The Day a Hostage Defended His Captor

August 1973. Stockholm, Sweden. A man named Jan-Erik Olsson walked into a bank, took four employees hostage, and held them captive for six days. What happened next baffled the world, not the crime, but the aftermath.

When police finally freed the hostages, the victims did not celebrate their liberation. They wept for their captor. One female hostage later became engaged to Olsson. Another raised funds for his legal defence. They had developed emotional bonds with the very man who had threatened their lives.

Criminologist and psychiatrist Nils Bejerot, who assisted police during the crisis, coined the term Stockholm Syndrome to describe this paradox. It was later formalised in psychological literature and has since been used to describe a pattern that extends far beyond bank robberies, into bedrooms, boardrooms, and contracts we sign with a smile.

How a Hostage Story Became Everyday Psychology

The reason Stockholm Syndrome resonated so broadly is because it describes a survival mechanism that human beings deploy, often unconsciously, when they are trapped with a source of both threat and relief.

Psychologists have identified four core conditions under which it typically develops:

1. A perceived threat to physical or psychological survival.
2. Small acts of perceived kindness from the abuser, such as a compliment, a moment of warmth, or an occasional reward.
3. Isolation from any perspective other than the captor’s, so you hear only their version of reality.
4. A perceived inability to escape, whether real or imagined.

Notice something? None of those conditions require a gun to your head. They require only a power imbalance, a sense of dependency, and the slow erosion of your sense of self. That is why Stockholm Syndrome has found its way into the language of therapists, HR professionals, and relationship counsellors worldwide.

The Office That Became a Prison

Let us talk about the version nobody likes to name directly, the one that happens behind glass office walls, on Slack channels, and in annual review cycles.

You took the job because it was an opportunity. The boss was brilliant, demanding, yes, but you told yourself that was just the culture. The first time they humiliated you in a meeting, you swallowed it. The second time, you convinced yourself you had deserved it. By the third time, you had begun to believe it.

Does this sound familiar?

The micro-manager who controls every deliverable but occasionally says, “I don’t know what I’d do without you,” and that single sentence keeps you loyal for three more years. The organisation that underpays, overworks, and dismisses your concerns, but once sent you on a training in Dubai, so you stay. The founder who screams and demeans but also calls you “family,” and somehow that word does all the work of ten apologies.

Researcher Dr. Jennifer Freyd’s work on betrayal trauma helps explain this. When the person or institution that harms you is also the one you depend on for your livelihood, your identity, or your sense of belonging, the mind finds it safer to bond with the source of pain than to confront it. Confrontation risks total loss. Attachment offers survival, at least today.

In toxic work environments, Stockholm Syndrome often looks like this: the employee who defends a culture of abuse to colleagues who question it; the contractor who accepts exploitative payment terms because they fear losing the client entirely; the senior leader who normalises bullying because their boss was bullied and they “turned out fine.”

What It Actually Feels Like From the Inside

This is the part that most articles skip: the phenomenology of it. What does Stockholm Syndrome feel like when you are living it?

It feels like loyalty. It feels like resilience. It feels like being the only one mature enough to handle the pressure. It feels like everyone outside simply does not understand the complexity of the situation the way you do. It feels, strangely, like love.

You find yourself explaining away red flags to friends and family. You feel a quiet contempt for people who left; they were weak, you think. When your abuser shows any sign of vulnerability or humanity, your heart surges. You protect them from criticism. You take their side in disputes, even when your own gut tells you otherwise.

And the worst part? It feels earned. Because you have suffered so much to get here, leaving would mean that suffering was for nothing.

The Long Shadow It Casts on Your Life

The impact of Stockholm Syndrome does not end when the relationship or the contract does. The research is sobering.

According to studies on complex trauma and coercive control, survivors of Stockholm-type bonding often experience persistent difficulty trusting their own judgment; a tendency to recreate the same dynamic in new relationships and workplaces; chronic anxiety and hypervigilance; depression rooted in the grief of finally seeing the relationship clearly; and, in some cases, full Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).

