How does it split the mind when your greatest hero is also the culprit of your deepest wound?
Is love a safe harbor to take refuge in, or is it the storm itself? Childhood is our first stop in understanding the world, and in this stop, the father figure is the hero we expect to protect us. However, for a small child shaken by their father’s unpredictable violence, if this hero can turn into a monster at uncertain intervals, it becomes impossible to distinguish between being loved and being harmed.
This confusion sometimes manifests as a state of “boredom” because that familiar tension cannot be found in a secure relationship; other times, it shows up as one side of the person seeking closeness while the other side wants to flee with great fear the moment that closeness occurs.
This impasse, which we call fearful-avoidant attachment, is actually the inevitable shadow cast upon our adult relationships by those unpredictable footsteps of the past.
A Fear Without Solution: The Dilemma
John Bowlby (1988), the founder of attachment theory, defines the bond a child forms with a caregiver to survive as the “internal working model” of our adult relationships. Under normal circumstances, a child runs to their father when afraid. However, if the source of danger is the father himself, the child becomes trapped in a paradox. One side wants to approach the father for safety, while the other must move away to avoid harm.
In literature, this situation is called “fright without solution,” making love and fear an inseparable whole in the individual’s mind (Main & Solomon, 1986). The mind cannot integrate these two opposing pieces of information, and from childhood, the belief that “closeness is dangerous” takes root.
Reflections In Adulthood: Approach-Avoidance
For individuals with fearful-avoidant attachment, relationships are often an approach-avoidance struggle. The person is very interested and close at the beginning of the relationship; however, when intimacy deepens and they feel vulnerable, they suddenly withdraw, fearing the repetition of that unpredictable past pain.
A common occurrence at this point is the feeling of unease created by being in a secure relationship. Studies by Mikulincer and Shaver (2007) show that the root of this restlessness and cycle is not the partner, but the person’s own perception of the “unreliable other.” No matter how compassionate the partner may be, the individual harbors a deep-seated suspicion that they might drop their mask at any moment and turn into an inconsistent figure who could cause harm.
This chaos created by the father figure can lead the individual to develop a distorted belief that love must inherently involve a price or pain. Therefore, a peaceful relationship may be perceived not just as boring, but as an unfamiliar and thus “dangerous” territory.
A Mental Limbo: Intimacy As Both Need And Threat
The essence of fearful-avoidant attachment is an unresolved paradox: the person feels an intense need for closeness with others but also holds a deep belief that truly trusting someone will leave them vulnerable and lead to destruction. This leads to a state of mental limbo in relationships.
The moment they feel loved, they struggle with the question, “When will I get hurt?” While intimacy provides peace for someone with secure attachment, for a fearful-avoidant individual, it is a dangerous area that requires constant vigilance.
Hyper-Vigilance: Expecting Danger In The Relationship
Unpredictable violence is not just physical pain; it is a burden of endless uncertainty. A child left in this uncertainty develops a state of hyper-vigilance to survive. In adulthood, this causes the person to produce “major disaster” scenarios from the slightest change in a partner’s tone of voice, a door being closed slightly hard, or a moment of distraction.
Bartholomew and Horowitz (1991) explain this process as part of fearful-avoidant attachment. While these individuals desire affection, their childhood “threat” mechanism automatically activates when someone gets close, leading them to push their partners away.
A Continuous Testing Mechanism: “Are You Still There?”
As the bond with the partner strengthens, the fearful-avoidant person feels vulnerable, triggering the childhood fear of unpredictable violence. To soothe this fear, an unconscious “testing” mechanism is put into play. The main question in the person’s mind is: “If they see my worst version and still don’t leave, then I am safe.”
These testing behaviors usually manifest as starting arguments for no reason, suddenly acting cold, or making accusations that question the partner’s loyalty. The child who did not know when the father’s violence would strike tries to predict a potential future blow by testing their partner in adulthood.
Conclusion: Breaking The Cycle And Healing
In summary, unpredictable violence from a father knots love and fear together. The fearful-avoidant attachment style and the state of hyper-vigilance developed in childhood to avoid harm stand as obstacles to forming healthy bonds today.
However, Bowlby (1988) states that this attachment style is not immutable; the models in our minds can be updated. Healing begins by recognizing this cycle of violence from the past and accepting that love does not always have to contain chaos. Realizing the power of healing within yourself is the biggest step in breaking this cycle (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007).
Today, you can take the hand of that little child who waited for a hero in that house years ago and become the hero you once needed.
Author’s Note
This article was written specifically through the “father” figure; however, all psychological processes and the attachment model described here are equally valid for whoever the primary caregiver was (mother, nanny, etc.) in childhood.
References
Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(2), 226–244.
Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base: Parent-child attachment and healthy human development. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Main, M., & Solomon, J. (1986). Discovery of an insecure-disorganized/disoriented attachment pattern. In T. B. Brazelton & M. W. Yogman (Eds.), Affective development in infancy (pp. 95–124). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2007). Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and change. New York, NY: Guilford Press.