Avoidant Attachment: When Independence Becomes Isolation
LAST UPDATED: APRIL 2026
Sometimes, the strength you prize in yourself—the fierce independence and self-reliance—can quietly become a barrier to closeness. When avoiding vulnerability pushes you into isolation, it’s often rooted in avoidant attachment. We’ll explore the tension between wanting connection and the impulse to pull away, so you can find a way back to intimacy that feels safe and true.
- The Moment Independence Feels Like Isolation
- Understanding Avoidant Attachment: A Clinical Overview
- The Proverbial House of Life: Where Avoidance Takes Root
- The Four Exiled Selves: What We Hide When We Push Away
- Terra Firma and Building Secure Foundations
- Signs You’re Caught in Avoidant Patterns
- Steps Toward Healing Without Losing Yourself
- Frequently Asked Questions
The Moment Independence Feels Like Isolation
He just asked you to meet his parents. It’s a simple, ordinary request—almost a milestone after eight months of dating. He’s kind, steady, and clearly cares deeply for you. The kind of man who remembers your coffee order and asks about your day without making it about himself. Yet here you are, chest tightening like it’s about to cave in, breath catching in that familiar way.
You suddenly notice the way he chews, the slight pause in his voice, the way the light catches on the rim of his mug. Your mind races ahead, drafting the breakup text, rehearsing the words that will spare you the discomfort of opening up. Why do these small, benign moments feel like a trap? Why does the thought of closeness stir an urge to pull back—hard and fast?
Imogen, 42, creative director in LA, knows this feeling all too well. She’s built her life around being fiercely independent, a woman who thrives on control and creative freedom. But when things start to get real—when the walls come down and vulnerability calls—she finds herself retreating. It’s like a reflex: the moment connection deepens, she scrambles for reasons to run.
In my practice, I often see this pattern as avoidant attachment in action. The very independence that’s been her armor now feels more like isolation. The tension between wanting to lean in and the impulse to pull away creates a silent struggle. It’s not about lack of love or care. It’s about deep-rooted fears of losing oneself, fears often buried within the Proverbial House of Life—a concept that helps us map where our attachment wounds live.
This moment with Imogen isn’t rare. It’s an invitation to pause and reflect: When does independence cross the line into isolation? How do we hold space for connection without feeling overwhelmed? Here, we begin to untangle those questions with clinical insight and gentle understanding.
The Anatomy of Deactivation: When Closeness Feels Like a Threat
Imogen sits across from me, her fingers tapping a quiet rhythm on the armrest, eyes flickering away the moment our conversation edges toward emotional closeness. She’s a driven creative director in LA, someone who thrives on challenge and independence. Yet, she finds herself sabotaging relationships just when they begin to deepen. “It’s like I’m waiting for the other shoe to drop,” she says. “Or maybe I’m just looking for a reason to run.” This is the hallmark of avoidant attachment — the instinctive urge to deactivate emotional connection before it feels too overwhelming.
At its core, avoidant attachment isn’t about a lack of desire for intimacy. Rather, it’s the body and mind’s way of protecting itself from perceived suffocation. When closeness triggers a sense of vulnerability that feels unbearable, the nervous system flips a switch: emotional needs are shoved aside, and independence becomes a fortress. This self-protective deactivation can feel like freedom, but often it’s isolation masquerading as autonomy.
AVOIDANT ATTACHMENT
A relational pattern identified by psychologist Mary Ainsworth, characterized by discomfort with closeness and reliance on self-sufficiency as a defense against emotional vulnerability.
(PMID: 517843)
In plain terms: It means feeling safer keeping people at arm’s length rather than risking the messiness of true intimacy.
Inside this pattern lies what I call the ‘Phantom Ex’ and the ‘Perfect Future Partner’ — shadow figures that haunt the avoidant mind. The Phantom Ex is the ghost of every past hurt, the internalized voice that warns, “If you get close, you’ll be hurt again.” The Perfect Future Partner, by contrast, is an idealized image that’s always just out of reach — flawless, emotionally distant, and easy to control. Together, these inner figures pull the avoidant person between fear of connection and the lure of a perfect, unattainable love.
The cost of this fortress, however, is steep. While it may keep emotional pain at bay, it also cuts off the nourishment of true intimacy. Ambitious women like Imogen often report feeling lonely or disconnected even when in a relationship. This isolation can exacerbate underlying anxiety and feed a cycle of self-sabotage — just when vulnerability starts to bloom, the walls go back up.
