Why I rarely diagnose borderline personality disorder, even when it fits
Here is the irony in my practice. Some of the people who sit across from me would meet the criteria for borderline personality disorder on a careful reading of the DSM. They have the fear of being left, the relationships that swing from closeness to rupture, the anger that arrives faster than they can think, the self-harm or the reckless stretch that follows a fight. If I wanted to write the code, I could defend it.
I do my best not to. That is a choice I make on purpose, and I want to explain it, because people who have been given this label deserve to know that plenty of clinicians have serious doubts about it.
The diagnosis names a pattern of pain and then blames it on personality
Borderline personality disorder, as the DSM describes it, is a set of nine criteria: frantic efforts to avoid abandonment, unstable and intense relationships, an unstable sense of self, impulsivity, recurrent self-harm or suicidal behavior, intense mood reactivity, chronic emptiness, intense anger, and stress-related paranoia or dissociation. Five of the nine gets you the diagnosis.
Look at that list and ask what kind of history produces it. A child whose caregiver was unpredictable learns to watch closely for signs of leaving, because leaving was dangerous. A child who was hurt by the people who were supposed to protect them learns that closeness and threat arrive together. A child whose feelings were punished or ignored never gets the practice most people get at calming down. The adult version of those lessons looks a lot like the criteria above.
The research on this is not subtle. A 2020 meta-analysis in Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica pooled studies of childhood adversity in people diagnosed with BPD and found that, compared with non-clinical controls, they were nearly 14 times more likely to report childhood adversity. The strongest effects were for emotional abuse and neglect. Compared with people who had other psychiatric diagnoses, they were still about three times more likely to report it.
Not everyone with these symptoms has a trauma history, and I am not going to pretend otherwise. But the word "personality" puts the problem inside the person's character. What I usually see is an attachment system that learned its rules in a dangerous place and is still applying them in a safe one. Those are different problems with different implications, and the second one is far more hopeful.
I love working with people who show these patterns. They tend to carry a great deal of hard-won insight into other people and into themselves, and they are some of the most interesting personalities I meet in my work. Nothing about that fits the picture most clinicians have in mind when they hear the word borderline.
Serious researchers have argued the category should be abandoned
I am not alone in this, and it is not a fringe view. In 2023 two psychiatrists, Roger Mulder and Peter Tyrer, published a paper in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine titled "Borderline personality disorder: a spurious condition unsupported by science that should be abandoned." Their argument is that the category entered the DSM in 1980 as a compromise, that it has no grounding in the scientific study of personality, and that its features overlap so heavily with mood disorders, ADHD, and trauma that it does not carve out a distinct condition.
The World Health Organization reached a version of the same conclusion when it rebuilt personality disorders for ICD-11. It dropped almost all of the named types in favor of a single judgment about severity, mild, moderate, or severe, plus optional trait descriptions. Borderline survived only as a "pattern" specifier, kept largely because many clinicians objected to losing it. ICD-11 also added complex PTSD as its own diagnosis, which captures the emotional dysregulation, negative self-concept, and relationship trouble that follow prolonged trauma. A lot of people who were handed a BPD label a decade ago would be described differently under that system.
A critical discourse analysis published this year in the International Journal of Mental Health Nursing goes further. The authors argue that the diagnosis functions less as a clinical description than as a way of managing people, that it discredits the testimony of those who carry it, and that care should move away from the construct entirely. You do not have to agree with all of that to notice that it is a nursing journal, written for the people who work most closely with these patients in hospitals, saying the label is causing harm.
Who gets the label tells you something about the label
The DSM itself notes that about three quarters of people diagnosed with BPD in clinical settings are women. Large community surveys tell a different story. When the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions assessed nearly 35,000 American adults directly, men and women met the criteria at similar rates, 5.6 percent and 6.2 percent. The gap appears in clinics, where a clinician is deciding what to call what they see.
The pattern repeats with sexual and gender minorities. Researchers at the University of Michigan found that sexual minority adults in a national sample were nearly twice as likely as heterosexual adults to meet the criteria as usually scored, but when the diagnosis required that the symptoms cause significant distress or impairment, the rates were close. In a 2024 study in Transgender Health, transgender and gender diverse patients in a partial hospitalization program were far more likely than cisgender patients to receive a BPD diagnosis from their clinicians, and the gap held after the researchers controlled for actual borderline pathology. When the diagnosis was made by an algorithm based only on the symptoms, the disparity disappeared.
Want to talk about it? Click here
Think about what those groups have in common. They are more likely to have been harmed, more likely to have had their distress dismissed, and more likely to show their pain in ways that make clinicians uncomfortable. A queer teenager who has been rejected by their family and responds with anger and fear of abandonment is having a reasonable reaction to an unreasonable situation. Calling that a personality disorder misses the situation entirely.
The label changes how other clinicians treat you
Here is a test of any diagnosis: can you tell the person you gave it to? With depression, ADHD, or PTSD, I can sit down with someone, explain what I found, and the conversation usually brings relief. With BPD, that conversation is close to impossible to have well. The word carries so much contempt that hearing it lands as an accusation, and most people walk away hearing that they are manipulative and hard to love. A diagnosis you cannot say out loud to the person who has it is telling you something about the diagnosis.
It is also the most practical reason I avoid it. A BPD diagnosis in a chart changes how the next provider reads everything that follows. People carrying it describe being taken less seriously in emergency rooms, having physical complaints written off as attention seeking, and being turned away from treatment because they are presumed to be difficult. A 2022 scoping review of 57 studies in the International Journal of Mental Health Systems found repeated reports of practitioners avoiding or refusing care to people with the diagnosis, and a culture in emergency and acute mental health services that questions whether the diagnosis is even treatable.
Some clinicians still use "borderline" as shorthand for a patient they find frustrating, whether or not anyone formally assessed them. Once that word is in a record, it tends to stay there, and it travels to every provider who opens the file. The person may have changed completely in the meantime. The chart has not.
When I write a diagnosis, I am writing something other people will read for years, often without ever meeting the person. I owe my clients a description that is accurate and that will not cost them care later. In most cases, describing the trauma, the mood symptoms, and the attachment pattern directly does that better than a personality label does.
Most people grow out of the symptoms, which a personality disorder is not supposed to do
A personality disorder is defined as an enduring pattern. BPD does not behave like one.
The McLean Study of Adult Development followed a group of people hospitalized with a BPD diagnosis for 16 years. By the end, 99 percent had achieved a remission lasting at least two years, and 78 percent had a remission lasting at least eight years. Some people relapsed, about a third of those whose remission had lasted two years, but only one in ten of those whose remission had lasted eight. The Collaborative Longitudinal Personality Disorders Study found that impulsivity in people with the diagnosis declined after age 40, and suicidal behavior declined after 30.
My clinical impression matches that. Most of the people I have known with these symptoms in their twenties have found their footing by their forties. They learn how to stay in a relationship through an argument. They find people who do not leave. The emergency feeling that used to drive them softens because life stops confirming it.
I want to be honest about the other half of the McLean findings. Symptom remission came much more easily than full recovery, which the researchers defined as remission plus good social and work functioning. About 60 percent reached that by the 16-year mark. The symptoms fade, but years spent in crisis can cost education, jobs, and relationships that take longer to rebuild. That is an argument for good treatment early. It is not an argument for a permanent label.
What I do instead of writing the label
The treatments developed for BPD work, and I use what helps. Dialectical behavior therapy teaches concrete skills for riding out intense emotion without acting on it, and those skills help people regardless of what the chart says. Mentalization-based therapy and schema therapy have good evidence too. None of them require the person to accept that their personality is disordered in order to benefit.
What I focus on is the history and the pattern. Where did you learn that people leave? What happens in your body in the minute before you send the text you regret? What did anger protect you from when you were small? For many people, trauma-focused work, including EMDR, reaches the material underneath the reactions, and the reactions settle once that material is processed. The work I do in trauma, PTSD, and abuse recovery therapy often looks a lot like what other clinicians would call BPD treatment. I just don't start by telling someone their personality is the problem.
If you already carry the diagnosis, you are allowed to question it. You can ask a new provider to reassess. You can ask what specifically in your history and current life supports it. If you are in crisis right now, call or text 988 in the United States. That is true whatever label you have or don't have.
The bottom line
Borderline personality disorder describes a recognizable kind of suffering, and the people who have it are suffering. But the label explains very little, falls hardest on people who were already hurt or dismissed, follows them long after the symptoms fade, and describes as permanent something most people outgrow. I would rather describe what happened to someone and what it taught them than describe what is wrong with who they are.
If you have been carrying this diagnosis and want to talk with someone who will look at your history instead of your label, a free consultation is a reasonable place to find out whether we would be a good fit.
Keep Reading
Related articles
COVID Was a Shared Trauma. Why Isn't Anyone Asking You About It?
