Photo: Blake Lively Cannes 2016 3.jpg by Georges Biard, licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons
The legal blow came days after what was supposed to be the ending. According to a recent Daily Mail report, a judge denied Blake Lively’s request to file additional briefs before the court rules on whatever fees or damages she may be owed from her dispute with Justin Baldoni. The settlement was already signed. The headline-generating chapter of the case had supposedly closed. And yet here we are, watching the filing keep filing, the motions keep motioning, the ledger refusing to balance.
The internet does what the internet does. People grab the popcorn. People pick a side. People decide who is the toxic one, who is the greedy one, who is the unreasonable one. The algorithm rewards the most certain take, and the most certain take is almost always the wrong one.
I want to read this differently. I have sat with enough people in adversarial legal processes to recognize what I am looking at when a case keeps generating filings after the case is officially over. I am not diagnosing Blake Lively. I am not diagnosing Justin Baldoni. I have never sat with either of them, and the Goldwater rule means I would not presume to. What I am pointing at is a pattern I see in my office in less famous form almost every week. When a settlement is signed but the litigation will not stop, we are watching a survival response trying to close a wound through an instrument that cannot close wounds.
From the Daily Mail to Your Kitchen Table
Which pattern is running your relationship?
Take the free three minute quiz and meet the creature behind the cycle you keep getting stuck in.
The thread I want to pull runs through every contested conflict I have ever worked adjacent to. The legal process assumes two rational actors making decisions based on their interests. But inside a high-conflict break, there are no two rational actors. There are two survival brains trying to use a cognitive instrument to settle a limbic problem. Once you see it, you cannot unsee it. And it lives inside your divorce, your custody fight, your business partnership detonation, your family estate, your every text message war with someone you once loved or trusted.
What the data shows: in 58,221 completed relationship assessments, 74.1% of the 6,159 couples where both partners completed were in the pursue-withdraw cycle. Both partners typically describe the other as the one withdrawing.
The Mempool of the Body
Long before there was any modern ledger, the body was the original one. It records everything. Every moment of safety, every moment of rupture, every promise kept and every promise broken. The body is keeping score whether you want it to or not.
When a public conflict like this drags past the settlement, what we are watching is a trauma stuck in the mempool. The transaction has not been confirmed. The body still feels an unpaid debt. And because our culture has spent a century teaching us that money equates to justice, we keep trying to inflate away the debt of pain by adding more zeros, more filings, more legal fees, more rulings.
It will not work. It cannot work. No amount of financial compensation clears an emotional ledger. The body demands a different kind of settlement, and the courthouse does not stock the currency.
I sat with a couple last year who had been in litigation for eleven months over a toaster. A four-slice Cuisinart. Maybe forty dollars on eBay. Their combined legal fees on this single item had passed ten thousand dollars. When I finally asked the wife to tell me about the toaster, she started crying. He had bought it for her the first Christmas they were together. It was the last thing she owned that proved she had once mattered to him.
She was not fighting for a toaster. She was fighting for proof that she once existed inside someone’s love. The retirement account is never about the retirement account. The legal fees are never about the legal fees. They are receipts the body is trying to issue for a debt that the legal system was never designed to settle.
The Seduction of the Story of Other
There is a place every activated body runs to when it is in pain, and I call it the Story of Other. It is the most seductive place on earth. The world will always supply you with evidence to support your wound. If you feel dismissed, the world will hand you a thousand examples of being dismissed. If you feel betrayed, every text message will read as betrayal. The trigger is real. The meaning you build comes from your history, not from the outside world.
The Story of Other never leads to growth. It never leads to healing. It never leads to anything resembling sovereignty. It is the path the lab rat keeps running down, hoping to find food at the end, and the food is never there.
A legal filing days after the settlement is the lab rat sprinting down the corridor one more time. And here is the painful part: it makes complete biological sense. Your physiology has not been told the war is over. The body cannot read a settlement document. So it keeps reaching for the only authority figure left in the room, demanding the authority figure validate its story. When the judge declines, the panic does not subside. The panic escalates. More briefs. More filings. More attempts to extract from the system the thing the system cannot give: the recognition that you were the one who was hurt.
The Diagnosis Trap
We cannot ignore the environment all of this is happening in. Public figures are living inside a goldfish bowl where every move is archived, judged, screenshotted, and weaponized. The algorithm has trained an entire generation to scroll for ten minutes and walk away certain their partner, their ex, their colleague, their co-star, is a narcissist or a borderline or a psychopath.
Sometimes those labels point at something real. Far more often, they function as a protector strategy. Diagnosis gives certainty when a bond feels threatened. It turns pain into a story with a villain. It validates withdrawal, contempt, and self-protection. It lets you stop being curious about what is actually happening between two human bodies in panic, because you have already decided the other person is the problem.
I have written more about this in my piece on the Bevin divorce and what a courtroom can never settle. The pattern is identical whether the case is Kentucky’s former governor or two Hollywood stars or you and your ex texting at midnight about pickup time. The body in attachment panic reaches for the highest authority it can find and demands that authority validate its story.
Working through this right now?
Talk to Figlet about it. First 10 messages free, no signup, no waitlist. AI relationship coaching grounded in attachment science, available right now.
Cognitive Solutions to Limbic Problems
Here is the line I say in my office almost every week: you are not going to find a cognitive solution to what is a limbic problem.
High-functioning people are exceptionally good at living in the penthouse of their own emotional building. They rely on logic, spreadsheets, legal strategy, PR firms, and meticulously documented evidence. They are brilliant up there. The view is great. The problem is that the wound is not in the penthouse. The wound is in the basement, and the basement is where the body lives.
