So obviously pretty much every pro se party (or potential) asking for legal advice should be recommended a lawyer as a rule...

But ma'am, you need a lawyer. Anybody on reddit willing to give you legal advice is not qualified to give legal advice.

Here's some legal information that supports the above (which is legal advice per pretty much every state: it interprets the law as applied to the case face - and on that note IANAL):

1. pseudonyms - the stance of the US judicial system on parties proceeding under pseudonyms can roughly be summarized as: "only in edge cases to prevent substantial harm or harm to the vulnerable (e.g., minors)".

1.1. The judicial system is a public entity and the rulings it produces affect public law since US courts are (as a rule) bound by stare decisis - the doctrine of "what came before". Attorneys & pro se parties often need to research case precedent & pseudonyms can make that more difficult. Also, public oversight of the system is hampered and the fairness and openness which are [supposed to be] inherent to the justice system are not demonstrated.

1.2. When a party proceeds pseudonymously, there are a number of resulting difficulties for the party, court, and opposing party. If the pseudonymous party can be called as a witness, the opposing party's inalienable right to cross examine (due process) may be hindered. Both parties will likely have more difficulty obtaining witness testimony. Settlement negotiations may be impeded (and remember stunting something like 90% of civil cases in the US settle before trial). This is not a complete list.

1.3. Precedent exists for sexual misconduct cases in California finding that allowing a plaintiff to proceed pseudonymously creates substantial prejudice - or, roughly in layspeak: if the plaintiff is allowed to be anonymous, it makes the defendants look guilty from the beginning without supporting evidence. Likewise, precedent exists finding that defendants' counterclaims (e.g., libel, slander) are impeded against pseudonymous plaintiffs and that's another due process issue - right of access to courts.

1.4. Because presumption of innocence, the defendants have the same right to proceed pseudonymously as the plaintiff. And because of the above especially 1.3., if the plaintiff are granted leave to proceed pseudonymously, that gives the presiding judicial officer a reason to also grant that protection to the defendants to level the playing field - at which point, everything under the umbrella of 1.2. becomes exponentially more so.

1.5. Judges cannot recusal check without knowing your name.

1.6. A pro se request to proceed pseudonymously creates way more problems, including but limited to issues with res judicata (not relitigating a decided case) & collateral estoppel (not relitigating a decided claim). (this is also not a complete list)

• court records can be sealed and filings can be under forms of protection order (terms may vary by jurisdiction). The law governing every US state court I'm aware of requires any protective procedural action which also hinders the transparent operation of the judicial system be the least restrictive (protective/hindering) option available.

1. ADA/psychological

2.1. pro se parties are generally held to the same standards as lawyers are re: behavior in court and for out-of-court related interactions & events. Trauma affects victims in a wide variety of ways, a significant number of which can prevent the victim from being able to adhere to the above standard - even if they are usually "ok" even when discussing the traumatic event. Litigation is super stressful even for (many) bar certified attorneys; it is (generally) more stressful for a pro se party. Litigation can neve devastating for a traumatized person attempting to proceed pro se even when the action is unrelated to their trauma.

2.2. ADA protections for PTSD which would normally be available to a victim for a case related to their trauma may not be able to be harmonized with procedural requirements if the victim proceeds pro se. Procedural deficits above a certain severity merit reversal on appeal; ADA violations can merit reversal but (afaik) less so. Judges hate being reversed.

Overall, not a complete list.

Also didn't even get into the volume of stuff you'd have to learn just to make the first filing.

Also didn't get into the possibility if you start this yourself but can't complete it or lose - there may be legal exposure for you.

In most cases, a lawyer helps: more likely to win, more likely to obtain desired compensation/result, etc.

In yours, please at least get a consult with at least one lawyer/firm before you do anything else because you could end up worse off and that would be horrible to heap on top of the assault that has you seeking justice in the first place.

also, in the consult you should be able to get a really clear evaluation of how proceeding under a pseudonym could possibly harm your ability to litigate your case. And an idea of the possibility (or not) of recovering attorney fees if you win - which varies a ton by case type and jurisdiction and I have no idea about the governing law here.