What do you do when you're fighting a narcissist in court

 For those of you who are currently in litigation with a narcissistic abuser, one of the most frustrating parts is trying to explain what you are going through. Much of the time, we end up sounding irrational or exaggerated, not because we are, but because people who have not lived this experience struggle to process it. This kind of abuse does not fit neatly into familiar categories, and unless someone has survived it themselves, it is extremely difficult for them to grasp.

Even after we escape it, many of us still have trouble articulating what actually happened. The experiences are complex, layered, and often invisible from the outside. The concepts discussed in these books are, in my view, completely valid. They accurately reflect what survivors endure. The problem is not the truth of the concepts. The problem is that the legal system has not caught up to them yet.

That is what this fight is really about. It is about developing language that accurately honors what victims go through and correctly shifts responsibility off survivors and back onto perpetrators. Just because psychological homicide is not widely recognized does not mean it does not exist. It does. Just because neurological battery is not yet an accepted legal term does not mean it is not real. It is.

What this will take is precedent. It will take a lawyer or a prosecutor who is willing to be bold enough to bring these concepts forward and argue them clearly. It will take convincing a judge and a jury that these harms are real, measurable, and intentional. Once that happens, precedent is established. From there, progress becomes possible.

Something not having been done before does not mean it cannot be done. It simply means the right people have not pushed it forward yet. For those of you who are in this fight right now, know this. It is possible to win.