.png)
Episode 13: Divorce, Trauma & Truth with Gus Dimopoulos
- 11 minutes ago
- 34 min read
Divorce, Trauma & Truth: What the Courtroom Can and Cannot Fix
Welcome to Episode 13 of The Truth About Healing Podcast.
Divorce may happen in a courtroom, but the legal process is only one piece of what a family is experiencing.
Fear, grief, anger, financial insecurity, parenting disagreements, old relationship patterns, and unresolved emotional wounds don't disappear because someone files paperwork.
And when children are involved, the stakes become even higher.
In this episode, Dana sits down with Gus Dimopoulos, managing partner of Dimopoulos Law Firm and a family law attorney with more than two decades of experience handling complex divorce and custody matters.
Their conversation begins with one word that both Dana and Gus believe deserves more careful attention:
Trauma.
From there, they dig into parental alienation, high-conflict custody, narcissistic traits, coercive control, social media during divorce, financial conflict, parenting, prenups, and the uncomfortable reality that the court system isn't designed to heal the emotional wounds of a marriage.
If you're navigating divorce, supporting someone who is, or trying to understand how family conflict affects children, this conversation offers an important perspective on divorce and healing.
Listen on Your Favorite Podcast Platform
Episode Highlights
Dana and Gus discuss:
Why the word "trauma" can lose meaning when it's applied too broadly
The difference between describing an experience and clinically labeling it
Why facts and evidence matter in family court
How high-conflict custody cases differ from many divorces
What parental alienation can look like in everyday interactions
Why children shouldn't become allies in a parent's conflict
The importance of allowing children to have their own feelings about each parent
Why patience matters when a child is resisting or refusing contact
What courts can and cannot realistically accomplish
Why a judge isn't a therapist
The challenges of divorcing someone with narcissistic traits
Why emotional reactivity can hurt you in court
How social media can complicate divorce and custody proceedings
Why the courtroom may not give you the validation you're seeking
The role of therapy during and after divorce
Financial control and coercive control
Why couples should have difficult conversations before marriage
When a prenup can be helpful
Why defining what "winning" actually means matters
How parents can protect children even when they cannot control the other parent
Memorable Quote
"Do you love your children more than you hate your spouse?" - Gus Dimopoulos
Want to Respond to This Episode or Ask a Question?
I'd love to hear from you.
Use the form below to:
Share feedback about this episode
Ask a question for a future episode
Suggest a topic you'd like covered
Share your experience or insight
Further Learning & Resources
Discover journals, workbooks, consultation resources, and recommended tools designed to support both personal healing and professional growth.
EMDR Therapy Progress Journal
The EMDR Therapy Progress Journal helps clients track healing progress, identify
patterns, document insights, and stay connected to their therapeutic journey between sessions.
Perfect for:
EMDR clients
Trauma recovery work
Reflection between sessions
Tracking healing milestones
EMDR Coach Treatment Planning Workbook
Designed specifically for EMDR therapists, this workbook helps simplify case
conceptualization, target sequencing, and treatment planning.
Ideal for:
EMDR-trained clinicians
EMDR consultation groups
Organizing complex cases
Strengthening treatment planning skills
Meet Our Guest: Gus Dimopoulos
Gus Dimopoulos is a New York family law attorney and managing partner of Dimopoulos Law Firm.
For more than two decades, he has represented clients in complex and high-conflict divorce and custody matters involving issues such as parental alienation, coercive control, psychological abuse, addiction, mental health challenges, and family system dysfunction.
He has been recognized by Super Lawyers, Lawyers of Distinction, and Premier Lawyers of America and shares his perspective on divorce, custody, and modern family dynamics through his legal work, speaking engagements, media appearances, and podcast, Split: A Podcast on Modern Divorce.
Connect With Gus
🌐 Website: www.dimolaw.com
🎙️ Podcast: Split: A Podcast on Modern Divorce
Meet Our Host Dana Carretta-Stein, LMHC
Dana Carretta-Stein is an LMHC, EMDRIA Approved Consultant, founder of The EMDR Coach, and founder of Peaceful Living Mental Health Counseling (PLMHC).
Her work focuses on trauma-informed therapy, nervous system healing, EMDR therapy, attachment patterns, and helping people understand the deeper roots behind emotional and behavioral patterns.
Dana blends neuroscience, trauma-informed education, and direct honesty in a way that helps listeners feel both validated and challenged to think differently about healing.
Her core belief: Symptoms make sense when you understand the nervous system underneath them.
Trauma-Informed Therapy Through PLMHC
Peaceful Living Mental Health Counseling provides trauma-informed therapy for children, teens, and adults.
Services include support for:
Overthinking
Burnout
Trauma
Emotional overwhelm
Nervous system dysregulation
PLMHC offers in-person therapy in Scarsdale and virtual therapy throughout New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Florida.
If you’ve been searching for trauma-informed therapy in Westchester or EMDR therapy in Scarsdale, support is available.
Full Episode Transcript
Dana: Welcome to another episode of The Truth About Healing, the podcast that's here to challenge everything you think you knew about therapy.
I'm Dana Carretta-Stein, EMDR and neuro-informed therapist, and I'm on a mission to help 10 million people change their patterns, relationships, and future generations by teaching them how to gain control of their nervous system.
Let's go with it.
