Carver, J. M.: Love and Stockholm Syndrome: The Mystery of Loving an Abuser,at
http://www.mental-health-matters.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=167.
Joseph Carter’s article on mind control in interpersonal relationships has become a minor Internet classic, probably because it grapples with a relatively common form of grief in our dominance-and-submission-oriented society… and it’s widely available at no cost.
In recent years, many have come to see Stockholm Syndrome as an extreme form of codependence involving a selfish, self-obsessed, controlling narcissistic rescuer / persecutor and a selfless, other-obsessed, controlled dependent who’s come to see the dominance as “natural and normal.”
Carver’s original text is in black; my comments are in dark red.On August 23rd, 1973 two machine-gun carrying criminals entered a bank in Stockholm, Sweden. Blasting their guns, one prison escapee named Jan-Erik Olsson announced to the terrified bank employees "The party has just begun!" The two bank robbers held four hostages, three women and one man, for the next 131 hours
[about five and one-half days]. The hostages were strapped with dynamite and held in a bank vault until finally rescued on August 28th.
After their rescue, the hostages exhibited a shocking attitude considering they were threatened, abused, and feared for their lives for over five days. In their media interviews, it was clear that they supported their captors and actually feared law enforcement personnel who came to their rescue. The hostages had begun to feel the captors were actually protecting them from the police. One woman later became engaged to one of the criminals and another developed a legal defense fund to aid in their criminal defense fees. Clearly, the hostages had "bonded" emotionally with their captors.
While the psychological condition in hostage situations became known as "Stockholm Syndrome" due to the publicity – the emotional "bonding" with captors was a familiar story in psychology. It had been recognized many years before and was found in studies of other hostage, prisoner, or abusive situations such as:
Abused Children
Battered/Abused Women
Prisoners of War
Cult Members
Incest Victims
Criminal Hostage Situations
Concentration Camp Prisoners
Controlling/Intimidating Relationships
…bonding with an abuser is actually a strategy for survival for victims of abuse and intimidation. The "Stockholm Syndrome" reaction in hostage and/or abuse situations is so well recognized at this time that police hostage negotiators no longer view it as unusual. In fact, it is often encouraged in crime situations as it improves the chances for survival of the hostages. On the down side, it also assures that the hostages experiencing "Stockholm Syndrome" (SS) will not be very cooperative during rescue or criminal prosecution. Local law enforcement personnel have long recognized this syndrome with battered women who fail to press charges, bail their battering husband/boyfriend out of jail, and even physically attack police officers when they arrive to rescue them from a violent assault.
SS has occurred in males bonded with abusive females, as well. My personal experience with this includes the dedicated “rescuer” (the “white knight” position on the Karpman Drama Triangle; see http://sighkoblahgrr.blogspot.com/2009/04/karpman-drama-triangle-summary.html)
of a two-time murderess. He paid her legal expenses during the second murder case and continued to foot the bills for her parole motions despite having been beaten over the head by her with a tire iron (see http://www.palmspringslife.com/Palm-Springs-Life/Whispering-Palms/The-Black-Widow-of-Rancho-Mirage/index.php).
Stockholm Syndrome can also be found in family, romantic, and interpersonal relationships. The abuser may be a husband or wife, boyfriend or girlfriend, father or mother, or any other role in which the abuser is in a position of control or authority. Once the syndrome is understood, it's easier to understand why victims support, love, and even defend their abusers and controllers.
Every syndrome has symptoms or behaviors and Stockholm Syndrome is no exception… several of these features will be present:
1) Positive feelings by the victim toward the abuser/controller
2) Negative feelings by the victim toward family, friends, or authorities trying to rescue/support them or win their release
3) Support of the abuser's reasons and behaviors
4) Positive feelings by the abuser toward the victim
5) Supportive behaviors by the victim, at times helping the abuser
6) Inability to engage in behaviors that may assist in their release or detachment
It has been found that four situations or conditions are present that serve as a foundation for the development of Stockholm Syndrome. These four situations can be found in hostage-taking, severe abuse, and abusive relationships:
1) The presence of a perceived threat to one's physical or psychological survival and the belief that the abuser would carry out the threat.
2) The presence of a perceived small kindness from the abuser to the victim.
3) Isolation from perspectives other than those of the abuser.
4) The perceived inability to escape the situation.
The veteran cult deprogrammer will immediately recognize that every one of the four circumstances is identical to those found in mind-control cults. The interpersonal dynamic is, in fact, virtually identical, even if it is “dressed” differently.
By considering each situation we can understand how Stockholm Syndrome develops in romantic relationships as well as criminal/hostage situations. Looking at each situation:
1) Perceived threat to one's physical/psychological survival
The perception of threat can be formed by direct, indirect, or witnessed methods. Criminal or antisocial partners can directly threaten your life or the life of friends and family. Their history of violence leads us to believe that the captor/controller will carry out the threat in a direct manner if we fail to comply with their demands. The abuser assures us that only our cooperation keeps our loved ones safe.
Indirectly, the abuser/controller offers subtle threats [to prevent being abandoned or resisted], reminding you that people in the past have paid dearly for not following their wishes. Hints are often offered such as "I know people who can make others disappear." Indirect threats also come from the stories told by the abuser or controller – how they obtained revenge on those who have crossed them in the past. These stories of revenge are told to remind the victim that revenge is possible if they leave.
Witnessing violence or aggression is also a perceived threat. Witnessing a violent temper directed at a television set, others on the highway, or a third party clearly sends us the message that we could be the next target for violence. Witnessing the thoughts and attitudes of the abuser/controller is threatening and intimidating, knowing that we will be the target of those thoughts in the future.
2) The "Small Kindness" Perception
In threatening and survival situations, we look for evidence of hope – a small sign that the situation may improve. When an abuser/controller shows the victim some small kindness, even though it is to the abusers benefit as well, the victim interprets that small kindness as a positive trait of the captor. In criminal/war hostage situations, letting the victim live is often enough. Small behaviors, such as allowing a bathroom visit or providing food/water, are enough to strengthen SS in criminal hostage events.
