Tagged: “moral virtue”

The Role of Emotional Validation in Apologies and Forgiveness

This blog post is by Dr. Suzanne Freedman, a Contributing Writer and Researcher to the IFI. She is a Professor in the Educational Psychology department at the University of Northern Iowa in Cedar Falls, Iowa.

I did something to hurt my daughter the other day. It was unintentional, but she was angry and hurt, and she had a right to her feelings. When she shared her emotions with me, I realized that my actions were wrong. I felt bad about what I had done; I apologized and assured her that it would not happen again. However, I apologized immediately after she expressed her anger, while she was still upset. Fortunately, through my study of forgiveness and the psychological process of forgiving for over 30 years, I understand that forgiveness is not instantaneous.

Although I wanted my daughter’s forgiveness, I knew expecting it right away was neither fair nor realistic. People often apologize and expect immediate absolution before the injured has processed their emotions. Many individuals who say, “I forgive you” upon receiving an apology later discover they do not feel that forgiveness in their hearts. This is because genuine healing requires time, not just words.

One of the most overlooked aspects of apologizing is allowing the hurt people time to work through their emotions. Expecting immediate forgiveness disregards the necessary emotional processing that follows a deep, personal, and unfair injury (Smedes, 1996). Emotional reactions to conflict and personal injury are normal and natural, and those who have been hurt need time to feel and express their emotions. As a student in my college class on interpersonal relationships stated, “Forgiveness is not immediate—you cannot just say ‘I forgive you’ and expect everything to be better. Especially if saying it is not true—saying it just to stop talking about it does not make it better for you or them. Yet, I see it all the time, and people wonder why their relationships/friendships are never the same. There are steps you can take to forgive someone, even if you never forget what happened or your relationship isn’t the same” (personal communication, March 2025).

A sincere apology involves emotional validation—the acknowledgment of another person’s feelings as real and important. Research shows that interpersonal hurt often evokes a mix of emotions, including resentment, anger, and/or sadness (Freedman & Zarifikar, 2016). If these emotions are dismissed—such as when an offender urges the injured to “move on” or “let it go”—it can lead to emotional suppression or denial rather than genuine healing (Gregory, 2025). Admitting and expressing feelings is a critical step before forgiveness can occur, as emphasized in the first phase of Enright’s (2019) process model of interpersonal forgiveness. Forgiveness is often criticized because individuals fail to recognize this critical step in the forgiveness process and mistakenly believe that forgiveness involves the suppression or denial of one’s emotions (Freedman & Zarifkar, 2016).

I knew that allowing my daughter to feel, express, and process her emotions was just as important as my apology. By validating her anger rather than dismissing it or pushing her toward forgiveness, I communicated that her pain mattered. This act of validation fosters an environment where forgiveness can develop naturally over time. Parents often struggle when they see their children in pain and may react by suggesting they quickly move past the hurt. However, individuals need time to experience and process their emotions before they are ready to move forward. According to Damour (2020), when teens can sit with their feelings and then move beyond them, they develop resilience, realizing they can endure difficult emotions.

Pressuring someone to forgive before they are ready can lead to resentment, emotional dissonance, and distrust in the forgiveness process (Worthington, 2006). Instead of fostering healing, forced forgiveness creates obligation, often resulting in superficial reconciliation (Freedman & Chang, 2010). My college students frequently report that they remember being told in childhood to forgive after receiving a forced apology, despite still feeling hurt. Similarly, offenders are often encouraged to apologize before they truly feel remorse. Genuine forgiveness and apology cannot be demanded—it must arise from within.

In my situation, if I had expected my daughter to forgive me immediately, she might have felt pressured rather than supported. This could have led to resentment or suppression of her emotions instead of real healing. By giving her the space she needed, I conveyed that her emotions were valid. As Damour (2020) explains, psychological health is not about avoiding discomfort but about experiencing the appropriate emotion at the right time and developing the capacity to endure it.