Gus Dimopoulos is one of New York's leading family law attorneys and the managing partner of Dimopoulos Law Firm. For more than two decades, he has represented clients in some of the most complex, emotionally charged, and high-conflict divorce and custody matters involving parental alienation, coercive control, psychological abuse, addiction, mental health challenges, and family system dysfunction.
Recognized by Super Lawyers, Lawyers of Distinction, and Premier Lawyers of America, Gus has become a respected voice on modern divorce, custody, and family dynamics through his legal work, speaking engagements, media appearances, and his podcast, Split: A Podcast on Modern Divorce.
I'm so excited to have him as our guest today.
Gus, welcome to The Truth About Healing.
Gus: Thank you for having me, Dana. I appreciate it.
Dana: I'm so glad that you're here.
Gus had a post on social media the other day, and Gus and I know each other from way back. We have the same trainer, we went to the same gym, and he's a killer divorce attorney.
He had this post about the word "trauma" being overused, including in legal proceedings. I saw it and was like, "Yes. This is something we need to talk more about."
So, Gus, tell me a little bit about where people get confused when it comes to trauma and what they think divorce is going to do for them in their relationship. Where do most people get stuck?
Gus: As it relates specifically to the word trauma, first of all, having been doing this for as long as I've been doing it, I have seen the worst of the worst.
I've seen people abused in ways that no one wants to talk about, and I've seen people hurt in ways I don't care to relive.
Obviously, I'm not a mental health professional, but there is trauma. People relive it, and people are forever affected by it in a very real way.
The problem is that the word, as of late, has become a catchphrase, so to speak.
It's social media. It's people who do what I do.
Dana: And what I do.
Gus: Right. And we're overusing it.
Kids, teenagers, everybody says, "That's traumatic."
We're throwing around a word that deserves to be given a lot more respect.
In court, people are doing the same thing. The problem is, number one, when a judge hears that word, they're accustomed to hearing it, but they're expecting it to come along with a story that you just don't have if you're using it the wrong way.
Dana: Evidence, right?
Gus: Correct.
They see it every day. They see the worst of the worst.
But when you're the litigant saying, "That was so traumatic," and what happened was a kid left a backpack and Dad screamed, once you're labeled as the person in court who's overusing words and trying to sell a narrative, you lose credibility.
What I'm trying to get across to people is that you don't need to use these words.
What you need to do is explain what you're experiencing and let everyone else draw the conclusions.
Dana: Right.
Trauma is the end result. Two people can experience the same thing. One is traumatized by it and one is not.
What that person felt can be more telling. For example, "The son was terrified."
Gus: Exactly.
And none of us, I'm a divorce attorney, the person up in the black robe is a judge, have the education or training to use that word in a clinical way.
When a litigant throws it around and then the divorce attorney mimics it, you lose credibility and respect.
Allow the judge who's seen these situations, or the forensic psychologist if that's the case, to make those determinations.
Tell the facts. Speak your story.
Dana: Is it common to have a forensic report saying someone was traumatized or has PTSD from a relationship? Is that something that's done a lot, or maybe not as much as it should be?
Gus: Forensic evaluations? People love statistics, so let me try to break it down a little bit.
If there are 100 divorce cases, and I'm using this anecdotally because I don't have statistical research to back this up, how many people litigate custody out of those 100?
Let's say 15.
Dana: That's smaller than I would think.
Gus: Of those 15, how many are high-conflict, complex cases requiring forensic evaluations? Say half.
So you're dealing with a small segment of cases.
The problem is those are the cases everybody talks about. Those are the cases everybody wants to hear about, and the perception becomes that that's what all divorces are like.
That's not the case.
When a forensic is involved, think about what we're doing. The judge is essentially throwing up his or her hands and saying, "I'm not a mental health professional. I need help. I need someone with credentials and an education to tell me what the right thing to do here is."
Dana: Which is good. They're acknowledging that's not their wheelhouse.
Gus: One hundred percent.
The problem with a forensic evaluation is to think about the incentive for each party.
"My job over the next four to eight weeks is to prove that he or she is crazy and a terrible parent."
And then vice versa from the other side.
Everyone's misconception is that winning a custody battle is about proving the other side is a horrible person, without ever focusing attention where it should be:
"Let me show you all the reasons why I'm great. Let me tell you all the things I do that are wonderful for the children and also benefit the other spouse."
Dana: Let me tell you how I parent and how I co-parent.
Gus: Correct.
When people quote-unquote "lose," it's because they lose focus on what they're trying to prove.
Dana: And in those situations, the ones who always lose are the children.
Gus: That's universal.
Parental Alienation and Protecting Children During Divorce
Dana: That's something I'm so passionate about, and I know you are too.
If parents are going through a divorce and there's a custody battle, if you could shake someone and tell them one thing, what would you say?
Gus: First and foremost, and I don't want to get too nerdy on you, but everyone has to understand the concept first.
Dana: No, let it rip. I love to nerd out.
Gus: Everybody knows right and wrong. We're humans. We all know right and wrong.
But when the term "parental alienation" gets thrown around in the context of a custody battle, I think it's important for people to understand what it is, where it came from, and why we're talking about it.
There was a study decades ago where it was labeled a syndrome. It was actually labeled a mental health condition, and they tried to get it into the DSM.
Dana: Oh, wow.
Gus: There was uproar.
"This isn't a mental health disorder. This doesn't belong in the DSM. This is something else."
People fought about it for 30 years.
Dana: So they would call it parental alienation syndrome?
