Trauma bonding is a complex emotional response that can develop in relationships characterized by abuse, trauma, and neglect. The term trauma bonds (also known as traumatic bonds) was coined by psychologists George Dutton and Susan Painter to describe emotional bonds with an individual (and sometimes a group) that result from a recurring, cyclical pattern of abuse perpetuated by intermittent reinforcement via rewards and punishments.
A trauma bond occurs when individuals experiencing ongoing mistreatment form deep emotional attachments to their abusers. Trauma bonding can happen in various types of relationships, including romantic relationships, friendships, and familial relationships. It is also seen in hostage situations, cults, kidnappers and their captors, military tours of duty, and manager-employee relationships.
A power imbalance between the abuser and the victim must exist for a trauma connection to persist, such that the abuser is in a position of power and authority while the victim is not. Inequity in power can cause diseases in individuals, which can strengthen the trauma bond. After receiving intermittent punishment from an abuser/dominator in a position of high power, the victim may internalize the abuser’s opinion of themselves.
Trauma Bonding vs Healthy Love
Trauma bonding differs significantly from healthy love. Key distinctions include:
- Equality: Healthy relationships are based on mutual respect and equal partnership, while trauma bonding is rooted in power imbalances and manipulation.
- Consistency: In a healthy relationship, love and affection are consistently displayed, while trauma bonding involves intermittent reinforcement, with alternating affection and mistreatment.
- Communication: Open and honest communication is a hallmark of a healthy relationship, whereas communication in trauma bonding is often marked by dishonesty, secrecy, and fear.
- Boundaries: Healthy relationships respect and maintain personal boundaries, while trauma bonding is defined by boundary violation and control.
It is important to acknowledge that the situation is rarely black and white. Relationships have many gray areas, and abusive spouses might occasionally be genuinely caring.
You most likely wouldn’t stay if your partner consistently used abusive language and showed no regard or kindness. Stated differently, the positive conduct cultivates the attachment that exacerbates the agony and difficulty of leaving an abusive partner.
Terror, dominance, and unpredictability are the foundations of trauma connections. As the trauma bond between an abuser and a victim grows stronger and deeper, it causes conflicting sensations of alarm, numbness, and grief to emerge in a cyclical pattern. Victims in trauma connections frequently lack agency and autonomy, as well as a distinct sense of self.
Understanding the Cycle of Abuse
The cycle of abuse is a specific pattern of behaviour used by abusers to gain and maintain control over their victims. This pattern typically consists of three phases: tension-building, explosive, and honeymoon.
During the tension-building phase, the abuser begins to exhibit signs of frustration and annoyance. The victim often tries to placate the abuser to avoid conflict. In the explosive phase, the abuser displays verbally or physically aggressive behaviour, seeking to establish control.
The first event of abuse is frequently viewed as an outlier, a one-time occurrence at the start of a seemingly healthy and good relationship that is generally not very serious. Furthermore, the abuser’s demonstration of tenderness and concern following the occurrence calms the victim and gives them hope that the abuse will not happen again.
Finally, the honeymoon phase occurs when the abuser expresses remorse, promising change, and showering the victim with affection and attention. However, repeated incidents of abuse and maltreatment cause a cognitive shift in the victim’s mind: that preventing emotional abuse is within their ability. When the inescapability of the abuse becomes clear, the emotional trauma bond is already strong.
The hypothesis of cognitive dissonance may explain the persistence of a trauma link. This hypothesis proposes that when people perceive a conflict between their beliefs and their actions, they are motivated to diminish or remove the inconsistency in order to reduce psychological distress.
Victims may distort their perceptions of the trauma and violence to maintain a positive view of the relationship. This may involve rationalizing the abuser’s behaviour, providing justifications, downplaying the impact of the abuser’s violence, and blaming oneself.
Gaslighting and Love Bombing
Two common tactics used in the cycle of abuse are gaslighting and love bombing. Gaslighting is a form of narcissistic abuse that involves maliciously convincing you that you are completely wrong about something.
It involves manipulative actions by the abuser, which cause the victim to question their reality and doubt their perceptions. The abuser may frequently lie and create false justifications for their behaviour.
Love bombing involves showering the victim with excessive affection, praise, and attention in the early stages of a relationship and after abusive incidents to regain control and manipulate the victim’s emotional vulnerability.
Signs of Trauma Bonding
Trauma bonding results from the repetitive cycle of abuse, with intermittent reinforcement of reward and punishment behaviours creating a strong emotional attachment to the abusive person. It’s crucial to recognize the signs of trauma bonding in order to break free from this cycle. Some indicators include:
- Feeling an overwhelming emotional attachment to the abuser despite their harmful behaviour
- Rationalizing or minimizing the abuser’s actions
- Confusing abuse with love and care
- Difficulty leaving the relationship due to fear of what the abuser might do
Impacts of Trauma Bonding
Trauma bonding has significant effects on an individual’s mental health. It is often associated with feelings of depression and anxiety stemming from the emotional and psychological manipulation within the relationship.
