Why Narcissists are a Threat to Truth and Justice--And Not Just in Family Courts

The narcissistic paradox: Narcissists have the ability to inspire confidence in their grandiose assertions about themselves without a shred of evidence of their competence.

For those of us who must deal with narcissists (Narcissistic Personality Disorder or NPD) as a part of our personal or professional life, whether as clients, partners, spouses, employers or bosses, few relationships are more challenging and frustrating. Literally millions of dollars are spent each year on professional counseling by the hapless victims of these charming, successful, and intelligent but toxic people to try to figure out how to live with inevitable scars resulting from a relationship of any kind with a narcissist. 

The personal suffering of the millions of victims of NPDs has been well documented over the last 20 years or so by many talented and articulate writers. Both the DSM-V and Sam Vaknin (a self-admitted NPD himself) have clearly explained the characteristics of NPD, and I won't repeat that list here. Rather, I want to address the toxic and systemic impact of narcissism on the functioning of the courts, particularly the family court system, and the Courts' decisions about conservatorship of children.

As we all learned in law school, our system of justice is predicated on the principle that out of the conflict of two trained advocates zealously representing the differing interests of their clients before an objective trier of fact, the truth will rise like a Phoenix out of the fires of conflict. I contend that in too many family court cases where an NPD is a party, this fundamental assumption about how truth is uncovered and justice is administered is fatally flawed.

First, when a NPD divorces, their spouse is already at a significant disadvantage. Spouses of NPDs are inevitably grossly wounded by their relationship, and many are so wounded that they have symptoms similar to those of combat veterans and PTSD sufferers. Worse, the isolation that they have lived with as a normal feature of their marriage has prevented them from realizing that the criticism, threats, insults, and humiliations that they suffered in private were NOT their fault, and they are NOT worthless human beings. As a result, they are difficult clients to represent because they have such low expectations that anyone can help them, and have to learn to stand up for themselves again. 

This background of humiliation and intimidation makes meeting with a divorce attorney a surreal experience where they are asked about details of their married life they frequently know nothing about: money, property, investments, and other assets. Inquiries about the children are more comfortable, and these moms are frequently very engaged with their kids (sometimes overly so). As mom's attorney begins to prepare for negotiating the terms of temporary orders for visitation, conservatorship, and support, the spouse's unease grows as she realizes that the odds of an agreement without a fight are very low. Furthermore, she knows how persuasive her NPD husband can be and how fearful she is of facing him in court.

Second, increasingly crowded family court dockets mean that time allocated for temporary hearings is declining. This trend favors NPDs, who can make damaging and completely specious allegations about their wounded spouse in their hearing testimony with no fear of being successfully challenged by their spouse's attorney with contravening facts.  
Two more core characteristics of the NPD style only make the challenge of finding facts in a short hearing even more difficult. NPDs respond to challenges of their outrageous fictions in two predictable ways: first, they "double-down" on the allegations and make even more grandiose and fictitious claims about their own character, accomplishments, and parenting ability; second, they increase their personal attacks on their spouse, again with no regard to the actual facts or the effects of those attacks on the mother of their children.

One ironic NPD characteristic is actually helpful to the insightful attorney representing the spouse of a NPD. One of the primary ways that NPDs cope and protect their grandiose views of themselves as "all good" or perfect, is to blame their opponents for actions they themselves are doing. For example, in a recent case, an NPD dad accused his ex-wife of substance abuse, but when the court ordered drug tests, the results showed that HE was using cocaine and pot, while his ex had nothing but prescription drugs ordered by her doctor in therapeutic doses in her blood. [Multiple instances of this pattern are currently in evidence in the race for president of the US]. 

Bottom line: If you want to know what an NPD has done or is doing that they know to be wrong or "bad", listen to what they are accusing their opponent of doing!

The problem for family courts who do their best to find the truth and administer justice for children and families is this: While our legal process is the best in the world for catching witnesses in a lie, that process takes time in court for painstaking fact-checking in cross examination and the requisite pre-trial preparation to work. In a world where Twitter's 140 character limit now sets the standard for meaningful communication, NPDs have substantial advantage, and the same goes in Courts who only have time for a 45 minute hearing to make a decision. 

The abbreviated hearing system is tilted toward the charm, confidence, and baseless but alarming allegations of the NPD litigant whose lies are unlikely to be successfully challenged in 20 minutes. As I teach my coaching clients, confidence is a large component of how people (and Courts) evaluate witness credibility, and NPDs have the charm, intelligence, cunning, and confidence to be very credible sounding witnesses while they spout an ever changing string of outright lies.

