What I bring is deep knowledge of coercive control, institutional betrayal, trauma responses, and how systems fail survivors — combined with years of experience building systems that analyzed institutional behavior at scale. I understand how institutions fail, how records are created and hidden, and that what looks opaque from outside has clear patterns once you know where to look.
Most survivors face a choice: hire an attorney (expensive, constrained to legal strategy), or go it alone (time-consuming, easy to lose the thread across months of process). I sit in between. Fluent in institutional documentation, in how grievance and complaint procedures actually run, and in the trauma-informed frameworks that explain institutional behavior. I work for people who need the navigation and the record-keeping, not people who need representation.
Institutions rely on your not knowing how they work. I do. I understand your rights, which processes produce results and which are designed to exhaust you, and how to document your situation so it speaks for itself. My approach is trauma-informed: paced for your safety, grounded in what actually happened, built on your expertise about your own situation.
I work with your own record and nothing else. No work aimed at a third party, no surveillance, no trespass, no unauthorized access. What that looks like in practice: request the files you are entitled to, organize what you already hold, identify patterns in how the institution has behaved toward you, and help you decide which channel to use and when.
I am also not an attorney. Nothing here is legal advice, and I do not tell you what your rights are or what to file. If you need that, you need a lawyer, and I will say so plainly.
Need to learn the research skills yourself, or find out what the internet exposes about you? See Research Literacy & Digital Self-Defense.
AI and the Acceleration of Coercive Control
The tactics that define coercive control — evidence tampering, impersonation, institutional capture, the systematic rewriting of reality — are now AI-accelerated. Fabricated evidence that once required weeks of sustained effort takes hours. Impersonation campaigns are scalable. Institutions already skilled at exhausting complainants can automate that exhaustion.
If your adversary has technical access or AI literacy and you don’t, the power imbalance deepens. This service operates with that threat model built in. Documentation strategy accounts for AI-resistant evidence formats and timestamped records. If there is reason to believe an AI-literate adversary is involved, we design for it explicitly — not as a hypothetical, but as a constraint shaping every decision about what to record, where to store it, and how to present it.
This work is confidential. It is not therapy — though I can help you find that too.
Engagement Models
Hourly for advocacy sessions, records work, and strategy. Project-based for scoped deliverables like a chronology or a records campaign. Retained monthly for ongoing advisory or support work.
For survivors, advocates, and individuals in active institutional disputes: sliding scale rates and pro-bono capacity are available. Reach out directly.