I'm always a bit skeptical when a story tries to 'fix' obsessive attachment too neatly. True recovery is messy and rarely linear. It’s less about the obsessed character suddenly seeing the light and more about them hitting a genuine, personal rock bottom where their fixation no longer serves them, or worse, actively destroys something they value more.
I think the most convincing paths involve a slow redefinition of self outside the object of obsession. In 'Rebecca', the second Mrs. de Winter isn't just competing with a ghost; she's building her own identity in a house that denies her one. The obsession (with Rebecca, with Maxim's love) fades as her own sense of personhood solidifies, almost by accident. It’s not a triumph, it’s a quiet, exhausting survival.
Another angle I find more realistic than grand gestures is the introduction of mundane responsibility. When a character obsessed with a lost love or a rival is suddenly thrust into a role where someone else depends on them—a child, a sick relative, a business on the brink—the obsessive tunnel vision literally doesn’t have room to breathe. Their energy gets rerouted into practical, daily acts of care, and that routine, over time, builds new neural pathways, so to speak. The old obsession becomes a distant, tiresome memory, like a song you once played on repeat until you ruined it.
For me, the test of a good recovery arc is whether the character could walk past the person or the symbol of their obsession and feel nothing but a faint, historical curiosity. If the story needs them to have one last dramatic confrontation to 'break the bond,' it often feels like the obsession is just being validated one more time.