I note that you said “he wouldn’t accept” a statement from you that you would rather not talk about this. That’s untrue. You do not have to alter your reasonable boundary because someone keeps hacking away at it.
I hope Prudence meant "It's not true that you have to lie because he wouldn't accept a statement of truth from you" instead of what she wrote, which is that he wouldn't accept the statement. He absolutely would refuse to accept it, and the situation would be escalated. Something very similar happened to me when my brother decided I owed him the names of my agent and editor.
But apparently Prudence is willing to split hairs; OP is supposed to make her "team" into more than it is, and that's not a lie? It's an invitation for the in-law to demand the names of the team so he can convince them they're wrong too. At least the last paragraph is right, but she needs to put all the distance possible between herself/her family and this guy.
no subject
I hope Prudence meant "It's not true that you have to lie because he wouldn't accept a statement of truth from you" instead of what she wrote, which is that he wouldn't accept the statement. He absolutely would refuse to accept it, and the situation would be escalated. Something very similar happened to me when my brother decided I owed him the names of my agent and editor.
But apparently Prudence is willing to split hairs; OP is supposed to make her "team" into more than it is, and that's not a lie? It's an invitation for the in-law to demand the names of the team so he can convince them they're wrong too. At least the last paragraph is right, but she needs to put all the distance possible between herself/her family and this guy.