Dr. Judith Herman, in her landmark work Trauma and Recovery, describes how prolonged captivity, physical or psychological, disrupts the very formation of identity. You begin to see yourself through your abuser’s eyes. Their assessment of your worth becomes your internal voice. Long after they are gone, that voice remains.

In the context of marriage or long-term relationships, victims often leave one controlling partner only to enter another identical dynamic, because the familiar, however harmful, has been neurologically coded as safe. In corporate life, professionals who survive toxic cultures sometimes become the very toxic managers they once endured, or they shrink into permanent professional timidity, terrified to trust any environment again.

How to Handle It, for Yourself and Others

The research points clearly to a pathway of recovery, and it begins with one uncomfortable truth: you cannot think your way out of a trauma bond. Willpower alone is not enough.

1. Name it first.

Awareness is the first act of freedom. Dr. Patrick Carnes, in his research on trauma bonding, found that naming the dynamic reduces its psychological grip. Say it out loud: this relationship is harming me, and I have developed a bond with the source of that harm.

2. Restore outside perspective.

Isolation is how the syndrome maintains itself. Re-engage with people who can reflect your reality back to you: trusted friends, a mentor, or a therapist. The goal is to hear voices other than your captor’s.

3. Seek trauma-informed professional support.

Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT), EMDR, and somatic therapy have all shown effectiveness in treating trauma bonding. The National Domestic Violence Hotline and the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies (ISTSS) are credible starting points for professional guidance.

4. Create physical and psychological distance, deliberately.

For workplace situations, this may mean requesting a transfer, engaging HR confidentially, or, in extreme cases, leaving the role. For relationships, a safety plan developed with a professional is critical before any confrontation or exit.

5. Grieve it properly.

The bond was real, even if it was harmful. Pretending it was not will delay healing. Allow yourself to mourn the time, the investment, and the version of the relationship you wished it had been.

A Word to the Wise, Before You Walk In

The best time to address Stockholm Syndrome is before it forms. That sounds simple, but it demands something most of us resist: clear-eyed assessment of power dynamics at the point of entry.

Before you accept that job, ask yourself: what does this organisation do when people disagree with leadership? Before you deepen that relationship, observe how this person behaves when they do not get what they want. Before you sign that contract, notice whether the terms require your silence as a condition of payment.

Healthy relationships, romantic, professional, or contractual, have a basic quality in common: your dignity is not on the negotiating table. The moment you find yourself rationalising why your worth is conditional, pay attention. That rationalisation is the door through which Stockholm Syndrome walks in.

You Might Be Looking at Someone Right Now

One of the cruelest features of Stockholm Syndrome is that the person experiencing it is usually the last to see it. The people around them, colleagues, friends, siblings, and children, often recognise it long before the victim does.

If you are reading this and someone comes to mind, please do not wait for them to ask. Do not wait until the damage is catastrophic. Do not convince yourself it is not your place.

Reach out. Ask the question. Say, “I’ve noticed something, and I care about you enough to say it.” You may not be thanked immediately. They may even defend the person harming them. That is part of the syndrome. But the seed you plant may be the one that saves them.

Early intervention matters. Research by Dr. Evan Stark on coercive control shows that the longer someone remains in the dynamic, the more entrenched the psychological rewiring becomes. Your voice, at the right moment, can shorten that timeline significantly.

Freedom Has a Different Feeling Than You Think

Here is the thing nobody tells you about breaking a trauma bond: freedom does not feel like relief at first. It feels like loss. It feels disorienting. It feels like you have abandoned something you built, even if what you built was a cage.

That disorientation is not a sign that you made the wrong choice. It is a sign that healing has begun.

Stockholm Syndrome thrives in silence, in shame, and in the lie that what you are experiencing is normal. It is not normal. And the fact that it feels normal, even comfortable, is precisely the point.

You were not designed to bond with what breaks you. You were designed to flourish. And every day you spend in a relationship, personal, professional, or contractual, that requires you to make yourself smaller to survive, is a day borrowed against your own future.

Choose your future. It is still there, waiting.

***

Author bio

Akin Akingbogun is a leadership development strategist, engineer, and co-founder of MindVolution, an HR and organisational leadership development firm. He writes on human behaviour, leadership, and the systems that shape us.