In relationships with abusers, a birthday card, a gift (usually provided after a period of abuse), or a special treat are interpreted as not only positive, but evidence that the abuser is not "all bad" and may at some time correct his/her behavior. Abusers and controllers are often given positive credit for not abusing their partner, when the partner would have normally been subjected to verbal or physical abuse in a certain situation. An aggressive and jealous partner may normally become intimidating or abusive in certain social situations, as when an opposite-sex coworker waves in a crowd. After seeing the wave, the victim expects to be verbally battered and when it doesn't happen, that "small kindness" is interpreted as a positive sign.
In SS victims with whom I’ve worked during their continued participation in and abusive relationship, several believed that any small kindness was positive proof that abusive partner truly loved and was genuinely concerned about them despite repeated and severe verbal and/or physical abuse. The patients often argued very energetically about this, clearly believing in a distorted view of reality not supported by other family members and/or friends.
Similar to the small kindness perception is the perception of a "soft side."
In working with several employees of a “tag-team” pair of charismatic “good cop” and verbally abusive “bad cop” bosses, it became evident that many believed that both bosses had a “soft side.” Five of the six employees had very evident drug, alcohol and eating disorder problems, by the way, as did the “bad cop” boss.
During the relationship, the abuser/controller may share information about their past – how they were mistreated, abused, neglected, or wronged. The victim begins to
[believe they may be capable of “fixing” the abuser/controller’s behavior]… or worse yet, that they (abuser) may also be a "victim"
[as described by the characteristics of the position at the bottom corner of the Karpman Drama Triangle]. Sympathy may develop toward the abuser and we often hear the victim of SS defending their abuser with "I know he fractured my jaw and ribs…but he's troubled. He had a rough childhood!"
…abusers may admit they need psychiatric help or acknowledge they are mentally disturbed, however, it's almost always after they have already abused or intimidated the victim
[for years or even decades]. The admission is a way of denying responsibility for the abuse. In truth,
[those with personality disorders, including criminals] have learned over the years that personal responsibility for their violent/abusive behaviors can be minimized and even denied by blaming their bad upbringing, abuse as a child, and now - video games. One murderer blamed his crime on eating too much junk food – now known as the "Twinkie Defense."
The personality disorders most commonly seen among SS abusers include those in the “aggressive” Cluster B of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Axis II. Almost all are narcissistic or subtypes thereof, including antisocial, sociopathic, psychopathic, sadistic and/or sadomasochistic. Most victims of SS tend toward the “submissive” Cluster C in Axis II, which includes dependent, avoidant, depressive and obsessive-compulsive personalities. (See http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/personality-disorders/DS00562/DSECTION=symptoms and http://www.merck.com/mmpe/sec15/ch201/ch201a.html.)
The narcissist tends to believe “what’s mine is mine and what’s yours is mine, too.” The dependent tends to believe “what’s mine is yours if it will buy me some sense of security.”
While it may be true that the abuser/controller had a difficult upbringing,
[a show by the victim of] sympathy for his/her history produces no change in their behavior and in fact, prolongs the abuse. While "sad stories" are always included in their apologies after the abusive/controlling event, their behavior never changes. Keep in mind; once you become hardened to the sad stories, they will simply try another approach.
3) Isolation from Perspectives Other than those of the Captor
In abusive and controlling relationships, the victim has the sense they are always "walking on eggshells," fearful of saying or doing anything that might prompt a violent/intimidating outburst. For [what they believe to be] their survival, they begin to see the world through the abuser's perspective. They begin to fix things that might prompt an outburst, act in ways they know makes the abuser happy, or avoid aspects of their own life that may prompt a problem. If we only have a dollar in our pocket, then most of our decisions become financial decisions. If our partner is an abuser or controller, then the majority of our decisions are based on our perception of the abuser's potential reaction. We become preoccupied with the needs, desires, and habits of the abuser/controller.
In more than 30 years of work with cult survivors, as well as with battered wives and other victims of interpersonal mind control, investigation of the victim’s early life nearly always turns up a parent, older sibling, grandparent or other significant caregiver or early life authority figure who was highly invasive, demanding, controlling and/or threatening. Most survivors of SS and other forms of interpersonal mind control appear to me to have learned to seek out new controllers, in large part because they grew up believing that they did not have to capacity to make the choices required to manage their own lives.
The presence of this belief – associated with a sense of both threat and hopelessness – in so many victims of SS is what leads most modern therapists to utilize a combination of cognitive restructuring and sensory exposure therapies to unravel the typical emotion-and-belief system of most SS, spousal abuse, cult and other mind-control victims. Cognitive restructuring is little more than identifying, questioning and revising self-talk (as in SIQR; see http://sighkoblahgrr.blogspot.com/2009/11/siqr-for-new-users-and-other-lay.html); sensory exposure is “sitting still and feeling what you feel,” more or less as in mindfulness meditation (see http://www.amazon.com/Coming-Our-Senses-Mindfulness-ebook/dp/B000FC2PNS/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259287065&sr=8-2, and the easily and quickly learned, fast-acting “drop drill;” see http://sighkoblahgrr.blogspot.com/2009/11/drop-drill-for-withdrawal-from-painful.html).
Taking the abuser's perspective as a survival technique can become so intense that the victim actually develops anger toward those trying to help them. The abuser is already angry and resentful toward anyone who would provide the victim support, typically using multiple methods and manipulations to isolate the victim from others. Any contact the victim has with supportive people in the community is met with accusations, threats, and/or violent outbursts.
Victims then turn on their family, fearing family contact will cause additional violence and abuse in the home. At this point, victims curse their parents and friends, tell them not to call and stop interfering, and break off communication with others. Agreeing with the abuser/controller, supportive others are now viewed as "causing trouble" and must be avoided. Many victims threaten their family and friends with restraining orders if they continue to "interfere" or try to help the victim in their situation.
