Working with resistance: Supporting meaningful change in stalking interventions
Our behaviour change practitioner Victoria Morandeira explains – when it comes to stalking interventions, resistance is often complex, shaped by shame, identity and deeply held beliefs about relationships and behaviour.
Resistance is not unusual in behaviour change work – particularly when individuals attend programmes due to external requirements rather than personal choice. As practitioners, our role is not to eliminate resistance, but to understand it, work with it and use it as part of the change process.
Identifying and working with resistant participants
Resistance tends to show up early and clearly. It may present by being guarded, defensive, or intellectualising – where participants engage in discussion but avoid emotional depth. Some challenge language or definitions, while others minimise their behaviour or reframe it as rational. There may be participation on the surface, but a reluctance to engage with vulnerability or personal accountability.
A participant entered our Compulsive Obsessive Behaviours Intervention (COBI) programme following a stalking conviction, attending solely because it was mandated. From the outset, he described the intervention as punitive. His engagement reflected this stance – he debated concepts, resisted structured exercises, and redirected conversations away from emotional content.
Rather than viewing this as disengagement, it is in fact providing us with meaningful data.
Resistance often mirrors the same patterns that contribute to harmful behaviour outside the room. In this instance, the participant’s difficulty tolerating discomfort, challenge and perceived rejection was consistent both in-session and in his offending behaviour.
Techniques to manage resistance and support engagement
Effective work with resistance relies on consistency, clarity, and safety. We maintained the structure of the programme without becoming rigid. When exercises were declined, they were not removed; instead, the resistance itself was acknowledged and explored.
In this case, a significant barrier was shame. The participant struggled with the label attached to his conviction, swinging between defensiveness and feeling defined by it. Both positions hindered progress.
Shame is not just an emotional issue in this work, it is a risk issue.
When someone cannot tolerate shame or rejection, the urge to repair image, regain control, or justify behaviour can increase. What we were seeing in the room wasn’t separate from the offending pattern. It reflected the same difficulty with limits and perceived rejection.
Boundaries in sessions mirrored the importance of boundaries in real life. At the same time, the relationship mattered. Emotions were acknowledged without excusing behaviour. We spent time separating guilt, which can move someone forward, from shame, which can freeze them in place.
Supporting the shift from external to internal motivation
Participants often begin programmes due to external pressures – legal requirements or conditions. While attendance is necessary, it is not sufficient for meaningful change.
The shift toward internal motivation happens gradually. In this case, progress began through structured tools such as chain analysis. By breaking down incidents into sequences, the participant started to identify underlying vulnerability factors, including loneliness and fear of rejection.
Over time, he began to reconsider his understanding of his behaviour.
What he initially framed as normal romantic pursuit was recognised, through careful examination, as persistence that escalated into pressure.
This reframing required a focus on impact rather than intention and a willingness to explore deeper emotional drivers – his need for connection, fear of being alone, and the values he believed were guiding him.
As insight developed, so did engagement. He began to participate not just because he had to, but because he could see the relevance of the work to his own risk and behaviour. This is the point where external motivation starts to give way to internal investment.
Outcomes of a consistent approach
The change in motivation was gradual. He began because he had to. By the end, he was engaging because he understood the link between emotional triggers and risk. That is the difference that matters.
This is the outcome that matters most.
Attendance on its own doesn’t reduce harm. Insight alone doesn’t either. What reduces harm is the ability to tolerate rejection, shame and limits without acting in ways that escalate.
Work with resistance in stalking intervention is rarely dramatic. It is steady, sometimes uncomfortable, and requires consistency. Resistance often softens when it is understood and contained rather than argued with. When participants move from defending themselves to examining their behaviour, the likelihood of future harm decreases. That is the point of the work.
The COBI programme is an intensive, challenging intervention designed for individuals exhibiting obsessive and controlling behaviours, such as stalking and harassment. Using Dialectical Behavioural Therapy (DBT), our facilitators help participants identify and improve their thinking processes and emotional responses.