Domestic Abuse: How Coercive Control Steals Freedom and Can Criminalise Victims
Domestic Abuse is often misunderstood as a series of isolated incidents. In reality, it is frequently a pattern of power, control and intimidation that can reshape a victim’s entire daily life. Under the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 in England and Wales, abuse includes not only physical and sexual abuse, but also controlling or coercive behaviour, economic abuse, and psychological or emotional abuse (HM Government, 2021). That broader definition matters because many victims are harmed less by one dramatic event than by an ongoing campaign of domination. A central feature of Domestic Abuse is coercive control. This can involve monitoring a partner’s movements, restricting access to money, isolating them from friends, humiliating them, or making them live by rules backed by fear. Over time, coercive control can erode a victim’s autonomy, confidence and capacity to make free choices (Stark, 2012; Wiener, 2022). In some cases, it also pushes victims into situations where they are later treated as offenders rather than victim-survivors. Understanding that risk is essential if legal and support systems are to respond fairly. 1.0 What Domestic Abuse Really Means The legal definition of Domestic Abuse now reflects what many specialists have argued for years: abuse is not only about injury, but also about entrapment. The law recognises that abusive behaviour may be a single incident or a wider course of conduct, and that it can include economic and emotional harm as well as violence (HM Government, 2021). This is an important shift because many victims live in conditions where every ordinary decision has been taken over by another person. For example, a victim may be told what to wear, when to sleep, who to speak to, and how to spend money. Their messages may be checked, their wages taken, or their visits to family criticised until they stop going. None of these acts alone always looks dramatic from the outside. Together, however, they can form the architecture of Domestic Abuse. Scholars such as Burman and Brooks-Hay (2018) and Buzawa, Buzawa and Stark (2015) have shown that law and policy increasingly try to capture this wider reality. The challenge is ensuring that criminal justice systems do not only recognise coercive control in theory, but also understand it in practice. 2.0 How Coercive Control Shapes Domestic Abuse Coercive control is best understood as a strategy of domination. Rather than relying only on visible violence, the perpetrator uses repeated behaviour to reduce the victim’s room for action. Stark (2012) argues that coercive control is a liberty crime because it strips away independence and personhood. Victims may still appear to be functioning, but their choices have been narrowed by fear, surveillance, deprivation and dependency. This matters because the impact on autonomy can be profound. A victim may stop working because their partner sabotages transport or childcare. They may avoid friends because every outing leads to accusations. They may hand over passwords or bank cards not because they freely agree, but because resistance carries consequences. In that sense, Domestic Abuse can become a form of captivity in ordinary life. The Crown Prosecution Service guidance makes this very clear. It lists behaviours such as isolating a person from support, monitoring them through digital tools, controlling bank accounts, enforcing humiliating rules, and even forcing the victim to take part in criminal activity (Crown Prosecution Service, n.d.). That last point is especially important, because it links coercive control directly to criminalisation. 3.0 How Domestic Abuse Can Lead to Victim Criminalisation One of the most troubling features of Domestic Abuse is that victim-survivors may be punished by the very systems that should protect them. This can happen in several ways. First, coercive control may force a victim into offending. A perpetrator might pressure a partner into shoplifting, taking on debt, hiding money, transporting goods, or neglecting responsibilities under threat or manipulation. The CPS explicitly recognises that controlling behaviour may include forcing a victim to commit crimes in order to increase self-blame and prevent disclosure (Crown Prosecution Service, n.d.). Tolmie et al. (2023) argue that when victims are compelled into offending, criminal law does not always respond with sufficient fairness or context. Secondly, Domestic Abuse can lead to misidentification. When police arrive after an argument and see only the final moments, they may misread a victim’s resistance, fear or anger as offending behaviour. A victim-survivor who lashes out after prolonged abuse, damages property while trying to escape, or appears inconsistent in interview may be viewed as the primary aggressor. Tolmie (2018) warns that criminalisation can work badly where the wider pattern of coercive control is ignored. Reeves, Fitz-Gibbon and Meyer (2025) similarly show how credibility assessments can fail victim-survivors when systems do not properly understand coercive control. Thirdly, perpetrators sometimes use the law itself as a tool of abuse. False allegations, repeated applications, manipulated evidence and selective recordings can all become part of the pattern. In these situations, Domestic Abuse is not only a private harm; it becomes a way of steering the victim into legal jeopardy. 4.0 Protecting Victims from Criminalisation in Domestic Abuse Cases If Domestic Abuse is to be addressed justly, victim protection must go beyond recognising coercive control as a criminal offence. It must also prevent systems from punishing those who are trapped by it. 4.1 Legal Reform Legal reform should focus on context, not only events. Decision-makers need clearer routes to recognise when offending has occurred within a coercive and controlling relationship. That includes stronger use of defences where coercion is present, better guidance on evidencing patterns of abuse, and more careful treatment of cases involving victim-survivors forced into criminal acts. Wiener (2022) and Wangmann (2020) both show that criminalising coercive control is only part of the answer; the surrounding legal framework must also respond to the realities of entrapment. A more context-sensitive approach would help ensure that Domestic Abuse is assessed as a pattern of power rather than as disconnected incidents. 4.2 Better Training Across Police, Prosecution and Courts Training is another essential safeguard. Professionals need to understand how coercive control works, … Read more