Again, this is often precisely what occurs during the deprogramming of religious and/or mind-control cult members. (Therapists beware: Working with such people is often a litigation minefield in which licenses and/or certifications are often suspended or even lost altogether, especially when the SS abuser, cult or religious sect has “lawyers, guns and money.”)On the surface it would appear that they have sided with the abuser/controller. In truth, they are trying to minimize contact situation that might make them a target of additional verbal abuse or intimidation. If a casual phone call from Mom prompts a two-hour temper outburst with threats and accusations, the victim quickly realizes it's safer if Mom stops calling. If simply telling Mom to stop calling doesn't work, for his or her own safety the victim may accuse Mom of attempting to ruin the relationship and demand that she stop calling.
In my own experience, the break-with-family pattern is more likely if the SS abuser or cult has material wealth and/or the original role model of invasive, boundary-breeching, abusive, demanding, shaming, guilt-heaping control remains invasive, boundary-breeching, abusive, demanding, shaming, guilt-heaping and/or controlling. Because the victim has come to perceive greater reward and less punishment with the new victimizer / rescuer / persecutor (refer again to the Karpman Drama Triangle), the original victimizer / rescuer / persecutor will be far more accurately perceived than his or her current replacement.
This presents a second potential minefield for the therapist / deprogrammer. Successful interventions may require considerable deprogramming of those who =hired= the therapist in the first place. I usually start with the Karpman Drama Triangle as an explanatory tool, strongly endorse reading of Pia Mellody’s Facing Codependence (see http://www.amazon.com/Facing-Codependence-Where-Comes-Sabotages/dp/0062505890/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259288026&sr=1-1) and/or any or (better yet) all of Patricia Evans’s four books (see http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_1_14?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=patricia+evans+books&sprefix=Patricia+Evans).
In severe cases of Stockholm Syndrome in relationships, the victim may have difficulty leaving the abuser and may actually feel the abusive situation is their fault. In law enforcement situations, the victim may actually feel the arrest of their partner for physical abuse or battering is their fault. Some women will allow their children to be removed by child protective agencies rather than give up the relationship with their abuser. As they take the perspective of the abuser, the children are at fault: they complained about the situation, they brought the attention of authorities to the home, and they put the adult relationship at risk.
Sadly, the children have now become a danger to the victim's safety. For those with Stockholm Syndrome, allowing the children to be removed from the home decreases their victim stress while providing an emotionally and physically safer environment for the children.
In a significant percentage of SS cases, the children are also being victimized by the abuser. Many are battered and/or sexually abused. Abusers, after all, abuse. They do not tend to be selective, especially among those “under their thumbs.”4) Perceived Inability to Escape
As a hostage in a bank robbery, threatened by criminals with guns, it's easy to understand the perceived inability to escape. In romantic relationships, the belief that one can't escape is also very common. Many abusive/controlling relationships feel like till-death-do-us-part relationships; locked together by mutual financial issues/assets, mutual intimate knowledge, or legal situations.
As with other cognitive schemas (beliefs, evaluations, interpretations, appraisals, etc.) about powerlessness, helplessness and/or hopelessness, SIQR and the other cognitive restructuring therapies are designed to help the SS or cult victim identify, question and revise their inaccurate self-talk. Martin Seligman’s work on the topic of “learned helplessness” is germane here (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness), as are Wayne Dyer’s many popular books on one’s “erroneous zones.”
Many SS survivors are initially very surprised to discover how they learned to believe themselves to be helpless, hopeless and powerless, especially after asserting that they are “no such thing.” In my experience, one out of three SS and three out of four mind-control cult victims will assert themselves to be anything but helpless, hopeless and powerless unless or until they are through the denial / pre-contemplation and contemplation / consideration phases and well into the acceptance / self-identification phase of recovery from their ardently denied victimization.
Here are some common situations:
Controlling partners have increased the financial obligations and/or debt in the relationship to the point that neither partner can financially survive on their own. Controllers who sense their partner may be leaving will often purchase a new automobile, later claiming they can't pay alimony or child support due to their large car payments.
The legal ending of a relationship, especially a martial relationship, often creates significant problems. A Controller who has an income that is "under the table" or maintained through legally questionable situations runs the risk of those sources of income being investigated or made public by the divorce/separation. The Controller then becomes more agitated about the possible public exposure of their business arrangements than the loss of the relationship.
The Controller often uses extreme threats including threatening to take the children out of state, threatening to quit their job/business rather than pay alimony/support, threatening public exposure of the victim's personal issues, or assuring the victim they will never have a peaceful life due to nonstop harassment. In severe cases, the Controller may threaten an action that will undercut the victim's support such as "I'll see that you lose your job" or "I'll have your automobile burned".
Controllers often keep the victim locked into the relationship with severe guilt – threatening suicide if the victim leaves. The victim hears "I'll kill myself in front of the children", "I'll set myself on fire in the front yard", or "Our children won't have a father/mother if you leave me!"
In relationships with an abuser or controller, the victim has also experienced a loss of self-esteem, self-confidence, and psychological energy. The victim may feel "burned out" and too depressed to leave. Additionally, abusers and controllers often create a type of dependency by controlling the finances, placing automobiles or homes in their name, and eliminating any assets or resources the victim may use to leave. In clinical practice I've heard "I'd leave, but I can't even get money out of the savings account! I don't know the PIN number."
In teens and young adults, victims may be attracted to a controlling individual when they feel inexperienced, insecure, and overwhelmed by a change in their life situation. When parents are going through a divorce, a teen may attach to a controlling individual, feeling the controller may stabilize their life. Freshmen in college may be attracted to controlling individuals who promise to help them survive living away from home on a college campus.
In unhealthy relationships, and definitely in Stockholm Syndrome, there is a daily preoccupation with "trouble." Trouble is any individual, group, situation, comment, casual glance, or cold meal that may produce a temper tantrum or verbal abuse from the controller or abuser. To survive, "trouble" is to be avoided at all costs. The victim must control situations that produce trouble.
That may include avoiding family, friends, co-workers, and anyone who may create "trouble" in the abusive relationship. The victim does not hate family and friends; they are only avoiding "trouble." The victim also cleans the house, calms the children, scans the mail, avoids certain topics, and anticipates every issue of the controller or abuse in an effort to avoid "trouble". In this situation, children who are noisy become "trouble." Loved ones and friends are sources of "trouble" for the victim who is attempting to avoid verbal or physical aggression.
