Questions & answers

Aurora reads a record of messages between two people and returns a written brief that names the recurring patterns it finds — things like schedule control, contradictory accounts, isolation, demeaning, financial pressure — and links each one to the exact messages behind it. Coercive control rarely lives in any single message; it shows up as a pattern across hundreds of them, which is hard to see by hand. Aurora reads for that pattern.

People preparing for a family-law proceeding, and the people who help them — a pro-se litigant getting ready for a hearing, an attorney building a record, an advocate or evaluator who needs to read a long history quickly. It's a preparation tool, used in the weeks or months before a proceeding. It is not a crisis or safety tool, and it doesn't do anything in real time.

No. Aurora names patterns and cites messages. It does not reach legal conclusions, decide your case, or tell you what to do — and it is not a substitute for a lawyer. Review every citation yourself, and talk to a qualified attorney about your situation.

No. It does not diagnose people or label anyone as an abuser. It describes what the messages do, over time, and shows you the messages. The reading and the judgment stay with you, your attorney, and the court.

No, in two senses. It doesn't pick and choose which messages to read — it reads the whole record. And it doesn't decide what matters for your case or what belongs in front of a court — you and your attorney do. Aurora's job is to surface what's already in the record so a person can decide what to do with it.

No — and this is an important boundary. Chain of custody is about how your messages were collected and preserved before they reach Aurora: that's the job of your export tool or a forensic examiner, not Aurora. Aurora analyzes the export you give it; it does not certify where that export came from or that it is complete and unaltered.

What Aurora does record is its own work — which version of its method and which version of the AI produced your brief — so the analysis itself is reproducible and attributable. Think of it as documenting how the reading was done, not vouching for how the messages were gathered.

Your messages are the evidence. Aurora's brief is a reading aid that helps you and your attorney find and organize what's already there — closer to attorney work product than to an exhibit. How anything gets used in a proceeding is a decision for your attorney and the court.

Neither, by design. Aurora will not invent patterns that aren't in your messages — every claim is tied to specific messages you can check. And it is not guaranteed to find every pattern present: a pattern Aurora doesn't surface is not proof that none exists. It's a careful reader, not an oracle.

You can, and for some people that's the right call — the underlying approach is just careful prompting of a capable AI. What Aurora adds is a maintained, versioned method built specifically for this: a pattern catalog grounded in the established literature, discipline that footnotes every claim to a real message and rejects ones it can't ground, and an output you can hand to an attorney. The honest short answer: you're paying for the method and the rigor, not for access to an AI.

The pattern catalog comes from the established academic literature on coercive control — Evan Stark, Lisa Aronson Fontes, and Emma Katz — not invented for the product. The method is versioned and cited in every brief, so a reader can check the source.

Aurora's goal is to stay affordable for the people who need it most — someone who can't afford a lawyer should still be able to walk into court prepared. What it costs depends on how you're getting access and on the funding behind it at the time, so the honest answer is: check the current details on the site, or ask us. Either way there are no surprise charges — if you're invited into the pilot, you'll be told exactly what to expect before anything runs.

Courts limit how long a filing can be, and a raw message history can run to hundreds or thousands of pages. Aurora consolidates that sprawl into a focused, cited brief — the patterns that matter, each tied back to specific messages — so you and your attorney can build a filing that fits the limit instead of attaching the whole record. It doesn't write the filing for you; it gives you a far shorter, organized starting point.

Right now the cloud pilot reads a PDF export from a co-parenting platform — OurFamilyWizard or Civil Communicator. Support for more sources (text messages, email, other apps) is planned. If you're not sure whether your export will work, get in touch.

Your messages are read to produce your analysis and nothing else. They're sent to our AI provider to run the analysis, then deleted from our servers the moment your brief is ready. The provider deletes them within 30 days and never uses them to train its AI. Your finished brief is an encrypted file only you can open; it stays downloadable for 7 days, then it's deleted too.