Conclusion

Forgiveness is a process, not a transaction. While an apology is a critical step in making amends, it does not guarantee immediate and automatic forgiveness. Emotional validation plays an essential role in healing by acknowledging the injured person’s emotions rather than rushing the person toward a resolution. Additionally, while an apology is not necessary for forgiveness to occur, it is often important for reconciliation and can make forgiving easier. However, requiring an apology before forgiving can leave the injured trapped in resentment, waiting for an apology that may never come (Freedman, 1998).

My experience with my daughter reinforced a fundamental truth—forgiveness cannot be rushed or forced. Healing requires time, understanding, and the space to process emotions fully. By allowing my daughter to work through her pain without pressure, I honored her emotional experience and our relationship, fostering the conditions for true forgiveness to emerge.

References

Damour, L. (2020) Helping teens make room for uncomfortable emotions. New York Times, April 21, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/21/well/family/coronavirus-teenagers-uncomfortable-emotions.html

Enright, R. D. (2019). Forgiveness is a choice: A step-by-step process for resolving anger and restoring hope. American Psychological Association.

Freedman, S. (1998). Forgiveness and reconciliation: The importance of understanding how they differ. Counseling and Values, 42(3), 200–216. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-007X.1998.tb00426.x

Freedman, S., & Chang, W.-C. R. (2010). An analysis of a sample of the general population’s understanding of forgiveness: Implications for mental health counselors. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 32(1), 5-34. https://doi.org/10.17744/mehc.32.1.a0x246r8l6025053

Freedman, S., & Zarifikar, T. (2016). The psychology of interpersonal forgiveness and guidelines for forgiveness therapy: What therapists need to know to help their clients forgive. Spirituality in Clinical Practice, 3(1), 45-58. https://doi.org/10.1037/scp0000087

Gregory, A. A. (2025). You don’t need to forgive: Trauma recovery on your own terms. Broadleaf Books.

Smedes, L. B. (1996). The art of forgiving: When you need to forgive and don’t know how. Penguin Random House.

Worthington, E. L., Jr. (2006). Forgiveness and reconciliation: Theory and application. Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

Can Murderers Be Forgiven?

Image by Ron Lach, Pexels.com

I recently watched a podcast video in which a prominent world figure, currently involved in inter-country conflict, was asked about the possibility of forgiving the other nation’s leader.  The world leader then asked this rhetorical question in response to the host: “Can murderers be forgiven?”  It was obvious by his anger that the world leader was saying, “No.”  He did not elaborate, which was the end of that particular part of the discussion.

It was apparent that the host saw the possibility of forgiveness between the two leaders as one path to peace.  Yet, if the leader sees the other as a murderer, then it follows that he is shutting the door on this possibility.

The question by the host was a serious one that might open the door, even a little, to peace.  Can murderers be forgiven?  If we look at the history of forgiveness, we see that the answer is a definite “yes” because those who are “murderers” can be and have been forgiven by others in the past.  Here are two examples:

Marietta Jaeger lost her daughter Suzy to a kidnapping and murder when her family was on vacation (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OFMx9kIems).  At first, she said that she was so angry that she could have killed him and with a big smile on her face.  Yet, as the weeks dragged on, she saw the stress and anger tearing her family apart.  It was then that she decided to forgive the murderer, even though she had no idea who this was.  She wished the person well and prayed for the person’s well-being.  When the murderer called Marietta on the first anniversary of his kidnapping Suzy, Marietta expressed concern for him.  Her kindness so took him aback that he stayed on the phone for over an hour, sufficient time for the law enforcement officials to trace the call, find, and arrest him.

The second example is by Eva Mozes Kor, who forgave “Dr.” Mengele for his abhorrent medical experiments on the twins of Auschwitz during World War II (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdgPAetNY5U).  Because of such unethical practices by Mengele, Eva’s twin sister, Miriam, passed away prematurely from kidney failure.  Despite some of Eva’s colleagues disapproving of her decision, she forgave Mengele and the Nazis “in my name only” as a way to be free of the resentment that could have been with her for the rest of her life.