Gus: PAS, parental alienation syndrome.
Dana: Interesting, because that's not a symptom. That's an act.
Gus: Correct. And it was almost labeled as a disorder that the child had.
Dana: So now we're putting the problem on the kid.
Gus: Right.
The problem is that it caused so much infighting between the two groups that nobody was actually focusing on what the problem was and how it affected kids.
Over the next couple of years of research, there were giants in this field, people who have done decade-long studies on the effects on children.
I have resources on my website where people can read about that, so I'm not going to try to recap all of it here.
But here's the basic concept.
You have someone who's trying to gain an advantage in litigation. This is my world.
Dana: I think it happens when people aren't divorcing, too, and no one ever sees it.
As a therapist, I can tell you there are parents who maybe should have gotten divorced and didn't. It happens all the time.
Gus: Absolutely. I'm talking specifically about it in the context of divorce.
Someone wants a particular outcome. They want legal custody, or they want more time with their kid, and they know the other parent isn't going to agree.
So they lean on the kids.
Sometimes it's big, and sometimes it's small.
I think the more dangerous type is small.
"You know, I'd love to do that, but your dad doesn't give us enough money."
Or, "You know how your mother is going to react to that. She's never going to allow you."
Dana: It's subtle.
Gus: Correct.
Or, "Gosh, I wish I could spend more time with you, but I really can't. I don't know why your mom won't allow me."
If you hear that three times a day, every day, over the course of litigation, it adds up.
At its core, it's a terrible thing to do to kids, but there are levels to it.
It can reach a point where you make a child your ally in your fight. That child takes sides.
Dana: Which is not a position a child should be in.
Gus: Correct.
For the last 25 years, I've heard people say in court, "The kids just don't want to be involved."
Guess what?
They are.
They're living in the house. They're dealing with each parent. They're involved because they're part of the family, and the family dynamic is changing.
So how do we figure out a way to involve them less?
The terminology has evolved, including "resist and refuse," but the core belief remains.
The court tries its best to protect against it.
Deal with your kids' schedules. Tell them you love them. Tell them, "Your dad wishes he could be there," or, "Your mom really has your best interest in mind."
But people just don't.
That's what's upsetting.
Letting Children Have Their Own Relationship With Each Parent
Dana: The way I think about it is, let's say you know your ex is a dick.
What's so wrong with your kid growing up thinking they're cared about?
Even if he doesn't really care, or let's say he's a narcissist, whatever. Do you really want your child growing up with that wound of feeling unlovable?
You don't have to shit-talk the other parent.
Gus: Let me challenge you and take it outside of divorce.
Let's use politics as an example. We're not here to talk about politics.
Dana: I love a good challenge.
Gus: Let's say you're a parent who strongly believes in one side or the other.
Your kid comes home and says, "You know what? I really find the arguments on the other side interesting."
A good parenting move is, "Oh, tell me about that. Why do you feel that way? Okay, interesting."
A bad parenting move is, "What are you, nuts?"
As parents, we have to allow our kids to have independent emotions separate from us.
Dana: Curiosity, right?
Curiosity is such an important parenting and interpersonal technique. It's not about getting the other person to agree with you.
It's not, "You need to understand me."
It's, "Tell me what I don't know."
Gus: Now put that in the context of divorce.
You're at a point in your life where, for some people, again, we're talking about a small percentage, you hate the other side with every fiber of your being.
Then the person you love most in the world says, "Dad and I had such an amazing time yesterday."
You're not at the best place in your life psychologically. It's going to hurt hearing that.
Maybe part of you doesn't even want them to feel happiness with the other side.
We're talking about people who are flawed, who are at their worst and not in a good place.
Now they're being asked to be the most understanding version of themselves.
Dana: That's where therapy can be so helpful.
Of course that parent is going to feel hurt. It's having awareness of that hurt so we don't take it out on our kids.
We don't have to project our misery onto our children.
And we're still allowed to have our feelings, too.
Gus: There's a question I've heard used in the court system a thousand times:
"Do you love your children more than you hate your spouse?"
Think about that for a second.
Because if you truly love your children more than you hate your spouse, you will bite your lip.
You will grin and bear it.
You will tolerate it.
You won't use every opportunity to bring the other side down.
Education matters, too. For people dealing with this issue in their lives or divorce, read the research.
There are significant documented risks associated with children living in alienating family environments, including increased mental health concerns and the possibility of repeating unhealthy relational patterns in the next generation.
I arm my clients with the research. I make it available in court proceedings.
I say, "If you read this data and you continue to do it, something is seriously wrong."
Dana: How does that land when you say that?
Gus: Some people hear it.
Some people need to be educated on what it means practically and what it looks like.
It doesn't happen as one big dramatic act where somebody says, "Okay, it's 8:14. I'm going to begin alienating right now."
It's little, subtle things.
When you teach people alternative reactions and different ways to deflect, it can work.
But if there are people with undiagnosed mental health conditions, sometimes they're not going to stop.
Dana: We repeat what we don't repair.
I say it every time we close our episodes.
Awareness is the first step. But if you're so focused on the other person, the person you hate so much, there's no focus on you.
Then you can't build that awareness.
When a Child Resists or Refuses Contact
Gus: Here's the beauty of it, and I've seen this many times.
If you're the target of parental alienation, kids are pretty incredible.
I don't say this to give people false hope, but I've seen kids come around in ways that will blow your mind.
