Understanding DARVO: Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender

Understanding DARVO: Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender

In recent discussions surrounding psychological manipulation and defense mechanisms, one term that has gained prominence is DARVO. DARVO stands for Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender, and it encapsulates a pattern of behavior observed in interpersonal conflicts, particularly those involving accusations or confrontations. This article aims to delve into the concept of DARVO, exploring its components, implications, and real-world applications.

What is DARVO?

DARVO was first coined by Jennifer J. Freyd, a psychologist specializing in trauma, to describe a sequence of responses commonly seen in situations where an individual is confronted with their wrongdoing or misconduct. The acronym breaks down as follows:

  • Deny: The first stage involves the accused denying the accusations or minimizing their actions. This denial can take various forms, from outright rejection of the claims to downplaying the severity of the behavior in question.
  • Attack: Following denial, the accused often counters the accuser by attacking their credibility, character, or motives. This defensive tactic aims to shift the focus away from the accused and onto the accuser, thereby diverting attention and casting doubt on the legitimacy of the accusations.
  • Reverse Victim and Offender: In the final stage of DARVO, the accused portrays themselves as the victim in the situation, reversing the roles to position themselves as the one who is unjustly persecuted or harmed. This reversal is a strategic move to garner sympathy or support and deflect accountability.

Psychological Mechanisms at Play

To understand why DARVO is effective and how it operates, it’s essential to delve into the underlying psychological mechanisms:

  1. Self-Preservation and Threat Response: When faced with accusations or criticism, individuals may perceive it as a threat to their self-image or status. Denial and attack serve as defense mechanisms to protect their identity and reputation.
  2. Cognitive Dissonance: Acknowledging one’s wrongdoing can lead to cognitive dissonance—the discomfort arising from holding conflicting beliefs or attitudes. Denial helps alleviate this discomfort by maintaining consistency in self-perception.
  3. Victimhood Narrative: Casting oneself as the victim allows the accused to garner sympathy and support, thereby minimizing the repercussions of their actions. This narrative can be compelling, especially in contexts where empathy and compassion are readily extended.

Real-World Applications of DARVO

DARVO is observed in various contexts, both personal and societal, where power dynamics and accountability are at play:

  • Domestic Abuse: Perpetrators of domestic abuse often employ DARVO tactics when confronted by their victims or authorities. They may deny the abuse occurred, attack the victim’s credibility, and portray themselves as victims of false accusations.
  • Institutional Responses: Institutions, when faced with allegations of misconduct or wrongdoing, may resort to DARVO to mitigate reputational damage. They might deny the allegations, attack the credibility of whistleblowers, and reverse the narrative to depict themselves as unfairly targeted.
  • Public Figures and Media: Public figures and celebrities accused of misconduct may also use DARVO to manage public perception. By denying allegations, attacking the accusers, and portraying themselves as victims of a media witch-hunt, they attempt to salvage their careers and public image.

Critique and Ethical Considerations

While DARVO can be effective in deflecting accountability and preserving self-image, it raises significant ethical concerns:

  • Victim Blaming and Revictimization: By attacking the accuser and reversing roles, DARVO perpetuates victim blaming and revictimization, undermining the credibility of genuine grievances.
  • Impeding Justice and Accountability: Employing DARVO can obstruct efforts to achieve justice and accountability, as it shifts focus away from addressing wrongdoing and towards discrediting those who bring attention to it.
  • Psychological Harm: Victims or whistleblowers who encounter DARVO responses may experience heightened distress and disillusionment, exacerbating the psychological impact of their experiences.

Counteracting DARVO and Promoting Accountability

Recognizing and addressing DARVO is crucial for fostering accountability and supporting victims:

  • Education and Awareness: Educating individuals and communities about DARVO helps increase awareness of manipulative tactics and promotes critical thinking in evaluating responses to accusations.
  • Support for Victims: Providing support networks and resources for victims of abuse or misconduct helps mitigate the effects of DARVO and encourages them to pursue justice without fear of reprisal.
  • Institutional Reform: Institutions and organizations can implement transparent accountability measures and whistleblower protections to reduce the prevalence of DARVO responses.


DARVO, as a concept rooted in psychological defense mechanisms, highlights the complexities of interpersonal dynamics and accountability. By understanding its components—Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender—we gain insight into how individuals and institutions navigate accusations and confrontations. Critically examining DARVO’s implications and applications underscores the importance of promoting transparency, accountability, and empathy in addressing misconduct and supporting those affected by it.

As we continue to explore psychological phenomena like DARVO, we contribute to a broader dialogue on ethics, justice, and interpersonal relationships in our communities and beyond. Recognizing the prevalence of DARVO and its impact empowers us to foster environments where accountability and empathy prevail over manipulation and evasion.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *