182. Why “I Don’t Need Anyone” Isn’t Healing With Guest Geoff Steurer MC, LMFT

The Fear of Needing Someone Again

Amie: Hello, hello, my amazing, beautiful listeners. Welcome — thank you for joining me today. It’s going to be a really amazing conversation. I’m so excited to have my friend and colleague Geoff Steurer be a part of this.

We happened to be talking about this subject right before the Christmas break, and I said, “I’ve got to have you come on and share this message.” It’s a topic I’ve been wanting to dive into, and I really loved what Geoff was saying and how he says it.

When we talk about healthy independence, leaning back into connection, attachment theory, and what a healthy relationship actually looks like — a lot of you have no idea what that looks like. It can feel scary to get back into a relationship. It can be scary to think that it’s okay to be with someone who has needs, and to be able to trust again that someone will meet your needs.

For a while, I believed that if I could get to a place where I don’t need anybody — not any man, not anyone — that would be what “healthy” means. That spoke to my feminist heart. But it doesn’t align with the science of attachment theory, and that’s what we’re going to talk about today.

Geoff has over 25 years of experience helping individuals and couples heal from betrayal and the disconnection that happens in the attachment. He and his wife also host a podcast about healing relationships after betrayal. I’m so hopeful this conversation is going to be validating, enlightening, and give you hope of what is possible.

Differentiation vs. Hyper-Independence: What’s the Real Difference?

Amie: I want to start with your point about differentiation — how it’s being taught, especially on social media. I want to help women who have been in very enmeshed relationships understand how to break free and reclaim independence, while also understanding that healthy relationships require healthy dependency. Can you speak to what you see in your work around this?

Geoff: Absolutely. I don’t think differentiation is harmful — I want to say that right out of the gate. I think differentiation as the only strategy is harmful. Healthy attachment has two sides of the same coin: one is independence and one is healthy dependency. That tension between holding onto ourselves and holding onto someone else — both of those matter.

My experience in betrayal communities, and what I see a lot on social media, is this message: “The healthiest people don’t need other people.” There are a lot of models, influencers, and books out there basically saying that. And that can sound nice on the surface — it can even feel empowering. If I can wall myself up, I am not going to stick my neck out again. I totally understand that.

As a short-term strategy for safety, swinging toward independence is absolutely what I recommend. Finding yourself, finding your voice, stepping back, untangling — all of that is important. But if differentiation stays the only strategy, it creates a false sense of security.

Why Walling Yourself Off Creates a False Sense of Security

Amie: Can you talk more about that — why it gives a false sense of security?

Geoff: Because it feels good to believe other people don’t impact us. It feels good, protected, safe. And maybe that can be true for a stranger who cuts you off in traffic. But we are impacted by other humans — there’s no way not to be.

Sue Johnson talks about how other humans regulate our nervous systems, our bodies, and our emotions. We cannot be neutral with that. The power of primary attachment is that when it’s your person, your bonded partner, something as small as a weird eyebrow raise before you leave for work can have you wondering all day what it meant.

The false security is thinking: “If I act like whatever they’re doing doesn’t bother me, I’m fine.” That’s just an illusion. The same goes for the other extreme — overdependence, where we’re so fused that we think closeness equals safety. Both are false securities. The healthy place is learning to hold that tension of “me” and “us” together — and that is not easy to do.

The Pendulum Swing: From Enmeshment to Hyper-Independence

Amie: I was so disconnected from my own self-awareness and so hyper-attuned to my partner that I lost myself entirely. I needed to regulate him and fix him to feel safe. So I understand why differentiation feels like a revelation. But what I see happen so often is that we swing too far to the other side and we stay there.

Geoff: Right — and yeah, we fight our own biology doing that. The pain of getting hurt in an attachment where you were trusting, where you put your life in someone else’s hands — that’s awful. And Patricia de Young, one of my favorite authors on shame, has this definition I find so profound: shame is the disintegration of self in the presence of a dysregulated other.

When you’re in a safe, secure attachment, you’re shame-proof. Think about a parent and child. When a child disappoints a parent, a secure parent redirects and then comes back — holds them close, says “Mistakes are for learning. I’m still here.” The child integrates: I can make mistakes and still be loved. I do bad things sometimes and I’m still a good person. Multiply that by hundreds of secure interactions and you’re pretty shame-resilient.

But in the presence of a dysregulated other who’s gaslighting you, lying to you, manipulating you, betraying you — your self begins to disintegrate. You’re performing here, pretending there, accommodating this, shoving that down. You’re becoming unrecognizable to yourself. So of course you pull away and go, “I need to reclaim who I am.” That’s completely right. But it can’t stop there.