You may have a kid who's refusing to go on weekend visits with you.
The only thing I'll tell you is: be patient.
Don't fight fire with fire.
Be patient. Let it happen. Rely on therapists. Do the little things. Let time go by.
Kids are smart.
Eventually, some may say, "You know what? My dad told me all this stuff about my mom. I don't think that's true. And I never heard Mom say anything about Dad."
Be patient.
It's a hard thing to ask.
Dana: It's so hard because people think, "I need them to see it right now."
Patience is so important.
Trust and be the person that kid needs.
Gus: That's why we rely on you guys.
Constantly in my cases, I'll ask, "What did your therapist say? How did your therapist tell you to respond?"
I can't open up a direct line of communication, but when my clients are experiencing something like that, especially when they're the target, I want to know what they've been told.
Dana: Absolutely. It is a therapeutic setting.
Anytime there's going to be a divorce or a breaking of a marriage and kids are involved, I wish there were more focus on family therapy, regardless of how happy the decoupling is.
Keep things transparent. Keep the lines of communication open.
Think about the worst-case scenario. If something comes up, how would we like to handle it?
Gus: I think people need to take away one thing.
Everything we're saying is wonderful and beautiful, and we're right.
But here's the problem:
Some people go to court to do bad things.
Some people go to court to hurt the other side.
While we can talk about family therapy and parental alienation, people sometimes enter litigation with the intention of doing harm.
Sometimes it's a war.
What the Court System Can and Cannot Do
Dana: And that's the problem with the legal system, right?
If people go in with that intention, especially someone who's been building their case for a while, how do we protect the person who's being victimized?
Gus: It's a great question.
People need to understand the volume courts are dealing with.
Even just looking at Westchester County as a microcosm, matrimonial judges can oversee hundreds of cases at a time.
On any given day, a judge may hear numerous cases.
You walk in at 9:30 in the morning and you're the first case being called. The judge looks at the agenda and sees multiple cases behind yours.
Your lawyer wants to talk about all the terrible things you've endured, and sometimes horrible things really have happened.
But that judge has a docket to get through.
What I tell people is, if you've come into litigation expecting the court to right the wrongs of your relationship and give your case all the time and attention you feel it deserves, that's your first mistake.
You're not going to monopolize the court's time.
That means you have to build your case in the background.
You have to do your healing, your family therapy, and your litigation strategy.
When you come to court, you need talking points.
"I've got three things to accomplish today, Judge."
Your lawyer has to be razor-ready. You have to be prepared with the facts and evidence.
You can't show up 15 minutes before court and say, "Oh, let me tell you what happened over the last five days."
This requires preparation.
Dana: You have to be really intentional.
Gus: Very intentional.
People also need to understand that not everyone is going to care about your case as much as you do.
Let's say something bad has consistently happened. Someone hasn't followed the rules around exchange times, or they haven't told you about decisions involving the kids.
Those are bad things.
But you may go into court expecting the judge's hair to light on fire and for them to bang an imaginary gavel.
That's probably not going to happen.
The day before, the judge may have dealt with a child being taken to another state, serious physical violence, or another severe safety issue.
They've heard it all.
Your story may be incredibly painful to you, but to the court, it may be another issue on a very crowded docket.
Is that terrible? In a way, yes.
But people need realistic expectations.
The court system is not there to heal you from an abusive or narcissistic spouse.
Dana: Exactly.
A judge isn't a therapist.
Gus: Correct. They have no formal clinical training to identify many of these issues.
Divorcing Someone With Narcissistic Traits
Dana: There's no law where you can say, "We're ruling for the defendant because the other person is a narcissist."
Gus: Exactly.
You know more about narcissism than I do, but the way it often shows itself in my cases is that the narcissistic person may actually seem like the reasonable one.
Dana: They can play the game.
Gus: They're geared and prepared to show that they're being compliant.
They've manipulated every situation five ways from Sunday.
If you're not trained to identify those issues, it looks like they're the good guy.
Dana: Meanwhile, the other person can look like the unorganized, chaotic one.
Gus: Correct.
The person may say, "She has no idea. I planned all these things for the kids."
Meanwhile, that person spent an inordinate number of hours planning something that sabotages your life and your schedule.
But they come to court saying, "Look at this wonderful planning I did."
Dana: "I was the perfect parent."
Gus: Correct.
The second mistake people make is thinking that eventually there's going to be a moment when their lawyer or they themselves will break through to that person.
It's never going to happen.
There are very few ways to deal with narcissistic litigants.
You have to bring the relevant facts to the judge.
Dana: And you have to leave the emotion out.
That's a huge part of working with someone who has narcissistic traits because they can feed on that emotion.
You have to keep it straight with the facts.
What levers can you pull based on the law?
If you don't have anything there, you have to work through the distress of the things you couldn't control.
That can take a lot of therapy.
Gus: It does.
Most of my clients dealing with a spouse with those traits have done a lot of homework and work to understand where they are.
But I can't stand when somebody comes into my office and says, "My spouse is a narcissist," then explains the traits, and I'm like, "Stop it. Your spouse is an asshole."
I've just diagnosed them.
Dana: I miss the days when someone was just an asshole.
Gus: Correct.
Someone said to me the other day, "You're really one of the people who understands more about narcissists."
I said, "I may not be an expert on narcissists, but I'm a world-class authority on assholes."
Dana: And you see people when they're at their worst.