In therapy, we work on what I think of as learning to tolerate closeness — not as a one-time fix, but as a gradual process of expanding the comfort zone. Using clinical frameworks like the Four Exiled Selves, we explore the parts of you that have been pushed away for safety’s sake. We build what the Proverbial House of Life calls the Terra Firma — a grounded, secure sense of self that can withstand the messy, imperfect reality of human connection. It’s not about losing independence; it’s about reclaiming the freedom to be fully seen and loved.
The Anatomy of Deactivation: When Closeness Feels Like a Threat
Imogen sits across from me, her fingers tracing the rim of her coffee cup. She’s just wrapped up a dinner with her partner, a night that should’ve felt warm and promising. Instead, she found herself shrinking away, mentally scripting reasons to end things before the connection deepened. “It’s like the moment I start feeling close, I hit a wall,” she admits, voice tight with frustration and confusion. This is the heart of avoidant attachment—the deactivation of emotional needs to keep intimacy at bay. In my practice, I often see how this coping mechanism, forged to protect against vulnerability, paradoxically leads to isolation.
Avoidant attachment isn’t just about valuing independence—it’s about a deeply ingrained fear that closeness will lead to engulfment or loss of self. The nervous system, conditioned by early relational wounds, signals intimacy as a threat rather than a sanctuary. The “Phantom Ex” haunts many avoidantly attached individuals: a mental replay of past hurts or betrayals that colors present relationships with suspicion and guardedness. Alongside this ghost, there’s the idealized “Perfect Future Partner,” an imagined figure who can provide safety without the messiness of real emotional give-and-take. These internal narratives serve as emotional safeties but also keep genuine connection out of reach.
The result? The fortress. It’s not just a metaphor but a palpable experience—walls built so high and thick that even the person inside begins to feel trapped. Imogen describes the exhaustion of maintaining this distance, the loneliness lurking behind her carefully curated independence. She’s learned to rely on self-sufficiency, yet the cost is profound: a persistent ache of disconnection and the missed richness that vulnerability invites. Clinically, this pattern aligns with the “Four Exiled Selves” framework, where parts of the self that crave belonging and emotional attunement are banished to avoid the pain of rejection or loss.
Learning to tolerate closeness is a gradual, often uncomfortable process. It involves gently inviting the exiled parts back into the room, acknowledging their fears without letting them dictate the narrative. We work within the “Proverbial House of Life” framework to rebuild safety—room by room—so intimacy no longer triggers the need to flee. For Imogen, this means practicing small acts of vulnerability and recognizing that discomfort doesn’t equal danger. Healing involves rewiring the nervous system to hold connection and autonomy simultaneously, a delicate balance that restores both freedom and belonging.
“The desire for intimacy is universal, yet the way we respond to closeness can either build walls or bridges.”
Dr. Sue Johnson, Clinical Psychologist & Developer of Emotionally Focused Therapy
RESEARCH EVIDENCE
Peer-reviewed findings that inform this clinical framework:
- Attachment avoidance positively correlated with negative mental health (r = .28, k=245, N=79,722) (PMID: 36201836)
- Attachment avoidance negatively correlated with positive mental health (r = -.24) (PMID: 36201836)
- In MDD patients, anxious/ambivalent attachment 71.7%; avoidant/dependent 13%; secure 15.3% (n=300) (PMID: 34562987)
- Anxious attachment correlated with problematic social media use (r = 0.319, 95% CI [0.271, 0.366], k=45, N=11,746) (Huang et al., Addictive Behaviors)
- Avoidant attachment correlated with problematic social media use (r = 0.091, 95% CI [0.011,0.170]) (Huang et al., Addictive Behaviors)
The Anatomy of Deactivation: When Intimacy Feels Like Suffocation
Imogen sits across from me, her fingers tapping rhythmically on the armrest of the chair. She’s just told me about the latest relationship that was “almost perfect” — until the moment it wasn’t. Right when things started to feel good, she found herself pulling away, finding reasons to end it. It’s a pattern she knows well but can’t quite explain. For Imogen, intimacy doesn’t feel like warmth or connection; it feels like suffocation. (PMID: 27273169)
This sensation is the core of what I call the anatomy of deactivation, a defensive process common in avoidantly attached individuals. When closeness approaches, their nervous systems signal danger, triggering an internal shutdown. It’s not about rejecting love but about protecting the self from vulnerability that feels overwhelming. In clinical terms, this is the activation of what attachment theory calls the “deactivating strategies,” where emotional needs are suppressed to maintain independence at any cost.
