'Why We Get Stuck in the 4 F Responses?'

This is not a side project — it’s the root system for your entire life.

A Nervous System Perspective on Relational Trauma

If you’re here, chances are you’re not only intellectually curious—you’re likely carrying a story that’s woven through your body. One where love and danger may have overlapped. One where your body may have had to make impossible choices, just to stay safe, connected, or unnoticed. I want to begin by saying: none of your responses were failures. They were brilliance under pressure. This isn’t about pathology—it’s about protection. And that protection runs deep.

The 4 F responses—Fight, Flight, Freeze, and Fawn—aren’t just concepts; they are living experiences. Often misunderstood, especially in relationships, they are not simply “reactions” to danger. They are nervous system survival strategies. When these responses become patterned, they reflect developmental adaptations to relational environments where safety, belonging, or attunement were missing or unpredictable.

Trauma theorist Pete Walker writes that the 4 F responses are not character flaws but “a result of over-reliance on one or two of the four responses to trauma... they are deeply ingrained adaptations to a childhood devoid of healthy attachment.” These responses shape how we give, receive, and sometimes avoid connection.

But there's more. As trauma science evolves, we now understand a broader landscape of nervous system responses that includes Collapse, Submit, Attach-Cry, and Please-and-Appease—strategies described in Stephen Porges’ Polyvagal Theory and refined by practitioners such as Deb Dana and Irene Lyon. These are hybrid states—blends of mobilization (fight/flight) or immobilization (freeze/shutdown) with social engagement or disconnection. In relationships, these can show up subtly: self-silencing, chronic over-accommodating, feeling numb but still smiling.

Let’s explore each of these responses, their relational impact, and what it means when we don’t complete the natural arc of our nervous system’s survival strategy—what’s called an incomplete mobilization or thwarted instinct.

Fight Response

“I must protect or control to feel safe.”

Relational Patterns:

• Quick to argue, defend, dominate, or criticize

• Misinterprets disagreement as danger

• Can manifest as emotional reactivity, anger masking fear

• May resist vulnerability or tenderness as weakness

Somatic Clues:

• Tight jaw, clenched fists, shallow breathing

• Heat rising, flushed face, strong internal pressure

Peter Levine notes that “aggression is a necessary survival response. When it becomes chronic, it means the system never got to complete the fight.” In relationship, this can look like a partner who escalates arguments or who sees control as safety. Underneath: a fear of helplessness or abandonment.

Flight Response

“I must escape to be safe.”

Relational Patterns:

• Overworking, overthinking, or physical withdrawal

• Avoids intimacy or conversations about emotions

• May feel chronically rushed, overwhelmed, or unsafe in stillness

• Uses productivity or perfectionism as a shield

Somatic Clues:

• Restlessness, bouncing leg, heart racing

• Anxiety in stillness or eye contact

In relationships, the flight response may show up as disappearing emotionally when conflict arises. The body believes that to stay still is to be in danger—so the mind and body stay on the move. As Deb Dana describes, "safety becomes associated not with connection, but with doing.”

Freeze Response

“I can’t move. I’m overwhelmed.”

Relational Patterns:

• Feeling numb or emotionally distant

• Difficulty accessing wants, needs, or boundaries

• May stay in toxic dynamics out of paralysis or confusion

• Shutdown, dissociation, or “checking out” during intimacy

Somatic Clues:

• Shallow breath, cold hands and feet, heavy limbs

• Held breath, locked eyes, blank expression

This is not laziness or passivity—it’s the body’s emergency brake. Peter Levine describes freeze as “high energy in a locked state.” In relational trauma, this may be someone who smiles and agrees outwardly but feels frozen internally, unable to act on their own behalf.

Fawn Response (Term coined by Pete Walker)

“I must put you first to stay safe.”

Relational Patterns:

• Chronic caregiving, self-abandonment, or appeasement

• Difficulty saying no or setting boundaries

• Hyper-awareness of others’ moods and needs

• Identity built around being agreeable or likable

Somatic Clues:

• Tension in throat, chest, or belly

• Smiling when upset, nodding without agreement

Fawning is a social survival strategy born from environments where conflict, rejection, or punishment followed authentic expression. It’s not about kindness—it’s about survival through compliance. It’s often deeply wired in those with childhood attachment wounds.

Collapse / Submit / Attach-Cry / Please-and-Appease

These hybrid responses go deeper than the 4 F’s and speak to nervous systems shaped by chronic relational threat, not just acute danger.

• Collapse/Submit (Stephen Porges, Polyvagal Theory): The body shuts down, but it’s not a choice—it’s a survival act. In relationships, it may look like emotional flatness, giving in silently, or staying small to avoid harm.

• Attach Cry (Porges): A childlike response to reach out for rescue or connection, even to an unsafe person. Adults may show this as anxious attachment, emotional flooding, or desperation for reassurance.

• Please-and-Appease (Irene Lyon): A hybrid of the sympathetic (mobilized) system and the social engagement system—where someone is over-engaged with others while disconnected from themselves. This may look like over-volunteering, never expressing preferences, or smiling through pain.

  
  

Incomplete Mobilization & Thwarted Instincts

When a person is prevented from completing the natural arc of fight, flight, or even calling out for help, the energy gets stuck. This can happen in moments of abuse, being overpowered, silenced, frozen, or discouraged from expressing anger or fear.

This uncompleted defense response leaves a somatic residue—a kind of unfinished business in the body. The nervous system stays “on” in subtle or not-so-subtle ways. As Deb Dana notes, “The body keeps seeking completion, but the person may not understand what it is they're trying to resolve.”

In relationships, this can show up as:

• Somatic Emotional flashbacks

• Chronic self-doubt or self-blame

• Overreactions or underreactions to emotional cues

• A loss of sense of self: a merging with others, or confusion about your own needs

  
  

Why We Get Stuck

We stay in these patterns because the body learned they were necessary. The physiology keeps responding as if the threat is still present — especially in relational trauma, where safety and danger are often tangled.

Hybrid states can cause us to lose ourselves for the sake of connection — submitting our will, performing safety, or shaping ourselves entirely around others’ needs.

But there’s hope: these states are not fixed. With body-based tools, compassionate awareness, and the right support, survival strategies can soften into choice.

📚 Referenced Authors & Theories

• Pete Walker – Complex PTSD: From Surviving to Thriving

• Stephen Porges – The Polyvagal Theory

• Deb Dana – The Polyvagal Theory in Therapy

• Peter Levine – Waking the Tiger, In an Unspoken Voice

• Irene Lyon – Nervous system educator and somatic practitioner

For a deeper dive into stuck survival stress states and related care plans visit

https://www.handsoftimehealing.com/product-page/breaking-free-survival-stress-recovery?origin=side+cart

To understand more about vagal support and interoceptive awareness visit https://www.handsoftimehealing.com/product-page/truths-and-treasures-of-the-vagus-nerve-unlock-the-hidden-power-within-you?origin=side+cart