Gus: When you see someone with true narcissistic traits in action, people need to understand that it doesn't necessarily look bad to a judge.
Dana: That's what's dangerous.
It's the charming ones. The ones who seem like they have it all together and are perfectly controlled.
Social Media During Divorce
Dana: For people dealing with that, they're not going to get their healing in court.
Sometimes people take to social media to tell their story.
How does that affect a case?
Gus: I call it changing your audience.
You present your case to one audience and don't get the reaction you want. Maybe you go to court and don't get the reaction you want there.
So what do you do?
You go to social media and look for a different audience.
The problem is that your audience on social media is often made up of people who think exactly like you.
There's not always a lot of critical thinking.
You get people who've been hurt in similar ways telling their stories and repeating the same catchphrases.
One of the top three stupidest things you can do during a divorce is post something on social media that even remotely touches your case.
Now, this is going to infuriate some people. They're going to say, "If I'm being abused, why can't I tell my story?"
You can.
But you're in court for a reason.
If it touches on custody, you're in court to protect your children and create a custody arrangement that's in their best interest.
Once you put yourself under the umbrella of the court system, guide yourself in a way that benefits you and your goals.
Dana: It goes back to patience.
You have to be tactical.
Sometimes you need to stay quiet for now.
Wait until the divorce is settled. If you want to speak afterward, that's different, although I'd recommend getting a therapist before letting it rip on social media.
As a therapist, what I see is that once someone has an empathic witness to their story, that's often when healing starts.
For some people, social media feels like that. They feel seen and heard.
But it's different from having an intimate therapeutic relationship where you feel understood by someone who can also tell you when they disagree with you and you trust them enough to listen.
Gus: Let me tell your listeners one more thing about social media because I'm very critical of it.
Let's say you say something that's not particularly bothersome.
You realize people can comment on that, right?
Your somewhat innocent statement can become something very different in the responses and comments.
Maybe someone commenting has lost custody of their children, been accused of assault multiple times, or been arrested.
Now the other side takes those comments and says, "Look who this person is talking with on social media."
Dana: So they can say, "This is who you're associating with."
Gus: Exactly.
Even if you don't know that person at all.
They can twist it and say, "Look at the circles in which he or she is associating."
Your little innocent comment just became a bullet in the other person's gun.
That's why, when we try to craft orders that prohibit this in court, it's not just "don't post."
Don't like, share, or comment.
Custody litigation lasts a finite amount of time.
Your kids are going to be your kids forever.
You're in this terrible phase of life for a year, 14 months, 16 months, whatever it is.
But you have a whole life ahead of you.
All we're asking is that for this amount of time, you behave in a certain way.
Repeating Relationship Patterns
Dana: Do you have frequent flyers?
People who came to you for one divorce, got remarried, and then came back for another?
Gus: A few times.
I can think of one particular client I'm really quite fond of.
I handled his first divorce. The divorce was finalized. I did his prenup. Then I did his second divorce.
At the end of the second divorce, I turned to him and said, "Listen, just save yourself the trouble. If you're thinking about a third one, just come and drop off a check."
Dana: Don't even bother.
There's a pattern here you need to address before you do that again.
Gus: Exactly.
There are people who go through these divorces, do the difficult stuff in therapy, get better, and find love in a different way the second time around.
You see that a lot.
I keep in touch with many of my clients. I've even been invited to weddings.
It's incredible to see how they evolve.
Less frequently, people continue to repeat patterns.
They didn't do the work.
Dana: That's such a big part of it.
Before anybody even gets married in the first place, do your work.
More often than not, we play out our unresolved stuff with our partners or our kids.
Nothing brings your unresolved stuff to the surface quite like having a child.
I can speak to that personally.
I was pregnant with my son, sitting on my therapist's couch with my husband in couples therapy.
She said, "Dana, I think your family-of-origin stuff is getting kicked up now that you're pregnant. Would you like to come in for some individual sessions?"
I was like, "Yes, please. Thank you."
We bring those things into our relationships.
There's attachment style, too. We tend to repeat familiar dynamics because even when we don't like something, it's familiar.
And we'll often choose what's familiar over what's supposedly "best" for us.
Gus: That makes a ton of sense.
Think about it.
You have to take a written test before you get a learner's permit.
You have to take the bar exam to practice law.
Therapists have to complete a tremendous number of clinical hours.
Zero for parenting.
Dana: Right. Anybody who wants can go have a baby.
Gus: And what about the fact that you can love someone and marry them, and they can be the most incredible person in the world, a go-getter career-wise or whatever, but how do you know how they're going to be as a parent?
The same traits you find attractive in a spouse may be horrible parenting traits.
Dana: That's scary.
Gus: Have conversations.
What would you do in this situation?
How do you feel about one parent staying home and not working?
How do you feel about the kids going away to college?
If people have fundamentally different beliefs about parenting, maybe you don't get married.
Have the Hard Conversations Before Marriage
Dana: Those are the hard conversations people need to have, and people want to avoid them.
So many people think, "It's going to be fine. They'll change their mind once we get married."
They don't necessarily change their mind.
It comes down to values.
Everybody has their own set of core values. They're not necessarily wrong. They're just different.
But if your values differ in ways that fundamentally impact how you're going to live your life or raise a family, that needs to be discussed.
Gus: I tell scary stories, but I want to put a bright side on this, too.