Again with regard to the early life experiences that condition many victims to accept control and abuse from partners, bosses or co-workers, most SS victims I have encountered pretty much the dynamics described above in their “families of origin.” For most of them, the controller/abuser’s behavior seems “normal,” “natural,” “expectable”… and acceptable. The victims were “normalized” to the SS dynamics in their lives at an age too early for them to question or wonder about them. The concept of normalization is described in depth in the anonymously written Fellowship Text of Adult Children of Alcoholics, the relatively new “big book” of one of faster-growing 12 Step self-help groups (see http://www.adultchildren.org/lit/Handbook.s).
Stockholm Syndrome in relationships is not uncommon. Law enforcement professionals are painfully aware of the situation, making a domestic dispute one of the highest-risk calls during work hours. Called by neighbors during a spousal abuse incident, the abuser is passive upon arrival of the police, only to find the abused spouse upset and threatening the officers if their abusive partner is arrested for domestic violence. In truth, the victim knows the abuser/controller will retaliate against him/her if, 1) they encourage an arrest, 2) they offer statements about the abuse/fight that are deemed disloyal by the abuser, 3) they don't bail them out of jail as quickly as possible, and 4) they don't personally apologize for the situation – as though it was their fault.
In many jurisdictions, the concepts described in this article are taught in police and sheriff’s academies. Most recently trained law enforcement officers are taught to look past what is being said, recognize the victim and abuser for who and what they are, and look for evidence of physical abuse (e.g.: fresh bruises, bleeding, swelling, burns) in the children as well as in the spousal victim.
While it is statistically far more likely that the victim will be a female, it is not always the case. The ratio I have heard in most presentations is four or five to one, meaning that officers see the signs of victimization in many males during domestic disturbance calls. Working with court-mandated anger-management group populations, it becomes clear in a hurry that female victimizers are not at all unusual.
Stockholm Syndrome produces an unhealthy
[sadomasochistic: of, relating to, involving, or exhibiting the deriving of pleasure, especially sexual gratification, from inflicting or submitting to physical or emotional abuse] bond with the controller and abuser. It is the reason many victims continue to support an abuser after the relationship is over. It's also the reason they continue to see "the good side" of an abusive individual and appear sympathetic to someone who has mentally and sometimes physically abused them.
Sadomasochism is the bedrock of all chronically abusive, SS-style relationships. While the term is widely confused with sexual bondage and dominance, it more accurately refers to the punishing, abusive and even violent results of an ongoing state of dominance and submission between two or more people (see http://www.amazon.com/Sadomasochism-Everyday-Life-Dynamics-Powerlessness/dp/0813518083).
It also refers to the value- and experience-driven interpersonal behavior of many adults who were victims of SS in childhood. The abused child may come to feel “powerless,” “helpless” and/or “hopeless.” He may also come to feel very resentful and angry. And the adult child within may turn that rage about his or her own victimization onto others when and if it becomes possible.
The contributing writers in Theodore Millon, et al’s, hugely influential Psychopathy: Antisocial, Criminal, and Violent Behavior portray case after case of child-abuse-induced sadism and interpersonally criminal behavior. Most mental health professionals with direct knowledge of prison incarcerees will point to child abuse (including abandonment and neglect) as the principle driving force back of criminal behavior (see http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/antisocial-personality-disorder/DS00829 and http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html).Is There Something Else Involved?
Carver’s theory of cognitive dissonance underlying the seemingly paradoxical thinking of the SS victim holds some water, so I have elected to retain it in this edited version of Carver’s original article. I have other ideas, however, and I will get to them.In a short response, yes! Throughout history, people have found themselves supporting and participating in life situations that range from abusive to bizarre. In talking to these active and willing participants in bad and bizarre situations, it is clear they have developed feelings and attitudes that support their participation. One way these feelings and thoughts are developed is known as "cognitive dissonance."
"Cognitive Dissonance" explains how and why people change their ideas and opinions to support situations that do not appear to be healthy, positive, or normal. In the theory, an individual seeks to reduce information or opinions that make him or her uncomfortable. When we have two sets of cognitions (knowledge, opinion, feelings, input from others, etc.) that are the opposite, the situation becomes emotionally uncomfortable. Even though we might find ourselves in a foolish or difficult situation, few want to admit that fact. Instead, we attempt to reduce the dissonance; the fact that our cognitions don't match, agree, or make sense when combined. "Cognitive Dissonance" can be reduced by adding new cognitions – adding new thoughts and attitudes.
Leon Festinger coined the term "Cognitive Dissonance"
[in the 1950s]. He had observed a cult in which members gave up their homes, incomes, and jobs to work for the cult. This cult believed in messages from outer space that predicted the day the world would end by a flood. As cult members and firm believers, they believed they would be saved by flying saucers at the appointed time. As they gathered and waited to be taken by flying saucers at the specified time, the end-of-the-world came and went. No flood and no flying saucer!
Rather than believing they were foolish after all that personal and emotional investment – they decided their beliefs had actually saved the world from the flood and they became firmer in their beliefs after the failure of the prophecy. The moral: The more you invest (income, job, home, time, effort, etc.) the stronger your need to justify your position. If we invest $5.00 in a raffle ticket, we justify losing with "I'll get them next time". If you invest everything you have, it requires an almost unreasoning belief and unusual attitude to support and justify that investment.
Studies tell us we are more loyal and committed to something that is difficult, uncomfortable, and even humiliating. The initiation rituals of college fraternities, Marine boot camp, and graduate school all produce loyal and committed individuals. Almost any ordeal creates a bonding experience. Every couple, no matter how mismatched, falls in love in the movies after going through a terrorist takeover, being stalked by a killer, being stranded on an island, or being involved in an alien abduction. Investment and an ordeal are ingredients for a strong bonding, even if the bonding is unhealthy. No one bonds or falls in love by being a member of the Automobile Club or a music CD club. Struggling to survive on a deserted island; you bet!
Abusive relationships produce a great amount on unhealthy investment in both parties. In many cases we tend to remain and support the abusive relationship due to our investment in the relationship. Try telling a new Marine that since he or she has survived boot camp, they should now enroll in the National Guard! Several types of investments keep us in the bad relationship:
Emotional Investment: We've invested so many emotions, cried so much, and worried so much that we feel we must see the relationship through to the finish.
