Skip to content

Why Most Avoidants Come Back After No Contact

Channel: Chris Seiter
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yGwCWM7IgI

The speaker argues the no contact rule works on dismissive avoidants because their core wound is fear of losing independence, and removing contact stops triggering their deactivation defenses, freeing them to long for the ex.

Key points

Core wounds and the avoidant paradox

  • Three of four attachment styles are insecure: dismissive avoidant (core wound: fear of losing independence), anxious (fear of abandonment), and fearful avoidant (both).
  • Avoidants project self-reliance but harbor a rich inner fantasy of an idealized "perfect" partner. Citing the book Attached, the speaker says avoidance mistakes self-reliance for independence.
  • This fantasy doubles as a deactivation strategy: a real partner never measures up, and they hyperfocus on a "Phantom Ex" (an idealized past partner) to keep current partners at arm's length.

Why no contact works on avoidants

  • The firm's polls find most clients are anxious-preoccupied while their exes are dismissive avoidant; the speaker calls this the worst possible pairing.
  • Anxious people instinctively do the opposite of no contact (chasing, fixing), which keeps the avoidant's walls up. Space lets the avoidant sit alone with their thoughts.
  • Two conditions make it effective: leave the avoidant alone, and let them find the dating landscape barren. Then nostalgia and idealization of the past relationship set in.
  • The "peak end rule": people remember an experience by its peak and end moments. Without space, avoidants dwell on negative end moments; with time, they reminisce on peaks.

The two death wheels

  • The avoidant "death wheel" has eight stages (desiring love, honeymoon, worrying signs, thinking of leaving, leaving, separation elation, loneliness/self-pity, repeat).
  • The anxious death wheel diverges at stage three: instead of noticing warning signs, the anxious partner becomes codependent, then tries to win the avoidant back, usually failing to hold no contact.
  • Cites Hofer's rat-pup separation study (Columbia): only reunion with the mother relieved all separation symptoms, mirroring the anxious urge to reunite to fix breakup anxiety.

Duration

  • Goal of no contact should be getting OVER the ex, not getting them back (which paradoxically can make the ex return). One therapist suggested 90 days; the speaker prefers flexible 45-day self check-ins.

Reception

  • Heavily skeptical and discouraging in tone; many top comments reject the premise of wanting an avoidant back at all.
  • Common refrain: avoidants are not worth reconciling with, are emotionally unavailable, and several equate them with narcissists.
  • Strong pushback on the framing of no contact as temporary or 45 days; many insist it should be permanent and purely for self-healing.
  • Several dispute the core wound claim, arguing the real wound is fear of rejection, not loss of independence.
  • Some report personal vindication (going more avoidant than the avoidant, healing fully); one self-identified avoidant says he is in therapy to stop hurting partners.
  • A few echo the video: become the ex they miss by being your best self and unavailable.