The general phenomenon of trauma survivors developing powerful emotional attachments to their abusers or captors has been observed in a range of situations (e.g., intimate partner violence, child abuse, hostage situations, human trafficking). Despite repeated observations of this phenomenon, little research exists regarding how this occurs and even less is known about its positive resolution in survivors. A commonly cited explanation is Stockholm Syndrome, which is often used interchangeably with traumatic bonding. Stockholm Syndrome was coined during a media interview in 1973 to describe the “positive bond” that kidnap victims develop toward their captor. Ever since, Stockholm Syndrome has been applied to a range of contexts where interpersonal violence and mind control is seen to be involved, e.g., child sexual abuse, intimate partner violence and human trafficking. Despite its widespread and increasing use, there is little empirical support for the concept of Stockholm Syndrome. A critical review of the professional literature on the topic found no validated criteria for Stockholm Syndrome as a psychiatric diagnosis and a research base of limited empirical value. Its origins in the media rather than research or clinical practice and its application to a diverse range of crimes, ages and interpersonal contexts raises questions about the term’s meaning, validity and continued relevance to theory building and research. Although past theorists have suggested that the concept of Stockholm syndrome may help normalize and de-pathologize survivors’ behavior we argue that the term is insensitive to survivor experience. Using the lens of Polyvagal Theory and an analysis of post-traumatic adaptation, Drs. Porges and Bailey sit down with Jaycee Dugard, who was kidnapped in 1991 and held captive until 2009, to discuss Appeasement as a more appropriate framework for viewing the relationship of an abductor and their abductee. Students will have access to the course for 180 days from the date of registration.