I've had hundreds of cases where people are going crazy over financial issues, the valuation of an asset, and all of that.
Then I ask, "How's the parenting going?"
"Oh, it's fine. We don't need to talk about it."
"What do you mean?"
"They can have whatever custody they want. They're a great parent."
That happens a lot.
There are people who can war over money but still respect each other as parents and as a family.
I don't want that healthy demographic to be forgotten.
Dana: That's so interesting.
Gus: "Total scumbag with money, though. Great dad."
Dana: The therapist in me goes, "Well, what does money represent to that person?"
Gus: Exactly.
There are people who can compartmentalize their issues with the kids and fight about finances without bringing the children into it.
Sadly, those aren't always the people who hire me because I tend to handle more complex cases.
Money, Power, and Coercive Control
Dana: Financial issues can create so much conflict.
Money can represent safety, control, or power.
Gus: There are men who look me in the face and say, "I understand I'm going to have to pay child support. She has no idea how to handle money, so can I just pay all of her expenses for her instead? Because if I give her the money, she's going to piss it away."
I say, "You realize you're going to be divorced, but she's still going to have to come to you to ask permission to spend money?"
And he'll say, "No, no, no. You don't understand. I want to do what's best."
People talk about coercive control.
Sometimes coercive control doesn't sound that coercive.
It sounds like, "I'm trying to do the right thing. Bless her heart, she just can't manage a checkbook, so I have to control it."
That doesn't sound so bad.
In reality, maybe he has an alert on his Apple Watch notifying him every time she spends more than $50.
Dana: He's keeping tabs on her.
Gus:Exactly.
It's about understanding the issues and being able to call them out.
And let's not make this all about gender.
I've had cases where my client is the woman and she's the moneyed spouse.
Let me tell you, that's a whole different dynamic.
Dana: What's the biggest difference you notice?
Gus: Men have been trained for 100 years to expect certain things in divorce.
Think about the old barroom sayings: "Cheaper to keep her." "I'm going to have to give her half anyway."
Men have been acclimatizing themselves to divorce.
When it comes down to paying child support, paying maintenance, or splitting assets, they know it's going to happen.
But reverse it.
In my opinion, women have often worked a lot harder to get into positions where they're financially independent and supporting a family.
They've dealt with things men historically haven't had to deal with.
Now she's in a position where her husband stays home or earns less and she's in control of the finances.
She may think, "Wait a second. He's a man. Why can't he go out and work?"
That's not how the law necessarily looks at it.
Dana: This is the life you chose.
Gus: Exactly.
Judges look retrospectively at the life you created during the marriage.
These were the choices you made during the marriage, and those choices can matter when the marriage ends.
Do You Need a Prenup?
Dana: That brings us to prenups.
What's your stance on prenups and trying to be intentional about how you're going into a marriage?
Gus: People are becoming more educated.
We have podcasts. We have social media.
I think that's good.
People are starting to identify how important mental health, psychology, relationships, and marriage are in a way they didn't 20 or 30 years ago when I first started practicing.
Prenups are a huge topic.
Any lawyer who tells you they're not a fan of prenups is crazy.
A prenup can potentially make a divorce so much easier.
Dana: That's my thought process. If it's done right, you've limited the issues, if not eliminated some of them.
Gus: Yes.
But social media sound bites don't take one thing into consideration:
Most people don't have much when they get married.
They're 28. They're 31. They just started a job.
What are you going to put in the prenup?
"My $14,000 in savings is mine?"
Not everyone is going to go to a lawyer and spend thousands of dollars on a prenup unless they have family wealth or other meaningful reasons to do so.
I think we're putting too much pressure on people to believe everybody needs one.
What social media is really getting at is, "Think about how things could go early."
But when I got married, Dana, I had nothing.
My wife had just started her first job.
What were we going to tell a lawyer to put in that prenup?
So I don't blame somebody who's 46 and thinking about divorce when people ask, "Why didn't you have a prenup?"
Let's go back in time and remember where things were 20 years ago.
Everything you've created after you're married is also part of a partnership.
I would not be here today without my wife.
Point blank.
Anyone who has this revisionist history during a divorce and says, "Well, I did it all," that's total bullshit.
If you're a high earner, you have assets, family wealth, or you're getting married later in life, absolutely consider a prenup.
But let's not throw everybody under the bus for not getting a contract when their biggest asset was their Apple Watch.
Dana: That's very well said.
When my husband and I got married, he was the higher earner. I was actually the one who asked him for a prenup.
My thought process was, God forbid we ever get to that point, I want us to make decisions while we still like each other.
I know how I can get when the chips are down. I can get vicious.
What I think is fair now versus what I might think is fair when I'm really upset could be two different things.
I wanted to make those decisions while we still loved each other.
Gus: I think that's brilliant.
But it's also a lot to ask of two 27-year-olds who are still finding their way in the world.
Compatibility Is More Than a Personality Test
Gus: What if we could make a marriage, parenting, and life test?
Companies use these types of assessments all the time to see if someone is management-level.
What if we had a simple test that could identify areas where you were highly compatible or incompatible?
Maybe something is extremely important to you and completely unimportant to your partner.
The social media buzz around prenups is really encouraging people to have conversations about real-life issues earlier.
But you can have those conversations without a prenup.
Sit down and say, "Let's seriously talk about how you feel about my parents living with us when they get older."
Maybe I come from a culture where, when my mom is 89 and needs care, I expect her to live with me.