Social Investment: We've got our pride! To avoid social embarrassment and uncomfortable social situations, we remain in the relationship.
Family Investment: If children are present in the relationship, decisions regarding the relationship are clouded by the status and needs of the children.
Financial Investment: In many cases, the controlling and abusive partner has created a complex financial situation. Many victims remain in a bad relationship, waiting for a better financial situation to develop that would make their departure and detachment easier.
Lifestyle Investment: Many controlling/abusive partners use money or a lifestyle as an investment. Victims in this situation may not want to lose their current lifestyle.
Intimacy Investment: We often invest emotional and sexual intimacy. Some victims have experienced a destruction of their emotional and/or sexual self-esteem in the unhealthy relationship. The abusing partner may threaten to spread rumors or tell intimate details or secrets. A type of blackmail using intimacy is often found in these situations.
In many cases, it's not simply our feelings for an individual that keeps us in an unhealthy relationship; it's often the amount of investment. For this reason, the most common phrase offered by the victim in defense of their unhealthy relationship is "You just don't understand!"
While Carver’s notions about cognitive dissonance are applicable, cognitive theorists have come a long way since Festinger’s day. In modern parlance, the chronic victim of SS chooses to be a victim because of his acquired beliefs and values, and because he or she does not know what his or her acquired values are. “Values clarification” (see http://www.amazon.com/Values-Clarification-Dr-Sidney-Simon/dp/0446670952)
came into vogue in the 1980s as a means of determining what one’s core beliefs, ideals, assumptions, convictions and attitudes – therefore, values – are… and how those values determine how one will appraise, evaluate, interpret, analyze, consider, conceptualize, judge and/or attribute meaning to the world around him.
(One should credit Jeffrey Young for much of this, as well as Richard Wessler and Sheena Hankin; see http://www.amazon.com/Cognitive-Therapy-Personality-Disorders-Schema-Focused/dp/1568870477/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259298268&sr=1-3 and http://www.amazon.com/Succeeding-Difficult-Clients-Applications-Professional/dp/012744470X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259298330&sr=1-1).
As simply put as I can offer it, those who are sufficiently conscious of their values can elect…
1) to be relatively satisfied with them,
2) to make minor adjustments to them here and there, and/or
3) to identify, question, and revise their values…
...so that their appraisals, evaluations, interpretations, analyses, considerations, conceptualizations, judgments and/or attributions of meaning to the world around them are more accurate and serve them to produce more functional and effective behavior.
Combining Two Unhealthy Conditions
The combination of "Stockholm Syndrome" and "cognitive dissonance"
[as well as a lack of clarity about one’s values] produces a victim who firmly believes
[values] the relationship is not only acceptable, but also desperately needed for their survival. The victim feels
[actually, believes] they would mentally collapse if the relationship ended. In long-term relationships, the victims have invested everything and placed "all their eggs in one basket." The relationship now decides their level of self-esteem, self-worth, and emotional health.
While most of them deny it initially, many SS victims in heterosexual, romantic relationships actually believe that of the 3.35 billion people in the world of the opposite sex, their mate is the only one who could possibly “love” them. They simply cannot see that they have narrowed the field of possibilities from billions down to one.For reasons described above, the victim feels
[actually, believes] family and friends are a threat to the relationship and eventually to their personal health and existence. The more family and/or friends point out the controlling and abusive nature of the relationship, the more the victim leans on his or her cognitive dissonance
[and unclarified values] and
[defends his or her position that the relationship is “okay”]. At this point, family and friends become victims
[or “co-victims,” in the terminology of Codependents Anonymous; see http://www.codependents.org/core/index.php] of the abusive and controlling individual.
Importantly, both Stockholm Syndrome and cognitive dissonance
[and the unclarified values that support the cognitive dissonance and evaluation of their SS as “acceptable”] develop on an involuntary basis. The victim does not purposely invent this attitude. Both develop as an attempt to exist and survive in a threatening and controlling environment and relationship.
Despite what we might think, our loved one is not in the unhealthy relationship to irritate, embarrass, or drive us to drink. What might have began as a normal relationship has turned into a controlling and abusive situation. They are trying to survive. Their personality is developing the feelings and thoughts needed to survive the situation and lower their emotional and physical risks.
The co-dependent SS victim’s collection of fundamental beliefs appears to be, “I cannot survive on my own. I need to turn my will and my life over to someone else more powerful. I will be okay if I depend upon others for my sense of reality.”
The SS abuser’s (KDT "persecutor's") collection of fundamental beliefs appears to be, “I must control everyone and everything near me to feel safe and secure. My ideas are inherently correct. I know all the answers. Others must obey me if they want to be close to me.”All of us have developed attitudes and feelings that help us accept and survive situations. We have these attitudes/feelings about our jobs, our community, and other aspects of our life. As we have found throughout history, the more dysfunctional the situation, the more dysfunctional our adaptation and thoughts to survive. The victim is engaged in an attempt to survive and make a relationship work. Once they decide it doesn't work and can't be fixed, they will need our support as we patiently await their decision to return to a healthy and positive lifestyle.
At this point in Carver’s article, the author moves into a lengthy discussion of what the family members should and shouldn’t do around the victim and current abuser. I have deleted it for brevity because I want to focus on enlightening the victim to the exclusion of any suggestion of further dependence upon others, including the original abuser or abusers who are often still part of the family. Those who wish to see the deleted section can do so at http://www.mental-health-matters.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=167&limitstart=3.
Final Thoughts
You may be the victim of a controlling and abusive partner, seeking an understanding of your feelings and attitudes. You may have a son, daughter, or friend currently involved with a controlling and abusive partner, looking for ways to understand and help.
If a loved one is involved with… a controlling and abusing partner, the long-term outcome is difficult to determine due to the many factors involved. If their relationship is in the "dating" phase, they may end the relationship on their own. If the relationship has continued for over a year, they may require support and an exit plan before ending the relationship. Marriage and children [along with financial encumbrances and couple relationships with significant third parties] further complicate their ability to leave the situation. When the victim decides to end the unhappy relationship, it's important that they view loved ones as supportive, loving, and understanding, not a source of pressure, guilt, or aggression.
