There are no universal guidelines for what defines a toxic relationship. What feels acceptable for one person may be deeply harmful to another. The spectrum ranges widely, from relationships that are merely unfulfilling, all the way to those marked by harm and danger.
It’s easy for outsiders to ask, “why not just break up?” But for the person inside, the answer is rarely simple. Attachment theory helps explain why. Our bonds can persist even when the attachment figure is a source of pain. When someone has only known inconsistency or control, that very pattern becomes their reference point for “normal” (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2016). In this sense, leaving doesn’t feel like walking away from pain. It can feel like walking away from familiarity, identity and even safety.
The loss of a toxic relationship can also feel like the loss of the self. These dynamics often involve elements of power, manipulation or control. It may be one-sided: One person maintains dominance through aggression, coercion, manipulation or gaslighting. The other, in protecting themselves by being submissive or compliant, may slowly lose parts of their autonomy. Over time, this can develop into dependency, not because the relationship is healthy, but because it becomes the only framework through which the person defines themselves (Slotter et al., 2010).
On the other hand, toxic dynamics can also emerge when both partners assert dominance and control. What begins as attempts to gain power can turn into a cycle of escalation, where each person reacts to the other’s intensity. In such relationships, the power struggle itself becomes the defining pattern. A constant back and forth that drains energy, erodes trust and destabilizes the foundation of safety.
In both instances, the individual’s identity can become entwined with the partner’s moods, demands or approval. The highs and lows of toxic relationships mimic the reinforcement patterns found in addiction through activating the brain’s reward system (Fisher et al., 2010) Where moments of affection or reconciliation that temporarily soothes the pain, intensifies the craving when those moments disappear. This cycle of intermittent reinforcement causes a trauma bond; an unhealthy attachment reinforced through both pleasure and pain.
Through seeing it from this lens, it would be understandable to extend an empathetic perspective to those having difficulties in leaving a toxic relationship and those that grieves the loss of one. The aforementioned loss of the self is explained through the high investment of a push and pull dynamic. Where the person may no longer have the opportunity to maintain friendships or support outside of the one with their partner. Or they may no longer engage in activities that were meaningful or valuable to them prior to entering the relationship. Oftentimes, others that were close to them may also feel their pain and decide to disconnect as they are frustrated when seeing someone they care about get stuck in a negative cycle that is seemingly their choice. The stuck individual may have limitations on activities that they can do, so they built a codependent identity while leaving their own behind.
When a person loses a toxic relationship, others around them may rejoice in support. Causing them to feel the need to hide their own grief. Where the contrast between a person’s feelings and other’s reactions are high, it may feel even more invalidating and isolating for that individual. They may even find themselves not being able to reconnect with their previous supports and feel that they are left to grieve on their own. Oftentimes, the grief a person experiences when losing a toxic relationship is disfranchised as it’s perceived as only positive. In reality, the loss that the person experiences is not only for the relationship itself but it’s also associated with other losses; such as time, identity, friends and connection.
And yet, recovery is possible. Research on post-traumatic growth shows that even after damaging relationships, individuals can emerge with renewed clarity of self, resilience, and deeper appreciation for supportive connections (Tedeschi & Calhoun, 2004). The process is rarely linear, but healing begins when space is created for new patterns, ones built on safety, respect, and mutual care.
For the Individual
- Acknowledge your grief
- Naming the experience as grief validates that what was lost goes beyond the relationship itself — it may include identity, time, and connections (Doka, 1989, Disenfranchised Grief).
- Journaling or therapy can provide safe spaces to process this complexity.
- Naming the experience as grief validates that what was lost goes beyond the relationship itself — it may include identity, time, and connections (Doka, 1989, Disenfranchised Grief).
- Rebuild identity and self-concept
- Research shows that toxic relationships often erode self-concept clarity (Slotter et al., 2010). Re-engaging in old hobbies, reconnecting with supportive friends, or trying new experiences helps reclaim parts of selfhood.
- Research shows that toxic relationships often erode self-concept clarity (Slotter et al., 2010). Re-engaging in old hobbies, reconnecting with supportive friends, or trying new experiences helps reclaim parts of selfhood.
- Seek professional and community support
- Trauma-informed therapy (e.g., CBT, EMDR, schema therapy) has been shown to reduce symptoms of trauma bonds and codependency (Courtois & Ford, 2013).
- Support groups offer solidarity and reduce isolation.
- Regain self-identity within the community by reconnecting with old interests or exploring new ones.
- Trauma-informed therapy (e.g., CBT, EMDR, schema therapy) has been shown to reduce symptoms of trauma bonds and codependency (Courtois & Ford, 2013).
- Practice grounding and self-care
- Simple tools like mindfulness, exercise, or spiritual practices can calm the nervous system. These practices support the body’s recovery from the highs and lows of toxic dynamics (van der Kolk, 2014).
- Simple tools like mindfulness, exercise, or spiritual practices can calm the nervous system. These practices support the body’s recovery from the highs and lows of toxic dynamics (van der Kolk, 2014).
For Friends, Family, and Community
- Validate, don’t minimize
- Avoid phrases like “You’re better off without them, just move on.” Even if true, it risks invalidating grief. Instead, say: “I can see this is painful, and I’m here with you.”
- Avoid phrases like “You’re better off without them, just move on.” Even if true, it risks invalidating grief. Instead, say: “I can see this is painful, and I’m here with you.”
- Offer consistent presence
- Research on social support shows that reliable, non-judgmental presence is one of the strongest predictors of recovery (Thoits, 2011). Sometimes, just showing up is enough.
- Research on social support shows that reliable, non-judgmental presence is one of the strongest predictors of recovery (Thoits, 2011). Sometimes, just showing up is enough.
- Encourage, but don’t pressure, professional help
- Many survivors hesitate to seek therapy due to stigma. Gently normalizing it as a form of self-care can make a difference.
- Many survivors hesitate to seek therapy due to stigma. Gently normalizing it as a form of self-care can make a difference.
- Be patient with setbacks
- Trauma bonding can create cravings to return to the toxic partner. Supporters should recognize this as part of the process rather than a “failure.”
To meet with a professional psychologist or counsellor, call The Other Clinic at 8809 0659 or email us hello@theotherclinic.sg.
References
Courtois, C. A., & Ford, J. D. (2013). Treatment of complex trauma: A sequenced, relationship-based approach. Guilford Press.
Doka, K. J. (Ed.). (1989). Disenfranchised grief: Recognizing hidden sorrow. Lexington Books/D. C. Heath and Com.
Fisher, H. E., Brown, L. L., Aron, A., Strong, G., & Mashek, D. (2010). Reward, addiction, and emotion regulation systems associated with rejection in love. Journal of Neurophysiology, 104(1), 51–60. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00784.2009
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2016). Attachment in Adulthood Structure, Dynamics, and Change (2nd ed.). New York, NY Guilford Press. – References – Scientific Research Publishing. (n.d.). https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=3016733
Slotter, E. B., Gardner, W. L., & Finkel, E. J. (2009). Who am I without you? The influence of romantic breakup on the Self-Concept. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167209352250
Tedeschi, R. G., & Calhoun, L. G. (2004). TARGET ARTICLE: “Posttraumatic Growth: Conceptual foundations and Empirical Evidence.” Psychological Inquiry, 15(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli1501_01
Thoits, P. A. (2011). Mechanisms linking social ties and support to physical and mental health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 52(2), 145–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022146510395592
van der Kolk, B. A. (2014). The body keeps the score: Brain, mind, and body in the healing of trauma. Viking.