Narcissists and borderlines with a Tendency for Interpersonal Victimhood (TIV) are the proverbial perfect storm in high-conflict divorce cases, especially when it comes to false abuse allegations. Given the rampant misuse of restraining orders and the prevalence of high-conflict cases in family court, it baffles me why so many judges, attorneys, custody evaluators, guardians ad litem, and parenting coordinators remain so ill-equipped to handle this issue. Is it willful ignorance, bias, incompetence, or just unbridled greed?
The goal of this series is to equip male victims of false abuse allegations with the knowledge they need to protect themselves and their children from ex-partners who make such accusations. In part one, Why Are Narcissists and Borderlines, Like Amber Heard, Such Convincing Liars? Understanding False Abuse Allegations, I discuss the personality traits of those prone to making false abuse allegations—namely, individuals with narcissistic, borderline, histrionic, psychopathic, paranoid, and dependent personality disorders.
In this part, I’ll examine the Tendency for Interpersonal Victimhood (TIV)—a new-ish academic term for professional victim or victim mindset. TIV encompasses other core characteristics and behaviors of false accusers. Thus far, Gabay and colleagues haven’t addressed how their findings apply to false abuse allegations, but I will. So let’s dive in.
The Tendency for Interpersonal Victimhood (TIV)
The Tendency for Interpersonal Victimhood (TIV) is a broad conceptual framework that encompasses the various psychopathologies driving false abuse allegations. Research confirms that TIV is an enduring personality trait, defined as “an ongoing feeling that the self is a victim, generalized across many kinds of relationships.” Those with a higher TIV tend to feel victimized more frequently, intensely, and for longer periods than individuals with a lower tendency for victimhood (Gabay et al., 2020).
Gabay’s literature review makes a crucial distinction: victimhood is a psychological state, not necessarily evidence of actual victimization or trauma (Berman, 2014; Schori-Eyal et al., 2017). For male victims of false abuse allegations, this distinction is key—especially when facing accusations from a partner whose perception of being victimized stems from psychological dysfunction rather than reality. Perhaps most critical to the context of false allegations, a victim mindset can develop even in the absence of real trauma or abuse (Klar et al., 2013; Urlic et al., 2010).
In cases where no real victimization has occurred, the false accuser is the aggressor, and the falsely accused is–by legal definition–the victim. Making false police reports and committing perjury are crimes.
TIV manifests in behaviors that leverage victimhood to manipulate others, garner sympathy, or gain tactical advantages in family court. For men who are likely to face or are already facing false accusations, recognizing these traits in a partner or ex is crucial. It helps you to anticipate manipulative actions, take precautions—such as recording all interactions—and build a strong defense.
So, what fuels this perpetual need to feel victimized? According to Gabay and colleagues, both individual and collective victimhood are comprised of four fundamental related aspects: the need for recognition, moral elitism, lack of empathy, and rumination. Each of these aspects includes other psychological phenomena, which I will also discuss in parts three and four of this series.
Need for Recognition
Unlike the typical narcissistic craving for admiration, individuals with a Tendency for Interpersonal Victimhood (TIV) seek recognition specifically for their perceived “suffering” (Hameiri & Nadler, 2017; Twali et al., 2020). This victim-centered recognition feeds their self-image as morally superior and allows them to position themselves as sympathetic figures rather than mere attention seekers. Psychologically, when others validate their false victimhood, it not only strengthens their narrative externally but also reinforces their own self-deception. This feedback loop enables them to present an ever-more convincing façade of victimhood (Urlic, Berger, & Berman, 2010).
Furthermore, recognition isn’t just about acknowledgment—it’s about demanding accountability from their supposed perpetrator. For these individuals, accountability equates to eternal punishment. Professional victims want the alleged abuser to take responsibility, express guilt, and show remorse (Baumeister, Stillwell, & Heatherton, 1994), while also receiving empathy and support from others (Noor, Shnabel, Halabi, & Nadler, 2012; Urlic et al., 2010). This need for recognition serves a more sinister purpose: it punishes the target of blame by portraying them as an abuser, which feeds into another aspect of TIV—the desire for revenge. The more sympathy the false accuser garners, the more their target is vilified.