The system is likewise tilted against the shell-shocked spouse of the NPD who knows the allegations are completely false but largely because of her toxic relationship with the NPD appears anxious, confused, uncertain, and is unable to defend herself agains the lies and be an effective witness for herself and her children. And she knows that after the hearing is over, regardless of the outcome or what the Court orders, the NPD is going to do exactly what he wants to do anyway because that is what he has always done.

Advanced Practice Tips and Tools for Attorneys Representing the Spouse of NPDs:

1. If your client looks unusually anxious, depressed, hopeless despite being married to a highly successful, professional, executive, or especially political, man suspect NPD in the man and get the wife to confirm the list (Google narcissistic personality to find everything you need).

2. Suspect hidden assets and extramarital relationships as well as substance abuse from the outset. NPDs will do or say anything to get what they want or think they deserve.

3. Remember, whatever the NPD is telling his attorney about your client is mostly self-serving lies, and the opposing attorney is most likely "under the spell" of the charming and persuasive NPD. Remember the old joke "Q: How can you tell when X is lying? A: His lips are moving" was written about NPDs.

4. Take the time to prepare your client to testify in the hearing by first, getting a good marital history that you also need to prepare for cross examination of the NPD spouse, and second, by coaching and practicing her direct testimony and the expected cross examination. (Some witnesses freeze when they hear the enormous lies and incomprehensible allegations about themselves for the first time in court; they just can't process it fast enough)

5. NPDs only back down when they are humiliated in public, in my experience. Their grandiose and perfect self image is the most important thing in life to them; if that's damaged or in danger, they lose interest in litigating and are more likely to be amenable to settlement.

Sandusky found guilty: More lessons

The jury found Jerry Sandusky guilty on 45 of 48 criminal counts last week, and Sandusky was remanded to custody to await sentencing. The defense team has already announced it would appeal (not surprising), and Sandusky has continued to insist that he is "innocent" (also not surprising). What follows is a couple of more lessons to be learned from this high profile case.

In contrast to most cases of child abuse perpetrated by fathers who are NOT sexual predators, Sandusky is clearly a sexual predator. Sandusky's continuing denial of his guilt, and in fact, his reportedly adamant insistence that he is innocent in the face of the overwhelming evidence of his guilt that he witnessed during the trial is another hallmark of a sexual predator: lack of remorse and empathy. Very few people truly understand that Sandusky really believes that he is innocent of any crime,  regardless of the testimony of all the witnesses and the jury's verdict. It is this fundamental flaw, the inability to recognize that his actions were wrong and damaging to his victims, that makes the Jerry Sanduskys of the world so dangerous for children.

In contrast to the predators, who are a small but malignant minority of the population of child abusers, I have evaluated and treated many perpetrators of sexual abuse (and their victims). What is striking about so many of these men is that they are emotionally needy and immature, and that at some point, during treatment, they will (usually) acknowledge their own behavior and tearfully admit that they knew it was wrong but felt compelled to commit the abuse. The rationalizations (it was loving or she needed it) for the abuse generally do NOT last long once treatment has uncovered the the underlying motivation (usually unmet needs to be loved, believe it or not). These men know what they did was wrong, and are able to acknowledge that what they did was harmful to the child. A combination of substance abuse, stressors like marital discord and financial difficulties, job loss or physical disability all combine to create the circumstances where normal boundaries disappear and normal self control evaporates. The abuse is an unhealthy and damaging reaction to a series of stressful events. These guys are not charismatic, nor smooth, nor seen by the community at large as "saints". These men are child abusers,certainly, but they are not predators.

It is the lack of empathy (and remorse), the hallmarks of psychopathy, that make these sexual predators so dangerous to children. Regardless of the outward appearance of selfless concern for kids, these men don't do anything out of a sense of altruism. Everything they do is designed to get them what they want, and what sexual predators want is easy access to children that they can groom to be their victims, opportunities to exploit the children without danger of being caught, and enough perceived power and authority to make the threats needed to keep the kids quiet afterwards have some real and lasting effect. When interviewed, these predators are smart enough to know that what they did was illegal, but they don't really believe it was wrong. That's the first lesson: not all abusers are sexual predators, and the two groups are NOT the same.


Lesson number two: the testimony of the wife of a sexual predator about his character has almost no probative value. These men are incapable of genuine intimacy, and NEVER let anyone get close to them, let alone get to truly know them. Spouses hold no special status for a psychopath, and are actually just part of the "window dressing" in their PR campaign to appear to be normal. Spouses of these men frequently "fill in the blanks" and make assumptions about their husband's behaviors and motivations, based on their own naive view of the world, and completely miss or ignore the signals that would indicate something amiss. Many of these women have been victims of abuse or neglect themselves, and have a huge "blind spot" when it comes to signals indicating abuse. It is precisely that blind spot that made them good choices as spouses for the predators, because they recognize that their wives are incapable of "ratting them out". So when these spouses testify that they never saw anything suspicious, it really doesn't mean what it would if a normal wife testified about her husband's character. These wives are unwitting accomplices to their husband's crimes.