DEACTIVATING STRATEGIES
Deactivating strategies are a set of unconscious emotional regulation tactics identified by Dr. Philip R. Shaver, PhD, a leading researcher in attachment theory. These strategies involve suppressing attachment needs and minimizing emotional expression to avoid perceived threats to autonomy and self-protection.
In plain terms: It’s when someone pushes down their feelings and distances themselves to keep from feeling overwhelmed or vulnerable in close relationships.
Free Guide
The invisible ledger in every relationship.
6 pages, 5 reflection prompts, and a framework for seeing your relational patterns clearly.
No spam, ever. Unsubscribe anytime.
For someone like Imogen, intimacy can feel like losing control of the carefully constructed fortress she’s built around herself. She’s developed what I call the ‘Phantom Ex’—a mental narrative of a past partner who “didn’t get her,” reinforcing her need to stay guarded. At the same time, she carries the image of a ‘Perfect Future Partner,’ an idealized figure who will never challenge her independence or trigger her fears. Both serve as emotional placeholders, keeping real connection at bay.
But this fortress, while protective, comes at a high cost. Emotional isolation can lead to a pervasive loneliness that even the busiest schedules or the most ambitious projects can’t fill. It’s a paradox: the very independence she cherishes becomes the barrier to the intimacy she secretly craves. Through the lens of the Proverbial House of Life, the rooms Imogen refuses to enter—those of vulnerability and reliance—are the ones where true belonging lives.
In therapy, we work on learning to tolerate closeness. It’s not about abandoning independence but about expanding the capacity to hold discomfort without retreating. Using the Terra Firma framework, we ground the experience of intimacy in safety and choice, rather than threat and loss. Step by step, Imogen begins to dismantle the walls, inviting connection not as a suffocating force but as a source of strength. The journey isn’t linear or easy, but it’s deeply transformative—turning isolation into authentic partnership.
The Both/And of Avoidant Attachment
Imogen sits across from me, her fingers tapping a restless rhythm on the armrest. She’s just told me how, every time her relationship reaches a warm, tender place, she finds a reason to pull away. “It’s like the closer we get, the more I feel like I’m drowning,” she says, voice tight. This is the anatomy of deactivation—the subtle, yet powerful, internal process where the drive for independence becomes a self-imposed exile.
In my work with driven women like Imogen, I often see how intimacy can feel like suffocation. The yearning for connection collides with a deep-seated fear of engulfment, triggering a protective reflex to retreat. It’s not just a dislike for vulnerability; it’s a physiological and emotional shutdown that happens before the partner even fully arrives. The “both/and” here is crucial: the same person who craves closeness is the one who tightens their fortress walls when that closeness threatens to expose their most tender parts.
The mind of someone with avoidant attachment often constructs two compelling, contradictory images: the “phantom ex” and the “perfect future partner.” The phantom ex is the shadow of past betrayals, disappointments, or unmet needs—a ghost that haunts current intimacy with whispers of “you’ll get hurt again.” Meanwhile, the perfect future partner is an idealized figure who seems to promise safety and ease but remains just out of reach, like a mirage. This dialectic keeps the heart oscillating between fear and hope, closeness and distance, trust and skepticism.
But what’s the cost of this fortress Imogen builds around herself? It’s more than loneliness. It’s the gradual erosion of connection that feeds and sustains the soul. In clinical terms, we might say it’s the exile of parts of the self that long for love but fear its demands—the Four Exiled Selves that get hidden behind walls of self-reliance. The drive to stay independent can mask the ache of isolation, and the longer this cycle continues, the more the capacity to tolerate closeness diminishes.
Learning to tolerate closeness doesn’t mean abandoning independence; it means expanding the Proverbial House of Life to hold both safety and vulnerability. For Imogen, this involves recognizing that intimacy isn’t a threat but a terrain where trust can be built, piece by piece. Through therapeutic work grounded in frameworks like Terra Firma, we explore how to gently lower the defenses, invite in the discomfort of closeness, and gradually rewrite the internal narrative that equates intimacy with loss of self. It’s a slow, often challenging process, but it’s also the path to transforming isolation into connection without sacrificing the drive and ambition that define her.