In neither case did Marietta nor Eva abandon the quest for justice.  Forgiveness and justice existed side-by-side.  By this I mean that Marietta certainly would not want the one who murdered Suzy to be on the streets to take the lives of others.  Eva was forgiving once she was free from concentration camp and the Nazis were utterly defeated.

Can murderers be forgiven?  Yes, and they have.  If the leader, who used this question as a rhetorical retort to the podcast host, is open to justice and forgiveness together in the future, as Marietta and Eva have shown is possible, might his fellow citizens and he be able to take a first step of peace in his region of the world?  This is no rhetorical question, but one that might in the future save lives.  I say this because negotiations with hatred in the heart are less likely to lead to satisfying and stable outcomes than when the heart is at peace and offers that peace to the other.

Questioning the Ubiquitous Statement, “Forgiveness Is What You Do for Yourself, Not for the Other”

Image by Leeloo the First, Pexels.com

In perusing the internet lately for news on forgiveness, I was faced at least occasionally with the statement in the title above.  More than a few people post this idea that forgiveness is centered on the self and not no the one who behaved unjustly.

Let’s carefully examine this statement about forgiveness for the self and see how it goes.

If forgiveness is for ourselves and not for the one who behaved unjustly, then forgiveness is not one of the moral virtues along with justice, patience, compassion, and love if it is not “for other people.” So what is it? The “for ourselves” statement limits forgiveness to a self-help psychological strategy for emotional healing. It would seem that we are free to ignore, disregard, or show no concern for the people who have wronged us if they are not included in this healing equation. To forgive, then, could be to dismiss.

Such a perspective then takes away the paradox of forgiveness. The paradox is this: As we focus on the other person and strive for empathy, compassion, and a wider view of who this person is beyond the injustice, our own hearts begin to soften toward that other person.  As the heart softens, the resentment, which is a nagging and persistent deep anger, begins to lessen.  Over time, as we focus this goodness on the other it is we ourselves, as forgivers of the other, who begin to heal.  Do you see the very large distinction between focusing on the other with a sense of goodness, which is the essence of forgiveness, and one important consequence of forgiving?  The consequence, paradoxically, is that as we strive for goodness expressly toward the other person, it is we as forgivers who heal.

We must not confuse what forgiveness is with a consequence of what forgiveness accomplishes.  Forgiveness is what we do in goodness toward the offending person.  An important consequence of such a focus on the other is that we experience emotional healing.

Helping Abused Adolescents, Who Are in Corrections, to Forgive

Image by RDNE Stock project, Pexels.com

Drs. Wongeun Ji and Robert Enright this month had a research study published in the Journal of Family Trauma, Child Custody, and Child Development. The study highlights the importance of being aware of the traumas suffered by these young people prior to their crimes, arrest, conviction, and imprisonment. It also highlights the effectiveness of a forgiveness program in reversing the negative effects of such trauma.

This study examined the effectiveness of a forgiveness education program for incarcerated female adolescents in South Korea who suffered from attachment disorders, adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), and the psychological compromise of anger, anxiety, and depression. A total of 27 female offenders were randomly assigned to a forgiveness treatment or the standard programs offered at this particular institution. Both groups first were screened to be sure that each participant was high on the “adverse childhood experiences.” Each participant also was screened to be sure that she had significant psychological challenges, such as heightened anger and anxiety. In the end, there were 10 participants in the forgiveness experimental group and eight in the control group because some dropped out or did not want to fill out the post-test questionnaires. The forgiveness program lasted for four weeks, with the participants meeting as a group daily for five days each week, except for the final week in which three days were allotted for the program. They met for about 50 minutes for each forgiveness class, which focused on what forgiveness is and is not and the practice of kindness, respect, generosity, and love toward those who act unjustly. The instruction focused on story characters and people (through video reports) who have struggled to forgive. Group discussion followed the presentation of the stories or videos. Participants were encouraged to reflect on their family trauma, but to protect each person’s privacy, the participants were asked not to verbally share those family traumas within the group because this was an educational program, not a psychotherapy program.