Carver’s final sentence above is significant. What I have seen again and again in the course of working with victims of this type is that family members attempt to gain access to the Karpman Drama Triangle (KDT) at the upper left “rescuer” position to displace the abuser to the upper right “persecutor” position while the abusee =remains= in the bottom “victim” corner (see http://sighkoblahgrr.blogspot.com/2009/04/karpman-drama-triangle-summary.html). As a direct result, the dynamics of the KDT are actually reinforced rather than dismantled.
Family interventions must be undertaken with the objective changing the paradigm (a set of assumptions, concepts, values, and practices that constitutes a way of viewing reality for the community that shares them) from rescuers, persecutors and victims to non-invasive supporters, functional adaptors and detached boundary setters (again described at http://sighkoblahgrr.blogspot.com/2009/04/karpman-drama-triangle-summary.html).
This article is an attempt to understand the complex feelings and attitudes that are as puzzling to the victim as they are to family and friends. I've outlined recommendations for detaching from a controlling / abusive individual (
http://www.drjoecarver.com/) but clearly, there are more victims in this situation. It is hoped this article is helpful to family and friends who worry, cry, and have difficulty understanding the situation of their loved one. It has been said that knowledge is power. Hopefully this knowledge will prove helpful and powerful to victims and their loved ones.
Please consider this article as a general guideline. Some recommendations may be appropriate and helpful while some may not apply to a specific situation. In many cases, we may need additional professional help of a mental health or legal nature.
Stockholm Syndrome describes what amounts to an addiction on the part of one person to another for the purpose of obtaining what is perceived by the victim to be vital to their well-being. The dynamics of SS are thus no different (at least in this respect, and many others) to any form of behavioral obsession, including self-destructive gambling, romance, sex, work, food, exercise or shopping.
The SS victim believes that his or her comfort is dependent upon obtaining the payoff of the addictive behavior. Without that payoff, the victim believes that he or she will suffer intolerable emotions he or she “cannot possibly stand.” So long as the payoff far outweighs the price, the relationship addict is likely to deny that the dynamic I have described here is in play.
The process of detaching and recovery from a controlling and/or abusive partner in a pseudo-romantic, marital, family, employment, cult, religious or other relationship is the same as for any other form of addiction. The formally schooled and experientially trained addictions counselor or psychotherapist will assist the recovering SS victim from seeing themselves as “normal” (if they are still in the denial / pre-contemplation phase), through “abnormal” (in the contemplation / consideration phase), through “victim” (in the acceptance / self-identification phase), onto “survivor” (in the commitment / action and maintenance / relapse recovery phases).
By now, I hope it’s becoming evident that removing the SS victim from the relationship, the cult, the employer, or the abusive family, is not the be-all and end-all of the problem. Those who come to believe from experiential learning that the rescuer, persecutor and victim positions on the KDT are “normal” have a continuing potential to (as Bessel Van der Kolk put it) “repeat the trauma” (see http://www.cirp.org/library/psych/vanderkolk/).
They will do so for the simple reason that their core beliefs, values, ideas, orientations, assumptions, convictions and attitudes remain the same, leading inexorably to the same kinds of appraisals, interpretations, evaluations, judgments, analyses and decisions about who they are and what they must do in life that got them into the trouble to begin with.
Current appraisals, interpretations, evaluations, judgments, analyses, attributions of meaning and decisions can be traced back to core beliefs, values, ideas, orientations, assumptions, convictions and attitudes with some form of cognitive therapy and critical thinking (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_therapy and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking). This is what occurs in the process of Self-talk (or Schema) Identification that make up the “SI” of SIQR therapy (see http://sighkoblahgrr.blogspot.com/2009/11/siqr-for-new-users-and-other-lay.html). Once the core beliefs, values, etc., are identified, they can be submitted to the five-step SIQR process that includes the Questioning and Revision stages (the “QR”) of SIQR.
Other forms of cognitive, cognitive-behavioral, cognitive appraisal and/or schema therapy (see Beck et al, Ellis et al, Wessler et al, and Young, respectively, in the References below) can be utilized for this purpose, of course. SIQR’s strength as compared to may of the older CBT therapies is that it can be so easily learned for self-administration by the SS survivor without having to buy another workbook, let alone return to a therapist for help.
Additionally, many recovering SS victims will benefit from using the Drop Drill (see http://sighkoblahgrr.blogspot.com/2007/10/drop-drill.html), another new therapy derived from mindfulness meditation (see Hayes et al, Kabat-Zinn, and Marra in the references) and other meditation practices, to work through the uncomfortable emotions (e.g.: sadness, rage, anxiety, grief, hatred) that usually come up during SS recovery.Finally, most SS victims on the way to becoming survivors will benefit from attending meetings of the 12 Step self-help groups Co-Dependents anonymous and Adult Children of Alcoholics (even if their parents were not alcoholics or substance abusers). Reading the literature and working the 12 Steps almost in variable turns up a treasure trove of clues leading to beliefs, values, ideas, assumptions, convictions and attitudes that can be worked through with SIQR or other forms of cognitive therapy.
Resources, References and Recommended Reading
Recommended reading for non-professionals is called out in blue.American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-III-R, New York: APA, 1987.
American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders DSM-IV-TR, New York: APA, 2000.
American Psychoanalytic Association et al: Psychodynamic Diagnostic Manual (PDM), Silver Spring, MD: Alliance of Psychoanalytic Organizations, 2006.
Anonymous: Adult Children of Alcoholics: Alcoholic / Dysfunctional Families, Torrance, CA: ACA World Service Office, 2006.
Anonymous: Co-Dependents Anonymous, Phoenix, AZ: Co-Dependents Anonymous, 1995.
Antony, M.; Swinson, R.: When Perfect Isn't Good Enough, Oakland, CA: New Harbinger, 1998, 2009.
Arsenault, L.; et al: Being Bullied as an Environmentally Mediated Contributing Factor to Children’s Internalizing Problems…, in in Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, Vol. 162, February, 2008.
