is be very careful with showing an attachment with the mom and display conflict - they’re not going to like that. Think about what is best for your kid(s) and come from their perspective. I’m sorry that I can’t answer the rest of your questions someone else may be able to address them were not lawyers. Do you have an L (lawyer)? What’s the current custody agreement? How many kids do you have? How old are they?

[GaGrl]

Have you discussed  with your lawyer a request for a formal custody evaluation, to include a psychological evaluation of both parents? Expensive, but effective in most cases.