False Abuse Allegations and the Need for Recognition in Family Court
In family court, the need for recognition translates into strategic moves designed to gain legal advantages. By positioning themselves as the victim, these individuals often secure restraining orders and other custody advantages, manipulating the system’s bias toward protecting victims. Court recognition also acts as “evidence” that further amplifies their victim status, enabling them to garner additional attention and sympathy.
In social contexts, particularly those with strong gendered narratives about domestic violence, false accusers exploit societal biases to gain recognition and support. This phenomenon, known as benevolent sexism, further tips the scales against their falsely accused partners (Bertsch and Matthews, 2023). Thus, the need for recognition becomes both a personal drive and a calculated exploitation of societal biases.
Additionally, in today’s social media-driven world, individuals with TIV can amplify their false narratives exponentially. Platforms like Facebook and Instagram allow them to spread claims of victimhood widely, gathering sympathy and support in ways previously limited to personal networks.
Moral Elitism and Its Impact
Moral elitism refers to “the perception of immaculate morality of the self and the immorality of the other side” (Gabay et al., 2020). It’s a tool used to portray oneself as morally superior by accusing others of being unethical (Urlic et al., 2010). This creates a rigid dichotomy where the “victim” is seen as entirely blameless, while the “abuser” is painted as completely at fault. Moral elitism aligns with the concept of splitting—a defense mechanism common among narcissists, borderlines, and other high-conflict individuals, where they fail to integrate both positive and negative qualities in themselves and others. Instead, they see the world in black-and-white terms, skewing their perception of morality.
Their perceived moral superiority becomes a weapon to attack and vilify anyone who questions their “victimhood.” They “split black” anyone they perceive as a threat to the false image of themselves as an innocent victim. This extends beyond just the accused, reaching friends, family members, and even strangers online who identify falsehoods in their narratives.
Examples of Moral Elitism in Action
Moral elitism also justifies the condemnation and ostracism of anyone who doesn’t support the TIV individual’s version of events. One example is the high-profile Johnny Depp vs. Amber Heard case. Supporters of Heard vilified Depp’s backers, accusing them of condoning domestic violence. Conversely, Depp’s supporters labeled Amber’s fans hypocrites who ignore male victims of abuse. Given Amber’s tactics of lying and projection (DARVO: Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender), Depp’s supporters raised valid criticisms.
Another example is grandparents who are barred from seeing their grandchildren for “siding” with (i.e., supporting) their accused son. Or, a TIV mom conducts a smear campaign at the children’s school, resulting in teachers and other parents treating the accused with hostility, rejecting play dates, and birthday parties hosted by the falsely accused dad. Just so we’re clear, these kinds of tactics don’t just hurt the falsely accused parent, they hurt the kids and everyone who is being “othered” by the TIV individual.
Moral Elitism as a Justification to Harm Others
The TIV person justifies such actions because they see themselves as inherently good and those who oppose them as inherently bad. This dynamic reinforces their victim status while marginalizing those who dare to dissent. This behavior fuels social and familial discord, as the accused and their supporters may find themselves isolated and subject to unwarranted hostility. By purging anyone who challenges their victim narrative, the TIV individual creates an echo chamber that further amplifies their false claims. This selective punishment not only validates their lies but also solidifies their position as the wronged party, distorting reality in their favor.
In summary, moral elitism strengthens the TIV individual’s belief in their superiority, empowering them to smear and stigmatize those who challenge their false victimhood. By manipulating public perception and creating division, they sustain their victim status, further damaging the lives of the falsely accused and their loved ones.
Lack of Empathy in Narcissists, Borderlines, and False Abuse Allegations
A lack of empathy is a defining trait in narcissistic, borderline, histrionic, and antisocial personality disorders, as well as individuals with a Tendency for Interpersonal Victimhood (TIV). This deficit presents as an obsessive focus on one’s own pain while disregarding the suffering of others (Urlic et al., 2010). People with a victim mindset feel entitled to behave selfishly and aggressively (Zitek, Jordan, Monin, & Leach, 2010) toward their alleged offenders (Schori-Eyal, Klar, Roccas, & McNeill, 2017) and other perceived enemies (Wohl & Branscombe, 2008).