Baumrind, D,: Current Patterns of Parental Authority, Monograph in Developmental Psychology, Volume 4, Number 1, Part 2, New York: American Psychological Association, 1971.
Beattie, M.: Codependent No More, San Francisco: Harper/Hazelden, 1987.
Beattie, M.: Beyond Codependency, San Francisco: Harper/Hazelden, 1989.
Beattie, M.: Codependents’ Guide to the Twelve Steps, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1990.
Beck, A.: Cognitive Therapy and the Emotional Disorders, New York: Penguin-Meridian, 1976.
Beck, A.; Freeman, A.: Cognitive Theory of the Personality Disorders, New York: Guilford Press, 1990.
Beck, A.: Prisoners Of Hate: The Cognitive Basis of Anger, Hostility, and Violence, New York: Harper-Collins, 1999.
Benjamin, L. S.: Interpersonal Diagnosis and Treatment of Personality Disorders, Second Edition, New York: Guilford Press, 1996.
Benjamin, L. S.: Interpersonal Reconstructive Therapy, New York: Guilford Press, 2003.
Berne, E.: Games People Play: The Psychology of Human Relationships, San Francisco: Grove Press, 1964.
Bernstein, A.: Emotional Vampires: Dealing with People who Drain You Dry, New York: McGraw-Hill, 2000.
Black, C.: It Will Never Happen to Me: Children of Alcoholics as Youngsters-Adolescents-Adults, New York: Ballentine, 1981, 1987.
Bowlby, J.: A Secure Base: Parent-Child Attachment and Healthy Human Development. London: Routledge; New York: Basic Books, 1988.
Branden, N.: The Disowned Self, New York: Bantam Books, 1976.
Branden, N.: The Psychology of Self-Esteem, New York: Bantam Books, 1973.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: The Effects of Childhood Stress Across the Lifespan, Atlanta, GA: CDC, 2008.
Cermak, T.: Diagnosing and Treating Co-Dependence, Minneapolis: Johnson Institute, 1986.
Cialdini, R.: Influence Science and Practice, 4th Ed., New York: Allyn and Bacon, 2000.
Clarkin, J.; Lenzenweger, M.: Major Theories of Personality Disorder, New York: The Guilford Press, 1996.
Courtois, C.: Guidelines for the Treatment of Adults Abused or Possibly Abused as Children (with Attention to Issues of Delayed or Recovered Memory), Washington, DC: The Psychiatric Institute of Washington, 1997.
Cross, K.: Reactive Attachment Disorder and Attachment Therapy, Kansas City: Kansas Attachment Center (online .pdf), 2005.
DeBellis, M.: Developmental Traumatology: Neurobiological Development in Maltreated Children with PTSD, in Psychiatric Times, Vol. 16, No. 11, 1999.
Dodes, L.: The Heart of Addiction: A New Approach to Understanding and Managing Alcoholism and Other Addictive Behaviors, New York: Harper & Rowe, 2002.
Ellis, A.; Harper, R.: A Guide to Rational Living, North Hollywood, CA: Melvin Powers, 1961.
Ellis, A.; Dryden, W.: The Practice of Rational Emotive Therapy, New York: Springer Publishing Company, 1987.
Ellis, A.: Overcoming Destructive Beliefs, Feelings, and Behaviors: New Directions for Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy, New York: Promethius Books, 2001.
Engle, B.: The Emotionally Abusive Relationship: How to Stop Being Abused and How to Stop Abusing, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2002.
Erikson, E.: Childhood and Society, New York: W. W. Norton, 1950, 1967, 1993.
Erikson, E.: Identity and the Life Cycle, New York: W. W. Norton, 1959, 1980.
Evans, F.: Harry Stack Sullivan: Interpersonal Theory and Psychotherapy, London: Routledge, 1996.
Evans, P.: The Verbally Abusive Relationship, Expanded Second Edition, Avon, MA: Adams Media Corp., 1996
Evans, P.: Controlling People, Avon, MA: Adams Media Corp., 2002.
Fairbairn, W.: An Object Relations Theory of the Personality, New York: Basic Books, 1952, 1984.
Fonagy, P.: Attachment Theory and Psychoanalysis, New York: Other Press, 2001.
Forward, S.: Toxic Parents: Overcoming their Hurtful Legacy and Reclaiming Your Life, New York: Bantam Books, 1989.
Fromm, E.: Escape from Freedom, New York: Avon, 1965.
Goleman, D.: Emotional Intelligence, New York: Bantam, 1980.
Gordon, T.: Parent Effectiveness Training: The Proven Program for Raising Responsible Children, New York: Three Rivers Press, 1970, 1975, 2000.
Grand, S.: The Reproduction of Evil: A Clinical & Cultural Perspective, Hillsdale, NJ: The Analytic Press, 2000.
Hare, R.: Without Conscience, New York: Guilford Press, 1993.
Hayes, S.; Follete, V.; Linehan, M.: Mindfulness and Acceptance: Expanding the Cognitive-Behavioral Tradition, New York: The Guilford Press, 2004.
Hoffer, E.: The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements, New York: Harper and Row, 1966.
Kabat-Zinn, J.: Mindfulness Meditation: Health benefits of an ancient Buddhist practice, in Goleman, D.; Gurin, J., editors: Mind/Body Medicine, New York: Consumer Reports Books, 1993.
Karpman, S.: Fairy tales and script drama analysis, in Transactional Analysis Bulletin, Vol. 7, No. 26, 1968.
Khantzian, E: The self medication hypothesis of substance use disorders: a reconsideration and recent applications, in Harvard Review of Psychiatry, Vol. 4, No. 5, Jan-Feb 1997.
Klee, T.: Eight Stages of Object Relations Therapy, online at ObjectRelations.org, 2001.
Kopp, S.: Guru: Metaphors from a Psychotherapist, New York: Bantam, 1976.
Korzybski, A.: Science and Sanity: An Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Semantics, 4th Ed., New York: Institute of General Semantics, 1958.
Laing, R. D.: Knots, New York: Penguin, 1973.