The Systemic Lens: When Independence Becomes Isolation
Imogen, a 42-year-old creative director in LA, sits in her sleek, sunlit apartment, scrolling through texts from her partner. Just as the conversation starts to deepen, she finds herself searching for reasons to pull away, to end things before they get “too real.” This pattern—common among driven and ambitious women with avoidant attachment—doesn’t exist in a vacuum. It’s woven tightly into the cultural fabric that shapes how many women learn to navigate intimacy and independence.
In my clinical work, I often frame avoidant attachment through what I call the Anatomy of Deactivation. This concept captures the internal shutdowns and emotional distancing strategies that arise when closeness triggers a sense of suffocation. It’s not just a personal defense mechanism; it’s a response conditioned by societal messages that equate vulnerability with weakness, especially for women who’ve been taught to prioritize self-reliance above all. For women like Imogen, whose identity is deeply invested in independence and professional success, intimacy can feel like an encroachment—an invisible hand threatening to dismantle the carefully constructed boundaries that protect their sense of self.
The cultural narrative around gender plays a significant role here. Ambitious women are often caught in a paradox: they’re celebrated for their drive but subtly penalized when they express emotional need or desire closeness. This creates what I refer to clinically as the ‘Phantom Ex’ and the ‘Perfect Future Partner’—two mental constructs that sabotage real connection. The Phantom Ex is a ghost of past relational disappointments, magnified and projected, justifying emotional withdrawal. The Perfect Future Partner, on the other hand, is an idealized figure who represents the safety and unconditional acceptance that feels unattainable in the present. Together, these constructs keep women like Imogen trapped in a cycle of pushing away and longing, never fully inhabiting the messy reality of intimate connection.
The cost of this fortress of independence is substantial. It’s not just loneliness or the frustration of failed relationships. It’s also the internal fragmentation that comes from suppressing the parts of ourselves that crave closeness and support. In clinical frameworks like the Proverbial House of Life, we understand that avoiding intimacy can mean shutting out entire ‘rooms’ of emotional experience—leaving the house structurally unsound. Over time, this can impact not only romantic relationships but also friendships, family bonds, and even self-compassion. The Four Exiled Selves framework helps us see that parts of the self—often the vulnerable, needy, or afraid—are locked away, creating internal dissonance and emotional exhaustion.
Learning to tolerate closeness is a gradual, often challenging process. For driven and ambitious women, it means unlearning the automatic equation of vulnerability with weakness and rewriting the internal scripts that dictate when and how they can be seen. We work on cultivating Terra Firma—grounding in the present moment and in one’s bodily experience—to gently expand the window of tolerance for intimacy. This isn’t about abandoning independence; rather, it’s about finding the freedom to be both self-reliant and deeply connected. For Imogen, this might look like stepping into discomfort, naming her fears of engulfment, and experimenting with small acts of trust. The systemic pressures won’t disappear overnight, but with awareness and support, the fortress can become a home—one where closeness doesn’t suffocate, but nourishes.
The Courage to Lean In: Reclaiming Connection Beyond the Fortress
Imogen sits in her sunlit office, the city humming beyond the window, yet inside, a familiar restlessness stirs whenever her boyfriend’s texts begin to arrive. Just as things start to feel warm and real, she finds herself crafting reasons—small, almost invisible cracks—to pull away. This dance between closeness and retreat is the hallmark of avoidant attachment, and it’s exhausting. In my work with driven and ambitious women like Imogen, the path forward begins with recognizing that the fortress built to protect you from suffocation can also be the very thing that isolates you.
The first step in healing avoidant attachment is learning to tolerate the discomfort of closeness. In clinical terms, this means gently expanding your capacity for intimacy by sitting with the feelings of vulnerability rather than fleeing from them. Through frameworks like the Proverbial House of Life, we explore the rooms you’ve locked away—the Four Exiled Selves, those parts of you that learned early on that expressing need was unsafe. By inviting these exiled selves back into your inner world, you start dismantling the automatic deactivation patterns that tell you “I must be self-sufficient or I’ll be overwhelmed.”
Another crucial element is confronting the ‘Phantom Ex’ and the ‘Perfect Future Partner’—those internalized figures representing past hurts and idealized futures that keep you stuck in a cycle of avoidance. In therapy, we work to recognize how these mental scripts sabotage present relationships, turning real connection into a test you’re destined to fail. When you begin to see your partner not as a threat but as a human being with their own vulnerabilities, the fortress’s walls start to feel less necessary.
