Elizabeth Holmes: Master of Deception or Victim of Coercion?

— We can see everything they want us to see

I wasn't planning to see Nathan Fielder and Lance Oppenheim's movie about Elizabeth Holmes, "You Can See Everything." What truth would I learn? Holmes has every reason to try to rehabilitate her image, and I'm used to working with underserved patients who will never be able to tell their truly harrowing stories to an A24 film crew. But then, I was asked to examine relationship dynamics, manipulation, and abuse in the film, and so I found myself crammed inside Rochester's Little Theateropens in a new tab or window next to a crotchety octogenarian who kept yelling at the screen.

I didn't expect it to devolve into an unsettling exploration of coercive controlopens in a new tab or window, whose sinister aura appears early in the film when Holmes's partner Billy Evans abruptly takes the eggs that Holmes is whisking too "lightly." Little signs of Evans's puerile attention-seeking manifest, from an upsetting "accidentalopens in a new tab or window" shot of his flaccid member ("Yuck!" said the octogenarian) to his frustration at not being able to control the narrative.

Evans often injects himself into the film with off-putting grandiosity, claiming to be integral to Holmes's legacy and suggesting that she will be known for their romantic relationship. With the relationship dynamics portrayed on screen, the central question shifts from, "Is Elizabeth Holmes even more skilled at deception than we realize?" to "Is Elizabeth Holmes being abused?"

Caveats & Collateral

I'm wary of viewing Holmes as the victim because she is calculating by all accounts, and I don't know her. So, in keeping with forensic psychiatrists' advice to consider collateralopens in a new tab or window, it would be imprudent not to review Theranos whistleblower Tyler Shultz's highly skeptical perspectiveopens in a new tab or window, which suggests Holmes might be capable of manipulating partners' abusive tendencies to her advantage.

I'm hesitant to say this because I've spent my budding career in psychiatry sublimating my pastopens in a new tab or window into patient care and vociferously defending women like me: victims of domestic violence who have struggled to be believed. But a trauma plotopens in a new tab or window in an era where women are facing an alarming rollback of their basic rights and an increase in societal misogynyopens in a new tab or window would indeed be helpful in softening Holmes's image. And in the film, she plays the doting mother exceptionally well, patting a cooing baby, sporting frazzled hair and a well-loved camel sweater.

In the past, however, she has shown herself to be adroitly manipulative -- she conned ex-Secretary of State Henry Kissingeropens in a new tab or window -- and my initial instinct is to view the signs of coercive control as instrumental in eliciting public sympathy while she pursues Theranos 2.0.

Coercive Control Looks Like Protection

That said, two things can be simultaneously true: Holmes can be cunning and Evans can demonstrate controlling and abusive tendencies, at least on screen. (All women would benefit from carefully studying what this looks like, given the multitude of associated adverse health outcomesopens in a new tab or window across the biopsychosocial axisopens in a new tab or window.)

Coercive control is the hallmark of intimate partner violence, which, despite the wealth of education and public awareness campaigns, we seem almost willfully to misunderstand, to the degree that victims believe themselves deserving of abuse, almost invariably assuming that they -- and not the outbursts, broken belongings, threats, and demeaning comments -- are the problem. When I first started taking psychotherapy patients, I'd print the Power and Control Wheelopens in a new tab or window, and we'd talk and highlight the relevant behaviors. Patients often expressed some version of: "I didn't realize my life was this bad."

Coercive control doesn't initially look like angry outbursts that terrify you into compliance; those come later. It often starts with overwhelming adoration and emotional manipulation, making the victim feel cared for and more susceptible to the explanation that controlling behaviors -- like jealousy, "suggestions" to alter your body size, cruel "jokes," sexual intimacy before you're ready for it, moving in together too quickly -- are a form of love. Pop psychology calls it "love bombing,opens in a new tab or window" a deliberate, insidious erosion of the victim's boundaries until they have unwittingly surrendered their agency.

You hear it on screen when Evans describes first meeting Holmes, claiming that he fell in love with her within an hour, despite simultaneously dating three other women. The language becomes increasingly grandiose: "building monuments of love to me,opens in a new tab or window" "I know what she'd want,opens in a new tab or window" a refrain Evans uses to justify representing Holmes on X and finagling a portion of the film's profits purportedly without her knowledge. (Although he ends up not taking payment.)

Let's be clear: these grooming behaviors that a man may use to make a woman dependent on him are not well-intentioned. A recent study revealedopens in a new tab or window that men who favor the tradwife movementopens in a new tab or window -- marked by defined gender roles and affirmation of the man as provider and the woman as submissive and dependent -- actually hold hostile and harmful views towards women; their belief in women's submission is less predicated on benevolent sexism than it is on a desire for power and control.

We can see the same dynamics between Evans and Holmes portrayed in the film. They appear romantic and protective, but his encroachment on and ultimate co-opting of Holmes's public voice seem more like coercive control under the guise of beneficence.

What Is Narcissistic Abuse?

I'm cautious with terms like "narcissistic abuse" and "gaslighting" because the way they're used online makes me uneasy. It's a slippery slope from these to "rejection-sensitive dysphoria,opens in a new tab or window" "my alters,opens in a new tab or window" and "AuDHD,opens in a new tab or window" which are not formally recognized in psychiatry the way they're applied in common parlance.

I'd also like to preface this by saying that I am not diagnosing anyone. But Evans's behaviors remind me personally of my former abusive partner, and the totality of these behaviors, to me, echoes a narcissistic personality structureopens in a new tab or window. "Everyone else ends up in therapy because the person who needs therapy won't go," I tell my students facetiously about this disorder. Evans's grandiosity and attention-seeking aside, his contentious interaction with actress Amanda Seyfried -- who played Holmes in "The Dropout," Hulu's fictionalized account of the Theranos scandal -- is illuminating. The loving, kind, supportive family man slips as soon as Seyfried challenges him for commandeering Holmes's X account, cursing out people in a way that Holmes would not do herself. He claims that she trusts him, as though that gives him permission to take her voice.

But when Seyfried pushes the point, Evans turns nasty. "You're a f– actress," he sneers, deriding her for describing Charlie Kirk as "hateful," claiming that he is more well-read than she, and finally uttering a chilling lineopens in a new tab or window: "I'm pretty strategic and well-resourced. I know people who can do just about anything." Seyfried freezes: "To harm people?" Evans goes silent.

Don't pay attention to how he treats you, my father used to say about evaluating a potential partner. Pay attention to how he treats others. In retrospect, I'd qualify that advice: pay attention to how he treats women who challenge him, not women who agree with him.

Evans remarks that his relationship with Holmes is blissfully smooth: "We've never had a significant argument. We really don't argue." I ignore men who say this about their partners. Instead, I ask the partners in the privacy of my office: What will happen if you argue with him?

Villain or Victim?

We can't possibly know the true nature of the relationship between Holmes and Evans; we know what they allowed us to see.

Is Holmes a target of coercive control? Or did she orchestrate a masterful scheme to appeal to the bleeding hearts like me, manipulating our empathy for her gain? Either way, her ending isn't ideal. At face value, she's got the partner, the family, the financial security. But I've met my fair share of Billy Evanses -- unpleasant, fragile fellows with limited distress tolerance. Whether by design or not, the prison that contains Holmes isn't a federal institution in Texas, but a cocky tech bro whose ego cannot withstand a woman's criticism. Imagine having to live with that every day.

I've lived it, I treat women who live it. It's not a happy ending. And it may be entirely of her own making.

These views are held only by the author, and are not shared by any institution with which she is affiliated.