When They Become the Person You Wanted—for Someone Else

Source: Cast Of Thousands/Shutterstock

Sam and Sandy dated for four years. In the beginning, they were deeply in love. But over time, the balance between them began to shift: Sandy found herself doing more and more to carry the relationship, while Sam did less and less.

It all came to a breaking point four years in when Sandy, yearning for growth and commitment, told Sam she wanted to move in together. She was growing anxious in a relationship that was growing stagnant. But Sam wasn’t ready. He didn’t want to lose her—but he also wasn’t willing to put in much more effort to fulfill her needs. He told her he could see a future with her but didn't feel it yet.

For the next six months, Sandy gave everything she had to the relationship: She twisted herself into knots, racking her brain for ways to prove her worthiness to Sam. But the more she tried, the more hyper-focused Sam became on any minor shortcomings, withdrawing further and making her feel inadequate as a result.

The relationship imploded under the weight of unspoken resentment and unmet needs. Sandy was left heartbroken, hollowed out by confusion and self-doubt: Why couldn’t he take the next step with her? What more could she do?

Then, only four months later, Sandy heard the news: Sam had not only moved on, he was engaged to someone he barely knew.

And in that single, shattering moment, the question that haunted her wasn’t why wasn’t he ready for her, but what did this new woman have that she didn't?

Does this story sound familiar? When people suddenly commit to a new partner after withholding from a previous one, it’s rarely about who is more deserving or what one person lacks. Instead, it’s about perception and behavior.

Why Effort Doesn’t Equal Reward

According to the investment model of commitment, commitment is driven by the satisfaction we feel in our relationship, the quality of potential alternative partners, and our investment—the effort and energy we put into our relationship. But long-term partners often suffer from a paradox: the more they invest, the more their efforts become expected by their partners, rather than rewarded.

Compare, for instance, the first romantic dinner your partner made for you versus the tenth, hundredth, or thousandth. The feelings stemming from the first were likely excitement, appreciation, and care. Meanwhile, years in, dinners—no matter how fancy—become "table stakes."

What new partners benefit from is not only novelty—that first-dinner feeling—but also their perceived potential, what feelings could look like by the thousandth dinner, not remembering that novelty attrits and diminished feelings that are bound to happen in the long run.

Further, in novel or distant relationships, the halo effect can take hold. The halo effect is a cognitive bias that causes people to project positive qualities onto someone they don't know very well based on limited traits.

In the beginning of relationships or in relationships with some distance, this bias may take hold; a new partner is often idealized, and with their flaws still hidden, their possibilities seem endless, and so they are seen through a lens of excitement and novelty. This can create the illusion of greater value, even if a new partner has contributed far less effort or emotional labor than a long-term partner. While the loyalty and consistency of a long-term partner should be valued, it tends to become invisible, and long-term partners can become defined by their flaws—overshadowed by the illusion of the new and perceived more valuable option, despite the little effort a new partner has put in.

Lastly, when people devalue and leave a long-term relationship, they can often experience cognitive dissonance—an uncomfortable feeling stemming from contradiction, like asking, was leaving my partner a mistake? Making a quick over-commitment to a new partner can be a way to convince oneself that the issue was the relationship or former partner, not their own patterns or perceptions—a psychological defense.

For Sandy, Sam's new engagement likely wasn’t about his partner being more deserving or worthy, or Sandy not being enough: Sandy’s years of loyalty became something Sam expected rather than valued—an example of how high investment can reduce perceived satisfaction. Meanwhile, his new partner, who Sam would see through an idealized lens and attribute qualities based on limited interaction, benefited from novelty and presented as a fresh alternative with low effort but high perceived reward.

Relationships Essential Reads

When Sameness Betrays Fairness

Why Do We Hold on to Old Flames?

By contrast, Sandy’s persistence and willingness to work on the relationship—ultimately a strength for a long-term partnership—were diminished, as her reliability became expected, not exceptional, and was therefore devalued. Further, as Sandy pursued closeness, driven by anxious tendencies, Sam responded by withdrawing, so his sudden commitment with someone new likely reflected the ease of a new relationship without conflict and triggers—but this unresolved avoidant pattern is likely to reappear over time, particularly without therapy.

In the end, the issue was never Sandy’s worthiness but Sam’s perception and behaviors. The lesson is to understand it's not about one's own self-worth but rather biases, patterns, and psychological factors.