I will discuss the currently popular & widely accepted treatment methods, which divide into three main groups: supportive, psychodynamic (or “psychoanalytically-oriented”), and cognitive-behavioral. Many of the methods are known by acronyms – usually 3-letter designations likes TFP (transference-focused psychotherapy), MBT (mentalization-based therapy), CBT (cognitive-behavioral), DBT (dialectic-behavioral therapy), SBT (schema-based therapy)… Recently, it has become fashionable to embark upon “randomized controlled trials” (RCTs) – where one of the “acronym” methods is pitted against supportive therapy (or “treatment-as-usual”//TAU) to see which is more effective in, say, reducing the tendency to suicidal behaviors. RCTs are of necessity of short duration and use small numbers of patients. They therefore address just the “symptom” aspect of BPD, not the more subtle personality-disturbances (anger, social awkwardness, insecure attachment-style, cognitive peculiarities like dissociative episodes, over-valued ideas, all-or-none-thinking, etc). It takes many years for those personality abnormalities to resolve – and by that time (5 to 15 or more years) borderline patients have not remained with the same therapist or even with the same treatment method during all that time. Yet the majority improve appreciably, though there is a substantial suicide risk, especially among the adolescent/young adult borderlines. My point is: one needs to be grounded in one type of therapy, while at the same time remaining flexible, and able to use temporarily – other methods as certain needs arise. My final point is that it would be impossible to prove to a scientific certainty that a given BPD patient could ONLY have been helped by one particular method, and that the horse-race mentality of certain clinicians (my method is better than your method) is not valid, and should be replaced by a more flexible, integrated approach – that uses, as the occasion demands, whatever conduces best to the long-range betterment of each patient.