In short, narcissists, borderlines, and high-TIV people feel righteously justified in attacking anyone they see as a threat to their fragile egos. These people often portray themselves as blameless victims, and anyone questioning their false victimhood becomes a target.
Client Examples of Malicious Behavior
I’ve worked with clients whose exes didn’t just target them but lashed out at anyone who challenged their false victim narratives—therapists, custody evaluators, parenting coordinators, judges, and even their own children. One client’s ex went so far as to physically assault her own attorney in the courtroom when the judge—who saw through her lies—ruled in my client’s favor, awarding him the house, legal fees, spousal support, and a chunk of her retirement. The bailiff had to restrain and remove her. Note: She was not arrested and charged with assault. If my client had done the same, he would’ve left the courthouse in handcuffs–speaking of benevolent sexism.
This behavior often follows a DARVO (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender) pattern, where high-conflict individuals deny wrongdoing, attack the person they’ve victimized, and claim to be the real victim. These tactics make it incredibly difficult for the accused to defend themselves, as any attempt to fight back is framed as further abuse. It’s a particularly sadistic tactic that underscores their lack of empathy.
How Lack of Empathy Enables False Allegations
A lack of empathy, coupled with a lack of conscience or shame, allows high-TIV individuals to justify malicious actions. Before falsely accusing someone of domestic violence, child abuse, or sexual assault, these individuals must dehumanize their target. The emotional disconnect allows them to destroy the lives of their victims without remorse, often feeling justified in their cruelty.
Moral elitism then compounds the problem by giving these individuals a sense of righteousness in their actions. They see themselves as morally superior, using that belief to justify their attacks. This combination of a lack of empathy and moral elitism creates a dangerous environment, where the falsely accused are systematically vilified, isolated, and punished, with little chance to fight back.
Please understand that a threat to one’s ego is not “synonymous” to a threat to one’s physical safety. We’re talking about individuals accusing an ex of domestic violence, child abuse, or sexual assault not because they’re in legitimate danger or because these things actually happened, but because their feelings were hurt, or they fear exposure of their abusive and toxic behavior. These people are not victims—they are the aggressors.
Rumination
Everyone ruminates on loss or emotionally painful experiences from time to time. For narcissists and borderlines, though, it takes a darker, more obsessive form. It becomes perseveration—endlessly replaying negative incidents and emotions until they’re consumed by them. Instead of working through their emotional issues or seeking solutions, these individuals focus on their perceived victimization, wallowing in their victimhood and punishing those they believe are to blame (Nolen-Hoeksema, Wisco, & Lyubomirsky, 2008).
Individuals with the Tendency for Interpersonal Victimhood (TIV) are especially prone to ruminating over interpersonal grievances (McCullough et al., 1998). This excessive rumination doesn’t just prolong emotional distress (Greenberg, 1995), it feeds into an escalating cycle of revenge fantasies. Rather than moving forward, they fixate on past injustices—whether real or imagined—allowing anger and entitlement to fester. This obsession keeps them stuck in a loop of resentment and anger, which eventually manifests as aggressive behavior (Collins & Bell, 1997).
Moreover, rumination in high-TIV personalities only heightens their desire for revenge (Collins & Bell, 1997). In my experience, narcissists, borderlines, and other TIV people see revenge and the constant pursuit of sympathy and attention, as their primary ways to cope with emotional distress. Instead of accountability or self-reflection, they turn to their toxic victim narratives as a means of validation.
This fixation on revenge and victimhood not only deepens their emotional dysfunction but also perpetuates the cycle of false abuse allegations, malicious attacks, and destruction. Their inability to let go and move on feeds their justification for these behaviors, further harming the accused and sometimes themselves.
