A couple sits at a corner table in a romantic restaurant. It seems like a perfect date night, but the clink of silverware and the glow of candles fail to mask the invisible walls between these two people—walls built from the legacy of one partner’s traumatic past. To an outsider, it might seem like the first sparks of romance have long burned out, but to researchers Lassri and Gewirtz-Meydan (2025), the silence is not disinterest—it is a scar. Their recent research, published in Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, explores the link between between childhood sexual abuse (CSA) and the challenges of sustaining satisfying adult romantic relationships. More importantly, it offers hope through identifying the protective power of mentalization in intimate partnerships.
CSA and Betrayal Trauma
Childhood sexual abuse is not just a physical boundary violation; it’s a cruel betrayal of trust. Survivors often carry this fractured trust into adulthood, viewing relationships as perilous terrain. As Lassri and Gewirtz-Meydan (2025) found, these early violations leave lasting imprints, manifesting in adult romantic relationships as difficulty communicating, avoidance of intimacy, and a lingering fear of emotional closeness. For many, romantic connection feels like walking barefoot over shards of a painful past.
“It’s not surprising,” the researchers note, “that CSA survivors may anticipate interpersonal trauma, even within ostensibly loving relationships” (Lassri & Gewirtz-Meydan, 2025). This anticipation often yields patterns of detachment or dependency—two sides of the same coin of distrust. Yet, amidst this relational backdrop, their study illuminates a pathway out: mentalization, or the ability to understand oneself and others in terms of mental states, such as thoughts or feelings.
What Exactly is Mentalizing?
Imagine a foggy window slowly becoming clear. This captures the essence of mentalizing—the capacity to see the minds of others and oneself with precision and compassion. Originating from childhood attachment relationships, mentalizing is a skill honed through mirroring experiences with caregivers who reflect back a child’s thoughts and emotions. But what happens when those reflections are distorted by abuse?
“It’s not surprising,” the researchers note, “that CSA survivors may anticipate interpersonal trauma, even within ostensibly loving relationships.”
In cases of CSA, the researchers explain, this developmental process often goes awry. Survivors may “shut down or lose interest in thinking about their own and others’ mental states” (Lassri & Gewirtz-Meydan, 2025). This protective mechanism, while useful in the short term, exacts a long-term toll: diminished ability to navigate the emotional intricacies of adult relationships. The study revealed that impaired mentalizing—marked by uncertainty about mental states—was a key mediator linking CSA to lower satisfaction in romantic partnerships.
The Resilience Factor
The author’s narrative is not entirely one of loss. Lassri and Gewirtz-Meydan’s work introduces an optimistic counterbalance: the power of robust mentalizing to act as a resilience factor. Even amidst the legacy of CSA, individuals with high certainty about mental states demonstrated a remarkable ability to shield their relationships from the fallout of past trauma. The moderating role of mentalizing was robust: at high levels, the association between CSA and relationship dissatisfaction reduced dramatically.
Consider the case of Miriam (a pseudonym), a 34-year-old CSA survivor who entered therapy after a string of tumultuous relationships. Through mentalization-based treatment, she began to understand her partner’s behaviors not as attacks but as expressions of his own internal emotional states. “For the first time,” she said, “I realized that my partner’s silence didn’t mean he was angry at me. He was just tired.” This shift in perspective, though subtle, was transformative, allowing Miriam to rebuild intimacy on a foundation of mutual understanding.
A Roadmap for Therapeutic Interventions
The study’s findings have implications far beyond individual therapy sessions. By identifying mentalizing as both a mediator and moderator, Lassri and Gewirtz-Meydan provide a roadmap for therapeutic interventions. Programs that enhance mentalizing capacities, such as those rooted in mindfulness or attachment-based frameworks, can offer CSA survivors tools to reframe their narratives and rebuild trust.
The moderating role of mentalizing was robust: at high levels, the association between CSA and relationship dissatisfaction reduced dramatically.
However, the researchers caution against oversimplification. Mentalizing, while powerful, is not a panacea. Its efficacy depends on a range of factors, including the survivor’s broader social context and access to supportive relationships. Furthermore, the study’s reliance on self-reported measures, while illuminating, underscores the need for future research using more nuanced methodologies to validate these findings.
The Road Ahead
The study’s limitations also pave the way for future inquiry. As the authors note, their sample was predominantly composed of educated, healthy individuals—a demographic that may not capture the experiences of more marginalized CSA survivors. Additionally, the cross-sectional design leaves room for longitudinal studies to untangle the causal threads between CSA, mentalizing, and relationship satisfaction.
There is also a pressing need to explore the dyadic dynamics of mentalizing within romantic partnerships. How does a partner’s mentalizing capacity influence the relational outcomes of CSA survivors? Could interventions that target both partners create a synergistic effect, amplifying the benefits of robust mentalizing? These questions remain unanswered but are fertile ground for future exploration.
Reference:
Lassri, D., & Gewirtz-Meydan, A. (2025). Breaking the cycle: Mentalizing moderates and mediates the link between childhood sexual abuse and satisfaction with adult romantic relationships.Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 17(1), 10–19. https://doi.org/10.1037/tra0001692