The good news is that the Sandusky trial has raised the level of awareness of sexual predators, especially for those who run large organizations that deal with children, and could lead to greater protection for children who could be potential victims. As I said in my last post, we all need to pay attention when vulnerable children have just a little too much private time with any adult who  is not a loving parent.

Your Best Divorce Now! Tips and Tools Before During and After Released today

List Price: $14.95  Add to Cart

Your Best Divorce Now! Tips and Tools Authored by Kevin Karlson JD PhD Whether you are thinking about divorce, in the middle of a divorce, or recovering from a divorce, this book can help you. Written by an expert on both the emotional and the legal challenges before, during, and after divorce, Your Best Divorce Now! offers tips for every phase of the process and tools for making the best of this very stressful time. Dr. Kevin Karlson JD PhD was trained as a psychologist and as a lawyer, and he has been a litigation consultant specializing in divorce and custody cases for more than 25 years, as well as a therapist, divorce recovery facilitator, marriage and family therapist, and child custody expert. Your Best Divorce Now! brings his expertise and experience to bear in a format that addresses the most common issues in short, easy to understand tips, and also provides tools that you can use before, during and after divorce. Before divorce, there are tools for deciding whether divorce is for you, and tips about how to make the decision that's best for you. During the divorce process, Your Best Divorce Now! provides tips and tools for making decisions, dealing with stress, communicating with your children and your ex, as well as understanding the "legalese" that is part of every divorce. You will find tips for dealing with lawyers, depositions, testifying in court, and child custody evaluations. After the divorce is finally over, Your Best Divorce Now! provides more tips and tools for starting life over as a single person or a single parent. Publication Date: May 18 2012 ISBN/EAN13: 1475073542 / 9781475073546 Page Count: 138 Binding Type: US Trade Paper Trim Size: 6" x 9" Language: English Color: Black and White Related Categories: Family & Relationships / Divorce & Separation Clink the link below to go to the page: https://www.createspace.com/3795285

Research update: When the speaker is boring, listeners’ brains will fill in the “blanks”; The implications for the courtroom explained.

The world is not made of atoms, it is made of stories. Muriel Rukeyser

For those of us in the communication business, we know first-hand the power of stories.  Nothing can match the story for engaging the audience, and conveying a compelling, emotionally powerful message like a good story. Good stories always contain vivid detail, and they almost always contain dialogue.  Now some new brain research using fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging) scanning has provided some new insights into the power of stories.

Scientists at the University of Glasgow’s Institute of Neuroscience and Psychology scanned the brains of study participants as they listened to audio clips of stories: one group of very short stories was read in a monotone and was “boring”, the other was read with more inflection and was “vivid”. While listening to the “boring” stories, the level of brain activity INCREASED in areas of the auditory cortex interested in human speech, and the participants reported that activity was the brain’s “internal dialogue” filling in the missing information in the boring story.  This was particularly evident in stories with no “direct speech quotations” which the researchers interpreted as the brain “talking over” the boring speech with its own internal speech to speed up information processing and to prepare a response.

Direct speech is more engaging because it triggers neural links to facial expressions, other voices, and gestures and therefore conveys more information. It is this same process that makes reading novels so powerful, as the brain supplies cortical activation in a network of brain centers to “fill in” a complete sensory-motor “picture” depicted in the words on the page.  This is the inherent power of a story: it engages the whole brain in creating an internal representation of the message, and keeps the brain engaged in processing that message.

As any seasoned observer knows, the audience in the courtroom, be it judge or jury, frequently faces the challenge of listening to “boring” speakers. It has long been known that when the audience is bored, they “tune out”, but this research highlights the real danger of “boring” courtroom argument or testimony: the audience not only tunes out, they actually SUBSTITUTE their own more interesting internally generated story to “make up” for the boring audio they are actually hearing!! This may help to explain why fact finders report hearing “evidence” that was not presented when they explain decisions which seem so disconnected from the testimony and the issues. Boring is not just a nuisance in court; it’s a danger! Bored brains are not your friends.

The bottom line: The brains of any audience can be both your friend and your enemy. When the message is a story that includes dialogue and is engaging, those brains will be your friend as they are completely involved in processing the information in multiple sensory and motor channels that are activated by a good story. 

On the other hand, when the message is boring, that is, monotonic, monotonous, and lacking in direct speech and dialogue, those bored brains will be busy “filling in” the processing time with a much more interesting but internally generated story which will probably be loosely connected to the message, at best.

Here’s the link to the research report: http://medicalxpress.com/news/2012-03-brain-speech-quotes.html