Funding the Wrong Studies
A good bit of research money has gone into trying to "prove" whether or not DID is real. In ridiculous ways much money has been prioritized towards dispelling myths about diagnosed disorders so the public (and detractors) will believe in it. This is not something that research funding should go to. It's rare to go through this rigamarole with other DSM-based disorders, so it's ridiculous to be funding research which does not further the goals of reducing misdiagnosis and shortening the recovery period for plurals (and for taxpayers/insurance savings) so they can lead a more comfortable and self-directed life.
Also studies do not include plurals or plural professionals on their teams, so there's often other issues with the studies that could be cleared up with some additional input from knowledgable plurals being added on to teams to review whether research is recovery-oriented, stigmatizing, SMART, whether it goes counter to expert-by-experience knowledge bases, and whether it really will benefit the subject population. The mental health recovery movement adage "Nothing about us without us!" goes for studies and research as well. There is no good reason to exclude plurals from teams except that professionals don't even think to include them (and are ashamed to admit they didn't even think of it). The expert-by-experience could be volunteers or consultants depending on funding sources, and built directly into grant funding.
The plural movement demands the right to review research study applications before they are funded, to be included on the teams when plurals (DID, DDNOS, dissociative disorders, P-DID, and by extension we demand that people with schizophrenia — potentially voice-hearers &/or misdiagnosed — be involved in schizophrenia studies, etc.) are involved from the planning phase onwards. Being 1-3% of the population it shouldn't be too hard to find us, and we can always point you towards more qualified members of our community.