Lissette, A.; Kraus, R.: Free Yourself from an Abusive Relationship: 7 Steps to Taking Back Your Life, Alameda, CA: Hunter House, 2000.
Ludwig, D.; Kabat-Zinn, J.: Mindfulness in Medicine, in Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 300, No. 11, September 2008.
Lundin, R.: Alfred Adler's Basic Concepts And Implications, London: Routledge, 1989.
Madanes, C.: Sex, Love and Power: Strategies for Transformation; New York: W. W. Norton, 1990.
Mahler, M.; Pine, S.; Bergman, A.: The Psychological Birth of the Human Infant: Symbiosis and Individuation, New York: Basic Books, 1975.
Marra, T.: Dialectical Behavior Therapy in Private Practice, Oakland, CA: New Harbinger, 2005.
Masterson, J. (editor/author): The Personality Disorders Through the Lens of Attachment Theory and the Neurobiologic Development of the Self, Phoenix, AZ: Zeig, Tucker &Theisen, 2004.
Mellody, P.; Miller, A. W.: Facing Co-dependence…, San Francisco: Harper, 1989.
Mellody, P.: Miller, A. W.: Facing Love Addiction…, San Francisco, Harper, 1992.
Meloy, J. R.: The Psychopathic Mind: Origins, Dynamics, and Treatment, New York: Jason Aronson, 1994.
Miller, A.: For Your Own Good: Hidden Cruelty in Child Rearing and the Roots of Violence, London: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1983.
Millon, T.; Simonsen, E.; Birket-Smith, M.; Davis, R.: Psychopathy: Antisocial, Criminal, and Violent Behavior, Guilford Press, 1998.
Millon, T.; Grossman, S.; Meagher, S., Millon, C., Everly, G.: Personality Guided Therapy, New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1999.
Mosac, H.: Primer of Adlerian Psychology: The Analytic - Behavioural - Cognitive Psychology of Alfred Adler, London: Routledge, 1999.
Negrao, C.; Bonanno, G.; et al: Shame, Humiliation and Childhood Sexual Abuse: Distinct Contributions and Emotional Coherence, in Child Maltreatment, Vol. 10, No. 4, Nov. 2005.
Ogden, P.; Minton, K.: Sensorimotor Psychotherapy: One Method for Processing Traumatic Memory, in Traumatology, Vol. 6, Issue 3, October, 2000.
Paine-Gernee, K.; Hunt, T.: Emotional Healing: A Program for Emotional Sobriety, New York: Warner Books, 1990.
Peck. M. S.: People of the Lie: The Hope for Healing Human Evil, New York: Touchstone, 1998.
Rapson, J.; English, C.: Anxious to Please: 7 Revolutionary Practices for the Chronically Nice, Naperville, IL: Sourcebooks, Inc., 2006
Schaef, A. W.: Escape from Intimacy, New York: Harper-Collins, 1987.
Schiraldi, G.: The Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Source Book, 2nd Ed.; New York: McGraw-Hill, 2009.
Schore, A.: Affect Dysregulation and Disorders of the Self, New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2003.
Seigel, D.: Reflections on the Mindful Brain, in Mind Your Brain, Los Angeles: Lifespan Learning Institute, 2007.
Seligman, M.: Learned Optimism: How to Change Your Mind and Your Life, New York: Knopf, 1990.
Shaffer, H.; LaPlante, D., La Brie, R.; et al: Toward a Syndrome Model of Addiction: Multiple Expressions, Common Etiology; in Harvard Review of Psychiatry, Vol. 12, 2004.
Shaver, P.; Mikulincer, M.: Psychodynamics of Adult Attachment: A Research Perspective, in Journal of Attachment and Human Development, Vol. 4, 2002.
Skinner, B. F.: Beyond Freedom and Dignity, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1971.
Siegel, A.: Heinz Kohut and the Psychology of the Self, London: Routledge, 1996.
Stone, M.: Abnormalities of Personality Within and Beyond the Realm of Treatment, New York: W. W. Norton, 1993.
Stovall-McClough, K.; Cloitre, M.: Unresolved attachment, PTSD, and dissociation in women with childhood abuse histories, in Journal of Consulting Clinical Psychology, Vol. 74, 2006.
Tangney, J. P.; Dearing, R.: Shame and Guilt, New York: Guilford Press, 2002.
Vaknin, S.; Rangelovska, L.: Malignant Self Love - Narcissism Revisited, Prague: Narcissus, 2003.
Van der Kolk, B.: The Compulsion to Repeat the Trauma: Re-enactment, Re-victimization, and Masochism, in Psychiatric Clinics of North America, Vol. 12, No. 2, 1989.
Van der Kolk, B: Traumatic Stress: The Effects of Overwhelming Experience on Mind, Body and Society, New York: Guilford Press, 1996 / 2007.
Weinhold, B.; Weinhold, J.: Breaking Free of the Co-dependency Trap, Revised Edition, Novato, CA: New World Library, 2008.
Wessler, R.; Hankin, S., Stern, J.: Succeeding with Difficult Clients: Applications of Cognitive Appraisal Therapy, San Diego: Academic Press, 2001.
Wood, M.; Balduf, J.; Howard, K.; Huang, H.; Marino, P.; McConky, K.: Reactive Attachment Disorder: A Disorder of Attachment or of Temperament? Unpublished but peer-reviewed manuscript at http://www.personalityresearch.org/papers/wood.html, Rochester, NY: Rochester Institute of Technology, 2003-2005.
Woodward, G.; Denton, R.: Persuasion & Influence in American Life, 4th Ed., Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, 2000.
Woititz, J. G.: Adult Children of Alcoholics, Pompano Beach. FL: Health Communications, 1983.
Woititz, J. G.; Garner, A.: Life Skills for Adult Children of Alcoholics, Pompano Beach, FL: Health Communications, 1990.
Young, J.: Cognitive Therapy for the Personality Disorders: A Schema-Focused Approach, 3rd Ed., Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press, 1999.
© 2009 by Rodger Garrett; all rights reserved on the commentary only. Links are fine. Please contact not_moses@fastmail.fm with comments or questions. Thank you.
