Blog 22: Why do I still love someone that hurt me? Understanding traumatic bonding

Missing someone who harmed you does not mean that you are weak, damaged or meant to return. It may reflect the powerful attachment that can develop within a coercive relationship. Sometimes months may have passed since the relationship ended. You may now understand what happened. You can recognise the controlling behaviours and identify the tactics that were used. If a friend described the same experiences, you might tell them to get as far away as possible.

Yet you still miss the person. You may miss your familiar routines, the things you did together, moments of closeness or even the way they said your name or spoke to you. You may remember the Sunday mornings you spent together or the way they held you when you were upset.

Alongside these memories may be painful questions such as “How can I still love someone who treated me that way?”

Traumatic bonding offers one way of understanding this apparent contradiction.

What is traumatic bonding?

Traumatic bonding is a psychological theory developed by researchers Donald Dutton and Susan Painter. It describes how powerful attachments can develop within abusive or coercive relationships, partly through the pattern in which harm and affection occur. This does not mean that abuse is loving. Rather, it describes conditions within the relationship that can intensify attachment.

Two conditions are particularly important:

1. A significant power imbalance

2. Intermittent reinforcement

   
   

When these occur together, the bond formed can feel unusually powerful and difficult to understand.

A significant power imbalance

In a coercive relationship, one person may increasingly control the emotional reality of the relationship. Their approval, anger, withdrawal or affection begins to shape the other person's behaviour.

For example, you may find yourself thinking: “He seems angry tonight. I'd better not mention the money. She hasn't replied to my message. What have I done wrong?” “If I cancel dinner with my friends, perhaps he'll be in a better mood.”

Over time, you may begin organising your behaviour around the other person's reactions. You might avoid certain topics, friends or activities because you anticipate their response. You may carefully monitor their facial expressions, tone of voice or mood. The relationship is no longer experienced simply as companionship and love. Your behaviour is also being shaped by the pressure created by the other person's control.

Intermittent reinforcement

The second condition is intermittent reinforcement. This occurs when periods of harm are unpredictably followed by periods of warmth, affection or closeness. After criticism, intimidation, rejection or a frightening argument, your partner may suddenly become loving again. They may bring home your favourite food and say: “I'm sorry. I don't know what came over me. I love you.”

Or they may become exceptionally attentive after a period of withdrawal, promise that things will change, or talk enthusiastically about your future together. This change can bring enormous relief, with you possibly thinking: “This is the person I fell in love with. Maybe things really will be different this time. If I can just avoid upsetting him, perhaps we can stay like this.”

Because the warmth is unpredictable, you may become increasingly focused on obtaining or preserving it. The loving periods can also revive hope that the relationship can return to what it once seemed to be.

When the same person becomes both the threat and the relief

This creates a profound emotional contradiction: the person who causes the distress also provides the relief that follows it. If you spent hours anxious because your partner had withdrawn from you and you were wondering what you had done wrong, you would watch their mood for signs that the situation was changing, and then suddenly they would become affectionate. They smile at you, touch you and tell you that everything is all right. This causes enormous relief, and the movement from distress to relief can strengthen the attachment rather than weaken it. Fear, longing, vigilance, hope and relief become intertwined. Your nervous system can begin to associate the same person with both the threat and the resolution of the threat.

This may help explain an experience that otherwise seems bewildering: “I was frightened of him, but when he finally became loving again, I felt so relieved that I just wanted to be close to him.” The intensity of the attachment is therefore not necessarily evidence that the love was deeper, more meaningful or uniquely destined. It may partly reflect the conditions under which the attachment developed.

Why healthy love may feel less intense

A stable and consistent partner does not create the same cycle. There is no repeated injury followed by dramatic relief, and affection does not have to be anxiously anticipated or recovered. Healthy relationships can still involve disagreements and periods of emotional difficulty. But the underlying sense of safety does not repeatedly disappear and then return. For someone accustomed to emotional highs and lows, this consistency may initially feel strangely unfamiliar.

They may wonder: “Why doesn't this relationship feel as intense?” However, less intensity does not mean less love. It may simply mean that the relationship does not depend upon fear, uncertainty or the repeated restoration of safety. Emotional intensity can sometimes be mistaken for evidence that a relationship was exceptionally deep. Understanding traumatic bonding provides another possibility: the attachment felt so powerful because harm and comfort had become linked. Loving someone does not mean you should return.

Continuing to love or miss someone is not proof that returning is the right decision, and feelings do not always disappear when understanding arrives. You may hear a song and suddenly remember a happy evening together. You may drive past a familiar restaurant and feel a wave of longing. You may find yourself remembering the good times and temporarily forgetting why you left. This does not necessarily mean that your decision to leave was wrong. You can recognise coercive control while still remembering genuine moments of warmth. These experiences can coexist.

There is no shame in the attachment. Traumatic bonding can help replace the question:

“What is wrong with me?” with a more compassionate one: “What conditions made this attachment so powerful?” The bond is not evidence that you are foolish, weak or damaged. It reflects the way a human attachment system can respond when power, fear, unpredictability and relief repeatedly occur together. Understanding this can reduce shame. Rather than judging yourself for continuing to care, you can recognise that the attachment developed over time and under specific relational conditions.

The bond can change

A traumatic bond can feel overwhelming, but it is not necessarily permanent. You may have a week in which you feel completely certain that leaving was the right decision, followed by a day when you desperately miss the person. You may suddenly remember only the good times. This does not necessarily mean you are going backwards.

Understanding the mechanism does not instantly remove the longing, but it can change what the longing means. Instead of: “I miss them, therefore I should go back,” you may gradually reach: “I miss them because I formed a powerful attachment. Missing them does not tell me whether returning would be safe.” Over time, greater clarity can help separate love from danger, warmth from the cycle surrounding it, and emotional intensity from genuine security.

The question becomes less: “Why am I still feeling this?” and more: “Can I understand this feeling without allowing it to decide what I do?” A feeling is not an instruction; you can grieve what was good without forgetting what was harmful. You can acknowledge the longing without acting on it, and you can love someone and still choose a life in which you are safe.

You are not weak for still loving someone who harmed you. You are experiencing the effects of a powerful relational pattern. With time and understanding, that pattern does not have to decide what happens next.