REPLAY: Navigating Narcissism Q&A - November 18, 2025

Family court can feel like a maze where logic gets replaced by procedure, and the loudest story wins. We pull back the curtain on how high‑conflict exes leverage control, projection, and “victim” narratives to tilt the field—and how you can respond with calm facts, clean records, and a strategy that actually holds up.

Mark joins us with a real, thorny dispute over non‑urgent orthodontic costs pushed through unilaterally under joint legal custody. Together we map the key moves: documenting timelines and alternatives, highlighting medical necessity versus preference, and filing tight counter-motions with affidavits and exhibits so a judge can rule on evidence instead of drama. We talk about the power of being the most reasonable person in the room, asking the court for process fixes to avoid repeat filings, and why men rarely recover attorney’s fees even when they “win.”

The conversation digs into predictable patterns—entitlement, impulsivity, rage, and endless accusations—that flourish in a “preponderance of evidence” environment. We explore alienation with teenagers when courts default to “they’re old enough to choose,” and offer tactics for staying present without escalating: steady contact, showing up for events, firm boundaries, and refusing to mirror chaos. You’ll hear how incremental wins accumulate, why “no” is a full sentence, and how time away—like college—can create openings for kids to see clearly and reconnect.

If you’re tired of feeling gaslit by a system that prizes efficiency over fairness, this is your playbook: evidence over emotion, structure over spontaneity, and resilience over reactivity.