An individual in a trauma bond can experience diminished self-worth, constant self-doubt, and feelings of hopelessness. These negative emotions can lead to a cycle of dependency on the abusive person, further strengthening the bond.
Attachment bonds established in early childhood form the basis for future interpersonal relationships, interactions, personality traits, and mental health. Typically, infants develop attachments with their parents or immediate caregivers.
Psychologist Harry Harlow’s research on monkeys demonstrated that infant monkeys formulate attachment bonds even with abusive mothers. The abusive ‘mother’ in his experimental setup was a fabric monkey who delivered mild shocks to the infant monkey or flung the infant monkey across the arena.
These results apply to human attachment bonds as well. Even in situations where immediate caregivers are abusive, human neonates still tend to attach to them – rejection from a caregiver only enhances the efforts to increase proximity to them and establish an attachment bond with them.
Perpetuation
People who have experienced abuse in trauma and traumatic relationships can perpetuate the cycle of abuse knowingly or unknowingly. In other words, victims who have developed a trauma bond with their abusers may develop into abusers themselves. Abuse perpetrated by victims may or may not involve trauma bonding.
For example, in a 2018 study of convicted child murderers, researchers discovered that caregivers who committed child homicide (murdered their child/care-receiver) had traumatic experiences and trauma bonds with abusers in their childhood.
Individuals who have cruel and/or dismissive caregivers are more likely to develop insecure attachments, which can lead to a variety of problems, including emotion dysregulation and a confused attitude toward the caregiver, who becomes a source of comfort as well as fear.
These harmful attachments can also manifest in a person’s relationship with their own offspring. Attachment issues and traumatic memories of trauma bonds with their own caregivers can be triggered, leading to increased and disproportionate aggression towards their child.
Long-Term Health Consequences
The long-term health consequences of trauma bonding are vast and can greatly impact an individual’s overall well-being. Some of these consequences include:
- Chronic stress: The persistent, high levels of stress experienced by those in trauma bonds can compromise their immune system, leading to an increased risk of various health issues.
- Psychological disorders: Prolonged exposure to the abusive behaviour of a trauma bond can lead to the development of mental health disorders, such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), bipolar disorders, depression, anxiety and other mood disorders.
- Physical symptoms: Trauma bonds can cause physical symptoms, including sleep disturbances, headaches, and digestive issues, which may exacerbate existing health issues
Stockholm Syndrome
Stockholm syndrome and the concept of trauma bonding are frequently confused.
Although there are similarities between the two, particularly in the context of developing an emotional connection with one’s abuser, trauma bonding and Stockholm syndrome are distinct. The primary distinction lies in the relationship’s directionality.
In contrast to a trauma bond, in which only the victim develops an emotional attachment to the perpetrator, Stockholm syndrome is bidirectional. In other words, in the case of Stockholm syndrome, the emotional connection is reciprocal, such that the abuser also appears to develop an emotional bond with the abused and harbour positive emotions for the abused.
References:
- Dekel B, Abrahams N, Andipatin M (2018-05-23). van Wouwe JP (ed.). Exploring adverse parent-child relationships from the perspective of convicted child murderers: A South African qualitative study. PLOS ONE. 13 (5): e0196772. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0196772
- Dutton DG, Painter SL (1983). Traumatic Bonding: The Development of Emotional Attachments in Battered Women and Other Relationships of Intermittent Abuse. Victimology. 6 (1–4): 139–155
- Dutton, Donald G.; Painter, Susan (1993). Emotional attachments in abusive relationships: a test of traumatic bonding theory. Violence and Victims. 8 (2): 105–20. doi:10.1891/0886-6708.8.2.105
- Festinger L (October 1962). Cognitive dissonance. Scientific American. 207 (4): 93–102. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican1062-93
- Harlow, Harry F. (1958). The nature of love. American Psychologist. American Psychological Association (APA). 13 (12): 673–685. doi:10.1037/h0047884
- Lawson DM, Akay-Sullivan S (2020-08-17). Considerations of Dissociation, Betrayal Trauma, and Complex Trauma in the Treatment of Incest. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse. 29 (6): 677–696. doi:10.1080/10538712.2020
- Marshall M, Shannon C, Meenagh C, Mc Corry N, Mulholland C (March 2018). The association between childhood trauma, parental bonding and depressive symptoms and interpersonal functioning in depression and bipolar disorder. Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine. 35 (1): 23–32. doi:10.1017/ipm.2016.43