When compared to the control group, the participants in the forgiveness treatment group demonstrated more decreases in anxiety and anger and increases in forgiveness and mother attachment. The study also discussed how staff members could serve as substitute attachment figures and promote better attachment outcomes. The results highlight the need for forgiveness programs in corrections because they allow the participants to heal from past traumas that may be contributing to the acting out of their frustrations onto other people.

It is unfortunate that too many correctional facilities do not yet see the strong utility of first giving forgiveness interventions to those imprisoned so that they can reduce anger and anxiety and, therefore, be more open to traditional rehabilitation approaches. After all, the control group had the usual corrections programs and they were not effective. The same kind of ineffective outcome with the usual corrections program occurred in the study with men in a maximum-security correctional context (Yu, L., Gambaro, M., Song, J., Teslik, M., Song, M., Komoski, M.C., Wollner, B., & Enright, R.D. [2021]. Forgiveness therapy in a maximum-security correctional institution: A randomized clinical trial. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy.) In other words, in two research studies to date, the hand-picked approaches by those in authority within the institutions created programs that, by themselves, do not work. In contrast, in each of these two studies, the forgiveness program was successful in enhancing psychological well-being.

The full article describing the above study in South Korea can be read here on the online version of the Journal of Family Trauma, Child Custody, and Child Development. 

The reference to that work in South Korea is:

Ji, W. & Enright, R.D. (2024). Forgiveness in juvenile corrections: An exploratory study on Korean female youth offenders. Journal of Family Trauma, Child Custody, and Child Development. https://doi.org/10.1080/26904586.2024.2436967

Forgiveness Gives Light

Image by Pixabay, Pexels.com

I was surprised this past summer when I read negative commentaries about forgiveness coming from major media outlets. As I argued on August 21, 2024 within this blog site, those criticizing forgiveness were misunderstanding what it is, confusing it, for example, with automatic reconciliation or being pressured into it as a norm that makes people miserable.

In this essay, I would like to take a different approach. Instead of dwelling on the darkness of misunderstanding, I would like to consider what forgiveness actually is when freely chosen and embraced by those who have been poorly treated.

Let us start with an analogy. We are in a dark room, and it is hard to see anything at all. In comes a little child who goes over to a bureau, picks up a candle, and carries it to you along with a match. “Would you light this candle for me, please?” the child requests. As you strike the match and unite it with the candle’s wick, all of a sudden there is bright light where there was darkness. You can see the smiling child clearly. You can see the paintings on the wall and the soft furniture, welcoming you to sit down and relax.

Forgiveness is like the lighted candle. At first, our hearts seem darkened by the injustices we suffer. That darkness almost seems as if it will be part of our identity, a part of who we are as persons. Yet, when we forgive, we offer goodness to those who have not been good to us. We offer them the light of a second chance. We offer them a view that they have worth despite what they did. We offer them light.

At the same time, and our science shows this over and over, as a person willingly and patiently gives this light of forgiveness to others, the darkness in one’s own heart fades, and the light of love can and does replace it. As that light shines onto the offending other person, it also finds its way into the hearts of our loved ones as we no longer displace our anger, our darkness, onto them.

As we give the light of forgiveness to others, that light can remain in their hearts and gives them a chance to pass that light of love to even more people. Have you ever thought of forgiveness this way? As you give the light of goodness to others, your light can be passed from one person to another, even from one generation to another. That one candle, lit in one dark room, can continue to shine across time and into many hearts.

Forgiveness is not the darkness of forced reconciliation or forced and phony empathy. When fostered and given freely to others, it is one of the most extraordinary forms of humanity.

Welcome to the light of forgiveness. May your light of forgiveness shine this Thanksgiving weekend…..and well beyond that to others.