You Can’t Fully Heal in Isolation: The Case for Healthy Dependency

Amie: I think sometimes women hear the message “You need to be fully healed before you get into another relationship,” and they take that literally. I remember thinking that myself. But it doesn’t work that way, does it?

Geoff: No, it doesn’t. My message is: give healthy dependency a chance. Babies don’t come into this world saying, “I don’t need you, I just want you.” We don’t somehow switch off our wiring to need other people to co-regulate with us. Spend time in independence — that’s okay. But don’t stop there.

Amie: When I was dating Scott and we talked about my triggers, he said something that really stuck with me: “There’s a level of healing you’re not going to be able to do unless you’re in a relationship.” And that was true. The first two years of our marriage, triggers I thought I’d healed came back up — but I could look at them with a safe, secure person beside me. Now, almost eight years in, I understand what healthy secure attachment actually feels like.

Geoff: And that’s exactly it. Patricia de Young’s formula works in reverse too: integration of self in the presence of a regulated other. In a safe, secure relationship, you unlock new layers of healing you could never access in isolation — childhood stuff, attachment schemas, beliefs about yourself, about men, about relationships. All of that opens up when it’s safe to look.

Bridging the Gap: Co-Regulation Before Romantic Attachment

Amie: Can you talk about how women who are still afraid of romantic attachment can start experiencing co-regulation safely in other relationships first?

Geoff: Absolutely. This is why betrayal communities are so powerful — groups, confidants, family, friends, other women who have been through this. Letting someone hold you while you cry is one of the most powerful visuals of co-regulation. Can you feel better after a good cry alone? Sure. But having someone pull you close and say, “You’re not alone — I’m here,” is something we are just defenseless against. We need it.

Co-regulation is everywhere. Being out in public with strangers can be regulating. Congregational singing in church, community rituals, being in the sea of humanity — it all counts. The closer you get to someone and the more you reveal yourself, the more powerful the co-regulation. But you need many flavors of it in your life.

The key before stepping into romantic attachment is to open it up inside yourself as a healthy possibility. Wrap your head around the fact that a safe, secure, loving relationship can exist for you. And don’t settle for an imitation of it — love bombing, a one-night stand, or anything that mimics the feeling but isn’t rooted in real relational safety.

Secure Attachment Requires the Freedom to Come and Go

Geoff: Healthy attachment is the ability to come close, hold tight, release, and have all of that stay intact within the relationship. When you’re practicing dependency with someone, if you can’t move in and out of that closeness without major consequences, you’re in an insecure attachment.

I had a client who was scared to break up with her boyfriend. I suggested she tell him she needed a little break. Within an hour, he had called her 127 times. That was her reality check. She couldn’t release herself from the relationship without major consequences — and that is not a safe attachment.

Amie: This is why I tell the women I work with who are dating again: build in a break. If you’ve started seeing someone every day, intentionally create a week or two of space. What comes up for both of you is really important information about attachment security.

What a Dysregulated Partner Actually Looks Like

Geoff: Dysregulation in a partner doesn’t always look like 127 spam calls. It can look like silent treatment, covert punishments, compliance and people-pleasing while being dishonest about their true feelings, addiction, hidden secrets, excessive checking, interrogation, and insecurity. The key marker is this: it will not feel peaceful. You will have confusion. You will not feel relaxed.

Amie: What has blown my mind in my relationship with Scott — even now — is still being able to say, “Is this real? Is this actually a thing?” For so many years I didn’t know what this felt like. It’s a whole other level of intimacy I now have with myself, because it’s finally safe to have it. And that is available to every single one of you listening.

When Attachment Work Is — and Isn’t — Appropriate

Geoff: A quick note on timing: if you’re in the early days, weeks, or months of discovery — if there’s still active betrayal, secrets, uncertainty, and you haven’t had a full disclosure — this is not the time for attachment-based couples work. Jumping straight into attachment healing in that environment will make things less safe for the betrayed partner, not more.

What we’re speaking to today is for those who have found some safety and stability and are starting to inch their way back into connection — whether that’s in a healed relationship, a new one, or just in community and friendship. There is a proper order, and it’s worth honoring.

Closing: Your Birthright Is Secure Attachment

Amie: Geoff, thank you so much. I want everyone to know what’s possible and what’s available — because if you don’t know what’s available, you can’t choose it or create it. And as always, you are the chooser in your life.

Geoff: Anytime. I love talking about this stuff. To everybody listening: hang in there. Keep doing your work. Things get better — I really believe that.

About the Guest: Geoff Steurer

Geoff Steurer is a licensed therapist with over 25 years of experience specializing in betrayal trauma recovery for individuals and couples. He is trained in Emotionally Focused Couples Therapy (EFT), a model developed by Dr. Sue Johnson, which centers attachment security as the foundation of healing. Geoff and his wife host a podcast dedicated to healing relationships after betrayal.