Let's talk about that right now.
That's a big deal.
Dana: A huge deal.
Maybe there's an alternative solution, but you have to talk about it.
Gus: Exactly. It's communicating.
The prenup conversation is really trying to teach younger people to have intelligent, important conversations about their lives earlier.
Dana: Have hard conversations.
My husband and I, on paper, would probably look highly incompatible.
On a DiSC profile, we're polar opposites.
But what we have in common is that we can communicate through conflict.
That's important.
Leave room for the conversation.
Gus: People used to criticize people for marrying within their cultures and religions.
I look at it from another perspective.
Why did people do that for hundreds of years?
Why did Greek people marry Greek people, or Korean people marry Korean people?
Was part of it that you had baked-in cultural assumptions that made your life easier?
Now we've moved away from that, which is fine, but you may have to have more explicit conversations about culture, religion, parenting, elderly parents, discipline, and other expectations.
Dana: That's such an interesting perspective.
My Sicilian grandmother used to say, "Marry a Jew. They make the best husbands."
I'm one of 10 grandkids, five girls and five boys.
I tend to agree. My last name is Stein now, so I was the one who really listened.
I'm happily married. God bless Grandma Sally for knowing what's what.
Gus: Don't laugh about that.
In Jewish culture, women historically had prominence and influence over the family in ways they didn't in many other cultures.
So it stands to reason there could be cultural expectations around respecting women that mattered to your grandmother.
Dana: Exactly.
And culture is important.
Our son started Catholic school, and it's the funniest thing in the world watching my husband do religion homework because he's learning.
Then I go to temple and I'm like, "Tell me all about this. I never learned this stuff."
But I think it's the openness to the other person's world.
Gus: Isn't that the core?
Dana: Yes.
Gus: It's the core of everything.
It's being open, listening, and reliably allowing the other person to be who they are.
You're not trying to absorb somebody into your world.
You're trying to create a world where both of your worlds can exist.
Dana: Although some people are trying to absorb the other person.
There's a reason they're called energy vampires, right?
Truth or Bullshit
Dana: We're going to segue into my little segment that I love called Truth or Bullshit.
I'm going to read a sentence, and you say whether it's truth, bullshit, or "it depends."
Gus: I'm ready.
Divorce Is Purely a Legal Process
Dana: Number one: Divorce is purely a legal process.
Gus: Absolute bullshit.
It's almost more of a psychological process than it is a legal process.
Sorry for outing you divorce lawyers, but the body of divorce law is relatively limited.
The law applies to all these issues, but divorce is also a way of balancing psychology through conversations about actual issues like money.
"Split this account."
Simple, right?
Not necessarily.
Maybe that account means something to one person because of what was happening in their life when they earned that money.
It's very psychological.
Dana: It's the emotions attached to things.
Selling a house is another example.
Someone may have an emotional attachment to the house. They don't care that the market says it's worth X amount.
"But this is where I raised my kids."
The market doesn't give a shit.
Gus: And fear.
How about fear?
"I'm fearful about my future prospects and earning potential. Therefore, I'm demanding more money."
That person can look like a money-hungry pig.
But maybe their real motivation isn't greed.
Maybe fear is controlling them.
Maybe they're afraid they won't be financially secure in the future.
Dana: It's that sense of security.
Winning in Court Means You've Won the Divorce
Dana: Number two: Winning in court means you've won the divorce.
Gus: Total bullshit.
If somebody can define winning for me early in the case, I'll go with it.
You're in my office for the first or second meeting and I ask, "What are your goals?"
Give them to me clearly.
"I don't really care about many things, but one, two, and three are incredibly important to me."
I can potentially deliver a win for that person.
If your goal is to get out of this as quickly as humanly possible with the least amount of psychological damage to you and your kids, maybe I can deliver that win.
The win I can never deliver is when there is no goal.
Dana: If you don't have a target, what are you shooting at?
Gus: Exactly.
"I need to end this marriage and achieve these three or four things that are incredibly important to me."
Fine.
But if you say, "I want you to right the wrongs of the past 20 years, leave me feeling better about myself, and inflict as much pain as possible," then the old saying that the only people who win are the lawyers becomes 100 percent true.
Dana: You need clearly identified goals.
You need to know what you're shooting at.
Otherwise, there is no outcome and you don't know how to deliver a win.
Gus: And I don't let the targets move without good reason.
Sometimes I'll sit down with a client early in the case and say, "Write down how you feel about this settlement offer and these issues right now."
Because four months from now, everything might look different.
An account may be depleted. An asset may increase in value.
When the goalposts move, your original goals shouldn't be forgotten.
Write them down. Keep them in your notes. Put them in your binder.
The Truth Always Wins in Family Court
Dana: Number three: The truth always wins in family court.
Gus: One hundred percent bullshit.
Dana: That's the one that breaks my heart.
Gus: We talked about this earlier.
You can tell the truth all day long about an abusive, controlling, or narcissistic spouse.
But if you don't present the relevant facts in the right way, you can lose.
If I could identify what wins in court, I'd say genuine people tend to do well.
That doesn't simply mean "truthful."
A genuine person is someone trying to get through the process with their dignity and self-worth intact.
They understand they're not going to win everything.
They know divorce sucks for everyone, for them and for their kids.
They're going to win some things and lose others.
They're going to modulate, be reasonable, and sometimes say, "Guys, it's fine. Let's move on."