Client Example: Rumination Fuels False Allegations and Harassment
One client’s ex coached her pre-teen daughter (from a previous relationship) to make false sexual abuse allegations against him. Unfortunately, my client shares a young child with this woman. As you can imagine, it’s been a nightmare. Despite her best efforts to have him convicted of the crimes she’s falsely alleged, she’s failed. Prosecutors in two counties found her and her daughter’s claims unsubstantiated and lacking credibility (i.e., they’re bad liars). Additionally, the Department of Children, Youth & Families (DCYF) also concluded that her accusations were uncredible. Nonetheless, their child was removed from his custody for nearly a year.
After tens of thousands in legal fees, the criminal investigations were dropped. My client has full custody and a restraining order against his ex. In fact, the protective order was granted at the beginning of this shitshow. The original judge found the ex to be the primary aggressor. Despite DCYF’s determination of the ex’s lack of credibility, they pushed for the case against him to proceed involving the state’s attorney general when local authorities showed no interest in pursuing it.
Throughout their relationship, the ex used the threat of false allegations as a means of coercive control. This reached a peak when my client had to have her trespassed by law enforcement from his home for attempting to leave at 3 AM with their child while intoxicated. Her threats, documented in hostile text messages, were instrumental in securing the restraining order. My client is now seeking a relocation order due to continued threats to his and his child’s safety.
The safety risks include:
- The ex continues to publicly smear him.
- Her family is friendly with law enforcement.
- The police have done nothing on the multiple occasions she’s violated the restraining order.
- She has a GoFundMe page soliciting donations for her legal fees, where she persists in perpetrating lies about my client.
- He’s received death threats via Facebook because of her false allegations.
- His neighbors report him to the police because of her allegations. “Hello officer, I’d like to report a sighting of a known sex offender…”
- She has access to firearms.
- She made multiple threats to kill herself during the relationship (i.e., coercive control and emotional blackmail).
My client is also concerned about the potential impact on his child, fearing that the ex’s family will manipulate the child when she’s old enough to understand the situation. His concerns are justified, given the ongoing nature of the harassment. Despite the possibility of losing custody due to her false claims, the ex continues with her aggressive tactics and lies.
In her relentless pursuit of portraying herself as the victim, my client’s ex not only exacerbates his suffering but also risks further incriminating herself and permanently losing custody. Her obsessive rumination on victimhood and her insistence on vilifying my client are likely to backfire, yet she remains undeterred. This unyielding focus on maintaining her victim status continues to harm all parties involved and perpetuates the cycle of conflict.
Conclusion
Narcissists, borderlines, and other high-conflict people fueled by their Tendency for Interpersonal Victimhood, transform false allegations into an incredibly effective weapon in high-conflict divorces. Their relentless focus on perceived slights, coupled with a relentless pursuit of sympathy and revenge, fuels their toxic behavior and perpetuates a cycle of emotional destruction for everyone who crosses their path. While playing victim, they craft a narrative vilifying anyone who dares to challenge their distorted reality.
But their malfeasance doesn’t end here. In my next article, I’ll delve into how anxious attachment styles, rejection sensitivity, and other factors amplify their destructive psychopathology. I’ll explore how emotional reasoning—where feelings trump facts—further distorts perceptions and escalates conflicts. From there, I’ll discuss entitlement, control freak tendencies, and the inability to forgive, providing a roadmap for understanding how these traits fuel ongoing conflict and false allegations. Armed with this knowledge, you’ll be better equipped to recognize, navigate, and combat the destructive tactics of those who thrive on chaos and deceit.
Counseling, Consulting and Coaching with Dr. Tara J. Palmatier, PsyD
Dr. Tara J. Palmatier, PsyD helps individuals with relationship and codependency issues via telephone or Skype. For over a decade, she has specialized in helping men and women break free of abusive relationships, cope with the stress of ongoing abuse and heal from the trauma. She combines practical advice, emotional support and goal-oriented outcomes. If you’d like to work with Dr. Palmatier, please visit the Schedule a Session page or you can email her directly at [email protected].
Want to Say Goodbye to Crazy? Buy it HERE.