Healing also involves embracing what I call Terra Firma—grounding yourself in the present moment and your embodied experience. Mindfulness practices and somatic approaches help you stay connected to your body’s signals, so you can notice when the impulse to shut down arises and choose instead to lean in. It’s not about instant transformation but incremental steps that build trust in yourself and others.
If you’re like Imogen, driven and ambitious, you might have built your independence as armor. But know this: the courage to lean into connection isn’t a weakness—it’s a powerful act of self-compassion. You can learn to hold closeness without losing yourself, to be seen without suffocating. Healing isn’t a destination; it’s a daily practice, a community, a shared journey. And you don’t have to do it alone. We’re in this together.
Begin the work of relational trauma recovery.
If you’re beginning to see these patterns in yourself, my course guides you through the relational trauma recovery framework step by step.
In my work with driven, ambitious women — over 15,000 clinical hours — I’ve observed that relationship struggles are rarely about the relationship itself. They’re about the relational template that was installed long before she ever met her partner. The woman who chose a man who withholds affection didn’t make a mistake. She made a neurobiologically coherent choice: she chose the emotional climate that matched her nervous system’s definition of “love” — a definition that was written in a language of absence, condition, and intermittent reinforcement before she was old enough to speak.
Stephen Porges, PhD, neuroscientist at Indiana University and developer of Polyvagal Theory, describes how the nervous system uses “neuroception” — an unconscious process of evaluating safety and danger — to determine who feels familiar and who feels foreign. For the woman who grew up with a parent who was emotionally unpredictable, a steady, reliable partner doesn’t register as safe. He registers as boring. Unfamiliar. Wrong. While the partner who pulls away, who runs hot and cold, who keeps her guessing — he registers as home. Not because she wants drama. Because her nervous system only knows how to attach in the presence of uncertainty. (PMID: 7652107)
This is why the advice to “just choose better” is not only unhelpful — it’s physiologically naive. You cannot cognitively override a nervous system template that was installed before your prefrontal cortex was online. What you can do is work with a clinician who understands the template, who can help you see it in real time, and who can offer a corrective relational experience — a relationship where safety isn’t intermittent, where you don’t have to earn attunement, where your needs don’t make you “too much” — that slowly, over months and years, rewires the system from the inside out.
Bessel van der Kolk, MD, psychiatrist and trauma researcher at Boston University and author of The Body Keeps the Score, explains that traumatic relational experiences are stored not in narrative memory but in the body — in muscle tension, breathing patterns, startle responses, and the autonomic reactions that fire milliseconds before conscious thought can intervene. This is why a driven woman can intellectually know that her partner’s silence doesn’t mean he’s leaving, and still feel a cascade of panic that makes her chest tighten and her throat close. She isn’t being irrational. Her body is responding to a threat it learned to detect decades ago, in a different relationship, with a different person who looked nothing like the man sitting across from her at dinner. (PMID: 9384857)
The body keeps the score of every moment you were left, dismissed, overlooked, or made to feel that your needs were an inconvenience. And it keeps the score silently — without words, without context, without the narrative scaffolding that would allow the conscious mind to say: this feeling belongs to then, not now. This is what makes relational trauma so disorienting for the intelligent, driven woman. She can analyze geopolitical risk with precision. She can build a financial model in her sleep. But she cannot figure out why she freezes when her husband asks her what she needs — because the answer to that question lives in her body, not her mind.
Richard Schwartz, PhD, developer of Internal Family Systems (IFS) therapy, describes how the psyche organizes itself into parts — protector parts that manage, control, and keep the system safe, and exiled parts that carry the original pain of not being loved the way she needed. For the driven woman in a relationship, the protector parts are often running the show: the part that monitors for rejection, the part that withdraws before she can be hurt, the part that performs independence so convincingly that even she forgets it’s a performance. (PMID: 23813465)
Underneath those protectors — and this is the part that most general therapy never reaches — are the exiled parts: the young, tender, desperate parts that still carry the grief of the child who wanted her mother’s warmth and learned to live without it, who wanted her father’s attention and learned to earn it through achievement instead. These exiled parts don’t disappear because she built a career. They don’t heal because she married a good man. They wait — sometimes for decades — until someone creates a safe enough container for them to finally speak.
