Why You Don’t Have to Forgive: Interrogating the Imperative to Forgive

In some therapeutic approaches, forgiveness is positioned as a marker of emotional growth. Clients are encouraged to forgive those who hurt them, not only as a relational act, but as an internal milestone. This suggestion is rarely neutral. Forgiveness is often framed as wise, mature, or psychologically evolved. To withhold it, by contrast, is framed as an obstacle to healing. This moral framing deserves closer scrutiny.

The assumption that healing requires forgiveness suggests that emotional resolution depends on moral closure. It equates peace with release, and implies that in order to move forward, one must let someone else off the hook. For people recovering from significant harm, this can be deeply unsettling. The encouragement to forgive may feel like pressure to minimize pain, soften judgment, or suppress anger in service of an emotional ideal.

The imperative to forgive is not grounded in clinical consensus or required by evidence-based practice, though forgiveness may correlate with psychological relief for some. Its elevation in therapeutic settings often reflects cultural, religious, or ideological values that prioritize harmony and redemption over justice or clarity.

Trauma recovery depends on very different tasks. Survivors need to integrate memory, regulate distress, and reestablish a sense of agency. These processes are rooted in neurobiology, relational repair, and the development of internal coherence. None of them require forgiveness. In fact, for some people, retaining moral clarity about the harm they experienced is essential. It validates what happened and counters the internalized minimization that often accompanies trauma.

When forgiveness is introduced too early or framed as a therapeutic goal, it can create emotional confusion. Survivors may feel ashamed for not wanting to forgive or assume they are failing at healing if forgiveness feels inaccessible. This pressure can distort the therapeutic process. Instead of focusing on grief, anger, or fear, the client may become preoccupied with performing the “right” kind of recovery. The attention shifts from their experience to an external emotional standard.

Forgiveness may emerge over time, and if it does, it should be honored as a choice, not a benchmark. For others, forgiveness may never feel authentic. That outcome is equally valid. The goal of therapy is not to guide people toward predetermined emotional outcomes, but to help them attune to what is true for them. If forgiveness feels like a betrayal of self, then withholding it is not a failure. It is a form of integrity.

The ability to define what healing looks like should belong to the survivor. Therapy that supports this autonomy is not only more respectful. It is more effective.