Every additional brief filed after a settlement is a penthouse maneuver in response to a basement terror. It feels productive. It feels like progress. It is in fact a Chinese finger trap. The harder you pull, the tighter the bind. The only way out is to stop pulling on content, but the survival brain cannot conceive of stopping, because stopping feels like surrender, and surrender feels like death.
The Keynote Speaker Problem
In couples counseling, I often say that everyone is the world-renowned expert in the problems of their partner. If I hosted a global conference on what is wrong with your partner, you would be the keynote speaker. And your partner would be the keynote speaker at the conference on your problems.
Filing additional briefs after the settlement is delivering another keynote address at the wrong conference. It is meticulously preparing your slides, refining your evidence, sharpening your case. The audience is rapt. The judge is the moderator. And the talk you are giving is brilliant. It is also pointless, because the conference is not the one that could ever resolve what is actually wrong.
I have watched this play out in people who regretted their divorce and only realized, years later, that the entire legal battle was their defended self trying to win an argument their whole self never wanted to have. The decision was made from behind a wall, and behind the wall, the view is always the same: the other person is irredeemable, the case is winnable, the next filing will be the one that finally settles it.
It never is. You signed the papers, but the ledger stays open. Talk it through with Figlet.
Two Truths, One Loop, No Villains
When a story like this dominates the news, the culture demands we pick a side. I cannot. Clinically, I will not. Because the only truth that actually moves anything forward is what I think of as relentless empathy, and relentless empathy refuses to manufacture villains.
There are always two truths in every conflict. Your truth makes sense. Their truth makes sense. Your panic makes sense. Their shutdown makes sense. Your longing makes sense. Their overwhelm makes sense. Your shame makes sense. Their defensiveness makes sense. Two truths. One loop. No villains.
The legal system structurally cannot hold this. It is built to deny the humanity of the other party in order to win the case. It demands you live inside what I think of as the Versus Illusion, the belief that you can only be okay if the other person is declared wrong. So you stay locked inside your own suffering bubble, they stay locked inside theirs, and the bubbles drift further apart with every filing.
What would actually move this forward is what I call Empathy Cubed. Compassion for me. Compassion for you. Compassion for the third thing we made together, even if what we made together is now in pieces. The “us” is its own living entity with its own wounds. And here is the brutal part: the courthouse is the worst possible venue for that work. The courthouse is structurally incapable of cubed compassion. It can only hold versus. So the litigation continues to issue receipts for a debt the system cannot collect.
When the Litigation Will Not Stop
If you are reading this from inside your own version of this, where the case is technically settled but the filings keep coming, where the texts keep landing, where you cannot stop drafting the next email even though you know you should, I want you to consider something.
The litigation will not stop because the body has not been told the war is over. And the body will not be told the war is over by another filing. The body needs a different kind of confirmation. It needs to know that you are safe even if the other person never apologizes. Even if the judge never validates your story. Even if the public never picks your side. Even if the ledger never settles in your favor.
This is what I mean when I talk about the real labor of becoming sovereign on your own ground. It is the slow practice of metabolizing what happened inside your own body, rather than continuing to outsource that work to a system that was never designed to do it. It is sitting with the unmetabolized grief instead of converting it into one more motion. It is grieving the loss of the version of the bond you thought you had, instead of demanding the courtroom resurrect it.
The same pattern shows up in people whose ex won’t follow the custody schedule, where every missed pickup gets converted into another data point in a war that has no winning move. The work is not to manage the other person’s chaos. The work is to stop using the legal apparatus to settle your own activation.
What This Means for You
You are not Blake Lively. You are not Justin Baldoni. You probably do not have a PR firm or a legal team or a Daily Mail reporter waiting on your next filing. But you have a version of this in your own life. The text you keep redrafting. The email you cannot stop revising. The conversation you keep replaying with someone who is not in the room. The grievance you keep adding evidence to, even though no one will ever hear the case.
Notice it. Notice the pull to issue one more receipt. Notice the body’s demand for the ledger to balance. Notice that the demand is real, the pain is real, the wound is real, and also that the venue you keep dragging it into cannot help. The settlement does not settle. The filing does not file what needs filing. The judge cannot rule on what you actually need ruled on.
The ground you actually want is the ground inside your own body, the steady, unbraced, available-to-breathe ground that does not require the other person to ever admit anything. That ground is built. Slowly. Through repair with people who can repair, and grief over the people who cannot.
This is not a you problem or a them problem
“When two insecurely attached people interact, their protector strategies collide to form a negative feedback loop I call the Waltz of Pain. Your protector meets your partner’s protector. Their protector meets yours. Two childhood strategies collide, and the relationship becomes a reenactment of wounds neither partner caused.”
“Neither partner is the villain. They are two younger selves inside adult bodies trying to stay safe in the only ways they once knew.”
Figs O’Sullivan, LMFT
What to Do Next
Working through this right now?
Talk to Figlet about it. First 10 messages free, no signup, no waitlist. AI relationship coaching grounded in attachment science, available right now.
The settlement will never settle what the body is asking the court to settle. That work happens somewhere else, in a smaller room, with the lights low and your physiology finally allowed to put the case down. Stop filing. Start grieving. The ledger does not balance the way you want it to. Your body still needs the war to be over. Tell it.
Keep Reading
Every couple has a pattern they cannot see. Find yours.
In love, each of you is a Relentless or a Reluctant, which makes you one of three kinds of couple: Relentless and Reluctant, two Relentless, or two Reluctant. The free quiz reveals your creatures and the cycle they fall into together. About three minutes.
No signup needed to start.
The Relentless
The Reluctant
