The case of Lauryn Licari stunned the public—not only because of the shocking abuse she endured but because the abuser was her own mother, Kendra Licari. Over months, Kendra launched a relentless cyberbullying campaign against Lauryn and her boyfriend, sending more than 12,000 messages laced with cruelty. The texts included horrific commands such as “kill yourself b*tch,” systematically attacking her daughter’s self-esteem and sense of security.
Yet when the truth came out, Lauryn’s reaction defied public expectations. Rather than expressing rage or hatred, she confessed, “I feel like a part of me is missing… and I will feel whole again when I see her.” This paradoxical longing for closeness with the very person who inflicted so much harm has left many baffled. Psychology, however, provides insights into why Lauryn might still feel bound to her mother, revealing how abuse can destabilize not only attachment but also self-concept and self-concept clarity—the degree to which individuals have a coherent, stable understanding of themselves.
Enmeshment: When Boundaries Blur
One explanation lies in enmeshment—a family dynamic where emotional boundaries between parent and child become blurred (Minuchin, 1974). In such families, the child’s identity is closely intertwined with the parent’s approval and emotional state. The parent is not just a caregiver but the defining mirror through which the child understands themselves. Lauryn’s statement about feeling incomplete without her mother illustrates how her self-concept is deeply entangled with her mother’s presence. Adolescents, who are still consolidating their identities, are particularly vulnerable to this type of relational fusion. When the parent disappears—whether through conflict, estrangement, or incarceration—the child may feel as though their very sense of self has fractured.
Self-concept clarity refers to the extent to which an individual’s beliefs about themselves are clearly and confidently defined, internally consistent, and stable over time (Campbell et al., 1996). Over time, enmeshed relationships can contribute to low self-concept clarity: the child’s sense of who they are may become diffuse or unstable, reflecting a reliance on the parent for emotional and identity validation. In Lauryn’s case, her deep identification with her mother and dependence on maternal approval may have made it difficult for her to maintain a coherent and confident sense of self, demonstrating how enmeshment can shape self-concept clarity as an outcome rather than a precursor.
Trauma Bonding: A Paradox of Loyalty
Trauma bonding occurs when cycles of harm are interspersed with moments of affection, apology, or connection, creating an addictive attachment to the abuser (Dutton & Painter, 1993). Paradoxically, the very person who inflicts pain also becomes the person the child craves for comfort (see disorganized attachment; Main & Hesse, 1990).
Even though Lauryn did not know her mother was behind the online attacks, their preexisting relationship had likely established a foundation of loyalty and emotional dependence. Once the betrayal surfaced, that bond did not simply vanish. Low self-concept clarity can intensify this paradox: adolescents uncertain about who they are may cling to harmful attachments as a way of anchoring themselves, seeking wholeness through the relationship even when it is destructive.
Identification with the Aggressor: A Defense Against Fear
Another defense mechanism shaping Lauryn’s response is identification with the aggressor. First described by Anna Freud, this occurs when victims unconsciously adopt the perspective of their abuser to regain a sense of control. Aligning emotionally or cognitively with a parent—even a harmful one—can reduce the terror of feeling powerless.
When self-concept clarity is low, individuals are particularly susceptible to this strategy. Lauryn’s longing to reunite with her mother may partly reflect an unconscious attempt to stabilize a fragmented self: by preserving a connection to the abuser, the mind maintains continuity in its understanding of self within the family system.
Cognitive Dissonance: Protecting One’s Reality
Leon Festinger’s concept of cognitive dissonance (1957) also illuminates Lauryn’s inner conflict. She must hold two seemingly incompatible beliefs: “My mother loves me” and “My mother abused me.” The psychological discomfort of such contradictions often compels people to minimize, excuse, or reinterpret the abuse rather than dismantle the belief in parental love.
Lauryn’s desire to reconnect may be her mind’s way of reducing this inner conflict—by holding on to the version of her mother she once knew. Yearning for her mother may be a cognitive strategy to preserve internal consistency, safeguarding the fragile identity that has been shaped by both love and harm.
Developmental Vulnerability
Adolescence is a particularly fragile stage for coping with betrayal. Erik Erikson’s theory of psychosocial development posits that the primary task of adolescence is to resolve the crisis of identity versus role confusion. Successful resolution leads to a strong sense of personal identity, while failure results in role confusion (Erikson, 1963). During this stage, teens question “Who am I?” and explore their goals, values, and beliefs to develop a sense of self. Failure to achieve a cohesive identity can lead to confusion and instability, making adolescents more susceptible to manipulation and dependency.
For Lauryn, seeking reunion is not merely about affection; it is about restoring stability and coherence to her emerging self.
Real-Life Parallels: Gypsy Rose Blanchard
Lauryn’s case echoes Gypsy Rose Blanchard, who endured years of medical abuse at the hands of her mother. Despite manipulation, isolation, and profound harm, Gypsy initially defended her mother. Paradoxical loyalty is common when children grow up without alternative role models or sources of secure attachment, leaving their self-concept both enmeshed with and dependent on the abuser.
Conclusion: The Paradox of Parental Abuse
Lauryn Licari’s response does not erase the reality of her abuse. Instead, it highlights the complexity of human attachment and response to trauma, particularly when forged within the crucible of family. Abuse does not easily sever the emotional bonds children feel toward parents; the pain often strengthens dependency and complicates the self. Despite the abuse, children might show extreme loyalty to the abusive parent, sometimes believing they deserved the mistreatment.
Recognizing these dynamics does not justify abuse but underscores a vital truth: healing requires not only protection from harm but also careful, empathic work to untangle bonds that intertwine attachment and self-concept. Only then can survivors like Lauryn begin to build a coherent, resilient sense of self that feels whole on its own terms—without needing to recover what was taken from them.