Co-dependency can be understood as interpersonal trauma-coping mechanisms rooted in the need to feel safe in relationships. By viewing these behaviors through the lens of trauma responses—fight, flight, freeze, and fawn—we can foster growth and understanding without judgment or shame. Importantly, these responses are context-dependent, relationship-specific, and can vary based on stress and other factors. The goal of this proposal is to foster deeper understanding, empowering individuals to view their behaviors with compassion. This lens highlights how these patterns serve as protective mechanisms. Through understanding, people can embrace growth.
Fawn Co-Dependency
Description: The fawn response involves appeasing others to maintain harmony and avoid conflict. In co-dependency, this manifests as hypervigilance toward others’ needs and emotions, leading to self-abandonment in the effort to keep others happy and oneself safe.
Caricature: As a child, Sarah was constantly expected to meet the needs of the adults around her. She learned that love often depended on how well she met others’ expectations. This taught her to prioritize others’ needs above her own, a pattern she still carries into adulthood. As an adult, Sarah constantly puts her own needs aside to ensure everyone around her is content. She anticipates her partner’s every need before they even ask and apologizes excessively, even when she’s done nothing wrong. Her inner voice reassures her, “If everyone else is happy, then I will be safe.”
Fight Co-Dependency
Description: The fight response manifests as controlling or intimidating behaviors aimed at managing relationships and reducing perceived threats. In co-dependency, this often looks like overt attempts to dominate situations to maintain a sense of safety.
Caricature: As a child, Mark grew up in an environment where control equaled survival. He learned that asserting dominance and keeping others in line helped him avoid chaos and unpredictability. This shaped his belief that staying in control of every situation was the only way to feel secure. As an adult, Mark often resorts to anger, manipulation, and forceful opinions to take charge. His loud, overbearing presence reflects his belief: “If I am in control, then I will be safe.”
Flight Co-Dependency
Description: The flight response in co-dependency involves avoidance, withdrawal, or isolation. This might look like staying busy, emotionally distancing, or attempting to escape perceived relational chaos.
Caricature: Emma grew up in a household filled with conflict, where the best way to feel safe was to disappear. She learned that staying busy or out of sight could help her avoid becoming a target for tension. As an adult, Emma avoids conflict at all costs by throwing herself into her work. She’s always “too busy” to deal with difficult emotions or relational challenges. When things get tense at home, she schedules an extra shift, telling herself, “If I’m not here, I can’t get hurt, so I will be safe.”
Freeze Co-Dependency
Description: The freeze response is characterized by paralysis or passivity. In co-dependency, this often involves avoiding decisions, staying in unhealthy situations, or dissociating from relational dynamics.
Caricature: Alex grew up in an environment where taking action often led to punishment or failure. They learned that staying still and invisible was the safest option. This experience ingrained a deep fear of making the wrong move. As an adult, Alex feels stuck in their relationship but can’t bring themselves to make a change. When conflict arises, they retreat inward, struggling to express their needs or take action. Their inner dialogue whispers, “If I do nothing, maybe this will blow over and I will be safe.”
Key Considerations
-
Contextual and Fluid: Individuals may exhibit different co-dependent trauma responses depending on the relationship, situation, or stress level. For example, someone might fawn in one relationship and freeze in another. For instance, an individual might fawn in a romantic relationship but freeze in a workplace conflict.
-
Non-Pathologizing: These behaviors are not “good” or “bad” but rather adaptive mechanisms that arose from a need to feel safe, often as a result of dysregulating childhood experiences. Recognizing this helps reduce shame and opens the door to growth.
-
A Path to Understanding and Growth: By identifying these patterns, individuals can explore their thoughts, feelings, and actions, and work toward healthier ways of relating to themselves and others. It is important to note that, at their core, all of these behaviors are attempts to control other people through various strategies to help oneself feel safe. This is often rooted in early childhood experiences that shape the way a child learns to see others, themselves, and their place in the world. Most importantly, these behaviors often reflect how a child learned to feel safe in their early environment and relationships.
This proposed framework invites compassion for oneself and others, emphasizing that co-dependency is not a flaw but an adaptive response to unmet needs for safety and connection. Recognizing these patterns is the first step toward building relationships rooted in mutual care and felt-safety. Growth begins with understanding these patterns and creating opportunities to heal. By understanding these patterns and seeking support when needed, individuals can take the first steps toward healthier and more balanced relationships.
Next Steps
This framework is a starting point. I welcome collaboration with therapists, researchers, educators, and individuals to further develop these ideas. And if this framework resonates with you or sparks new ideas, please share your thoughts. I'd be delighted to hear from you.