That container is what trauma-informed therapy provides. Not strategies for better communication (though those come). Not tools for managing conflict (though those come too). The foundational work is creating a relationship — between her and her therapist — where the exile can finally be seen, witnessed, and unburdened. And when that happens, something shifts in her external relationships too. Not because she’s “fixed,” but because the part of her that was unconsciously running the relationship from a place of childhood terror is no longer in the driver’s seat.
If what you’ve read here resonates, I want you to know that individual therapy and executive coaching are available for driven women ready to do this work. You can also explore my self-paced recovery courses or schedule a complimentary consultation to find the right fit.
Q: What are the main signs of avoidant attachment in relationships?
A: Avoidant attachment often shows up as a strong desire for independence paired with discomfort around emotional closeness. You might notice difficulty trusting others, reluctance to share feelings, or pulling away when a partner seeks deeper connection. In therapy, we often explore how these patterns protect from vulnerability but can lead to isolation, making it hard to sustain intimate relationships despite a deep underlying desire for connection.
Q: Can avoidant attachment be changed or healed?
A: Yes, avoidant attachment can be addressed and healed with intentional work. Through therapy, we create a safe space to explore your Four Exiled Selves and understand the roots of your avoidance. By learning to tolerate vulnerability and build trust, you can gradually shift from isolation toward more balanced interdependence. Healing is a process that involves patience, self-compassion, and relearning how to connect without losing your sense of self.
Q: How does avoidant attachment affect communication in a relationship?
A: Avoidant attachment often leads to communication patterns where emotional topics are avoided or minimized. You might notice shutting down during conflicts, giving one-word answers, or deflecting deeper discussions. This creates distance and frustration for both partners. Clinically, we work on developing Terra Firma skills—grounding yourself in emotional presence—to foster more open, vulnerable conversations that build safety rather than reinforce isolation.
Q: Is avoidant attachment the same as being independent?
A: While driven and ambitious women often value independence, avoidant attachment takes this to a place of emotional disconnection. True independence allows for healthy interdependence—being able to rely on others and be relied upon. Avoidant attachment, however, uses independence as a shield against intimacy, leading to isolation rather than connection. We distinguish this in therapy by exploring how your independence serves your needs versus how it might be keeping you emotionally distant.
Q: What causes avoidant attachment to develop?
A: Avoidant attachment often develops as a protective response to early experiences where emotional needs went unmet or were met inconsistently. In my practice, we explore how the Proverbial House of Life—your early environment—can leave parts of you feeling unsafe expressing vulnerability. This triggers the Four Exiled Selves, leading to self-protective strategies like emotional withdrawal. Understanding these origins helps create a path toward healing and healthier relational patterns.
Q: How can partners support someone with avoidant attachment?
A: Supporting a partner with avoidant attachment requires patience and respect for their need for space while gently encouraging emotional connection. It’s important to avoid pushing too hard, which can trigger withdrawal, and instead focus on consistent, non-judgmental presence. Couples therapy often helps both partners develop Terra Firma grounding techniques, fostering safety and trust. This balance allows the avoidant partner to gradually lower defenses and engage more fully in the relationship.
Related Reading
WAYS TO WORK WITH ANNIE
Individual Therapy
Trauma-informed therapy for driven women healing relational trauma. Licensed in 9 states.
Executive Coaching
Trauma-informed coaching for ambitious women navigating leadership and burnout.
Fixing the Foundations
Annie’s signature course for relational trauma recovery. Work at your own pace.
Strong & Stable
The Sunday conversation you wished you’d had years earlier. 23,000+ subscribers.
Annie Wright, LMFT
LMFT #95719 · Relational Trauma Specialist · W.W. Norton Author
Helping ambitious women finally feel as good as their résumé looks.
As a licensed psychotherapist (LMFT #95719), trauma-informed executive coach, and relational trauma specialist with over 15,000 clinical hours, she guides ambitious women — including Silicon Valley leaders, physicians, and entrepreneurs — in repairing the psychological foundations beneath their impressive lives. Annie is the founder and former CEO of Evergreen Counseling, a multimillion-dollar trauma-informed therapy center she built, scaled, and successfully exited. A regular contributor to Psychology Today, her expert commentary has appeared in Forbes, Business Insider, Inc., NBC, and The Information. She is currently writing her first book with W.W. Norton.