You can do well in divorce with that attitude.
If you're rigid and refuse to move off anything, judges notice that.
Judges make personality assessments from the moment you walk into court on day one.
I tell my clients, "Look at the judge's eyes during the court proceeding."
When the lawyer is talking, the judge isn't necessarily looking at the lawyer the whole time.
They're looking at you.
They're watching how you react.
Are you making faces?
"That's not true!"
Are you doing theatrics?
Dana: If you're highly reactive, you can tank your case.
Gus: One hundred percent.
The Court System Will Protect Someone Divorcing a Narcissist
Dana: The court system will protect someone divorcing a narcissist.
Gus: Absolutely, positively untrue.
They may not even know what it means.
Their knowledge of narcissism may come from the same social media posts everybody else is seeing.
I'm not saying this to disparage the judiciary.
Judges are lawyers. They are not mental health clinicians.
A judge can be assigned to matrimonial matters without having spent their career handling complex divorce and custody cases.
They have to learn.
I've worked with judges who've been very open about that.
One judge I respected tremendously would essentially say, "You two lawyers know more about matrimonial law than I do right now. I'm learning. I'm reading everything I can. I'm relying on you to tell me the truth and cite the law."
I loved that vulnerability.
But people need to understand that judges don't necessarily have formal mental health training.
So if you're hoping an inexperienced lawyer is going to explain a complex psychological dynamic to a judge who doesn't have clinical training, you're taking a major risk.
If you have any hope, get the studies.
Get the facts.
Do your work.
Have conversations with professionals who understand these issues.
Ask, "How do I present these facts in a way where I'm not going to be judged incorrectly?"
And go to a lawyer you're willing to listen to.
Sometimes that lawyer needs to say, "Those three things are horrible, but let me tell you what could happen if we present those facts this way."
When Evidence Can Backfire
Gus: Case in point.
A client comes to me with a recording.
It's about 37 seconds long.
It's horrendous.
It's a father yelling at a child in a way that's incredibly jarring. No physical abuse, but the yelling is awful.
She hands it to me and says, "Listen to this. When are we going to present this in court?"
I said, "Never."
She said, "Why?"
I said, "What were you doing during those 37 seconds?"
Dana: That was my first thought.
Gus: While your husband was doing this, your thought wasn't, "Protect my kid. Step in and diffuse the situation."
Your thought was, "Grab a recorder so I have evidence."
She looked at me with this raw emotion of, "I'm a terrible fucking person."
She wasn't.
She got caught up in it.
Dana: She's in survival mode.
Gus: Exactly.
She got caught up in thinking, "He's so charming. He's so successful. No one's ever going to believe me."
And she may have had legitimate reasons to feel that way.
But as it relates to custody litigation, you're going into an African safari with lions, tigers, and cheetahs.
Get a good guide and listen.
It is not always what you think.
Dana: The thought I just had is that the legal system might not protect someone from narcissism, but the parent can still work to protect the child.
Gus: Heck yeah.
Protect your kids.
And your second goal is to arm your child with the strength, therapy, tools, and resources to protect themselves because you're not always going to be there.
You're going to get divorced. The divorce ends.
Then your kid still has to deal with life.
There's that old saying: Don't prepare the road for the child. Prepare the child for the road.
Dana: Exactly.
That doesn't mean parental alienation.
It means modeling what a sense of security looks like.
So much of parenting is modeling.
Be the person you want your kids to grow into.
Someone who's strong and secure.
Someone who can say no.
Someone who knows they don't have to tolerate unhealthy treatment.
That's how you set them up for success.
Gus: Agreed.
Where to Find Gus Dimopoulos
Dana: Gus, thank you so much for being here and talking about all of this.
There are so many nuggets of wisdom that I think our listeners are going to gain from.
Tell everybody where they can find you.
Gus: My website is www.dimolaw.com. Pretty much everything is there.
You can listen to my podcast and find my social media content.
If you're interested in a particular topic, though, read the actual article. Study it.
Please don't get all of your information from my social media clips or anybody else's social media clips.
Those are meant to be quick discussions that get people interested in a topic.
Then go to the resources. Read them. Read the sources they cite.
Understand this stuff.
Dana: Let social media be the segue to where the information actually lives.
Gus: Correct.
Thank you very much, Dana. I had fun.
Dana: I had so much fun.
Thank you so much, and thank you everybody for listening.
I'm Dana Carretta-Stein. This is The Truth About Healing, and I'm here to remind you:
We repeat what we don't repair.
Thank you for listening to another episode of The Truth About Healing podcast.
If you know someone who's still stuck, share this episode with them because, as you know, the truth can set them free.
And if you're ready to get started and see what you need to repair, contact us at peacefullivingmentalhealthcounseling.com, and we'll get you started.
Until next time, I'm Dana Carretta-Stein, reminding you:
We repeat what we don't repair.
Podcast Disclaimer
This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for professional mental health or medical advice. Listening does not create a therapist-client relationship. If you need support, contact a licensed professional or your local emergency services.
Crisis Support: If you're in crisis, call or text 988 in the U.S. or contact your local emergency number.
Transcript lightly edited for readability while preserving the meaning and conversational tone of the original recording
Subscribe to The Truth About Healing Podcast
Never miss an episode.
Subscribe for conversations about:
Trauma healing
EMDR therapy
Nervous system regulation
Therapist growth
Mental health education
Personal development
Comments