[This post was originally written in January 2025 and information was added in February 2025 to include the Victim and Prisoners Act 2024 coming into effect.]
Coercive control is a form of domestic violence that has long been in advocates’ vocabulary but is rarely seen in legal contexts. The United States has no federal law against coercive control. At the time of this writing, only seven states have some sort of law involving coercive control, with DVSN’s home state of Massachusetts becoming the most recent to join that short list when it included coercive control as a criteria warranting the issuance of a restraining order. However, coercive control is still not an arrestable offense in and of itself in Massachusetts. The other six states only implemented their coercive control laws in the previous five years and what they actually encompass varies from state to state. In December 2015, England and Wales became the first nations in the world to criminalize coercive control within relationships. Coercive or controlling behavior (CCB) in England and Wales is punishable with a large fine and/or up to five years in prison. As more and more countries and US states consider and add coercive control laws, let’s take a closer look at the British law, how it has been implemented and adapted in the past decade, and its impact.
Britian’s Serious Crime Act 2015
Section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 lays out a definition of coercive control and exactly how it is considered a criminal act. The perpetrator must have repeatedly (on at least two occasions) or continuously (ongoing over time) engaged in controlling or coercive behavior that had a “serious effect” on the victim. The perpetrator and victim must be “personally connected” in that they are in an intimate relationship or are family members or former intimate partners who live together. The “serious effect” must have caused the victim to fear violence on at least two occasions or caused the victim “serious alarm or distress which has a substantial adverse effect on [their] usual day-to-day activities”. The perpetrator must also know or “ought to know” (what a “reasonable person in possession of the same information” would know) that their behavior will have such a “serious effect” on the victim. So, not only must the perpetrator’s behavior result in detrimental consequences for the victim, but the perpetrator (or a “reasonable person”) must know that their behavior would likely cause such consequences, making intent a noteworthy part of the law.
Defining Coercive Control
The UK government defines controlling or coercive behavior in two ways: 1) acts designed to make a person feel inferior and/or dependent by keeping them apart from friends, help, and support, including taking advantage of their money and things they have, stopping their independence, and controlling what they want to do, and 2) an act of assault, threats, humiliation and intimidation, or other abuse that is used to harm, punish, or frighten the victim.
Examples given of coercive and controlling behavior (CCB) include physical violence or threats thereof, sexual assault or threats thereof, and financial abuse. Controlling the victim’s daily activities, behavior, and social media, stopping them from making friends or communicating with others, and separating them from friends, family, or professionals trying to support them are also listed examples. CCB additionally includes forcing the victim to do things they don’t want to do, preventing them from getting health or social care, and stopping them from using birth control or forcing them to get an abortion. Threatening to give out information on the victim’s sex life, threatening the victim’s immigration status, and threats to put the victim into a facility or institution (particularly for elderly or disabled victims) or to take away or harm their children or pets round out the list of examples of CCB. (Guidelines)
Reviewing Results
A couple of years after it was enacted, the UK government called for a review of the CCB law in order to determine whether changes to the legislation or wider policy interventions were needed. The resulting review was published in March 2021, and, while citing a short implementation period of the law (four years included in the review) and a lack of data, it drew several conclusions. The review found that as people acclimated to having and applying the new law, police records of CCB offenses and CCB prosecutions significantly increased each year, showing that the law provided an improved legal framework for dealing with CCB in the criminal justice system. Recognizing that the number of CCB cases were still well below other domestic abuse-related offenses, the review concluded that, because a pattern of abuse (multiple incidents) is required to be considered coercive control, CCB could not be accurately compared to other DV offenses which relate to a single incident, such as assault.
The review also determined that an increased awareness of what constitutes coercive and controlling behavior is needed for law enforcement, legal professionals, and the general public. It estimated that only a small part of all CCB came to the attention of police or was recorded as CCB by police, and that both victims and police officers had difficulty in recognizing the pattern of incidents that constitute CCB. It called for further and consistent training throughout the criminal justice system and for domestic abuse specialists to be involved. Several other studies and investigations came to similar conclusions, that, despite some training, police were struggling to understand CCB and apply the new law.
While volumes of CCB offenses being recorded increased each year, those that led to a conviction slowed significantly after the first year. A potential reason cited for the stagnation of CCB convictions despite an increase in recorded offenses is the problem of providing sufficient evidence of coercive control, that building a case against perpetrators can be extremely challenging and that victims may have withdrawn from the legal process due to these difficulties. It called for an improved ability to record evidence and prosecute CCB crimes, without providing specific guidance on how those tricky tasks could be achieved.
The biggest glaring issue raised by the review, however, was concerns over the “cohabitation requirement”. Advocates argued that victims who leave their abusers are often at a sustained or increased risk of CCB and are at the highest risk of homicide. Under the 2015 law, however, if a victim does not live with a former partner abuser, they are not considered legally “personally connected” to them following a breakup, and thus not eligible for CCB prosecution, leaving a huge number of victims without this legal recourse.
Amendment
This devastating gap in the original law was corrected when an amendment to the Serious Crime Act 2015 was implemented through the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, replacing the definition of how the victim and perpetrator must be “personally connected”. In the original act, they must either be in a current intimate relationship, regardless of whether or not they live together, or be former intimate partners who still live together, or be family members who live together. Similar to the 1994 US Violence Against Women Act (VAWA)’s so-called (and since closed) “boyfriend loophole”, the original definition did not provide for coercive control by a former intimate partner who never or no longer lives with the victim. “We recognise that coercive or controlling behaviours may escalate following separation, and that members of a victim’s extended family may be involved in control or coercion,” said Victoria Atkins MP, Minister for Safeguarding, in a 2021 statement, “We have heard the calls from experts on this matter, and I am very pleased to say that the Government will be removing the co-habitation requirement contained within the offence…” She further commented that this change would, “send a clear message to both victims and perpetrators that controlling or coercive behaviors, irrespective of living status, are a form of domestic abuse.”
Continuing Challenges
While an amendment was made and more training was provided, difficulties with enforcing and prosecuting the new law persisted. “The law itself is good, [but] it is sitting in a system that doesn’t know how to use it”, said Dr. Jane Monckton-Smith, a former police officer and criminologist at Gloucestershire University, who worked with police forces to improve their understanding of the law. “…while some [police officers] really get it, some really just don’t… They just don’t get how serious it is, they think it is just we have to criminalise people for calling people names when that is not it at all.” “Cops are aware of it, but they are so busy now,” commented retired detective superintendent at Greater Manchester Police, Phil Owen, who trains police on domestic abuse legislation, “Their opportunity to spend time with the victims is diminishing.” “We, as police, will often deal with what is presented in front of us,” further explained David Tucker, crime and criminal justice lead at the College of Policing in England, who began to overhaul police risk assessment processes and provide further training on coercive control to English police in response to the challenges they found with the CCB law, “but with coercive and controlling behaviour you have to spend more time asking questions, to slowly find out about what could have gone on over years.” (Bureau)
Continuing reviews and statistics show that more training for law enforcement, judges, and other professionals is still needed to ensure CCB laws are effectively implemented and enforced. Additionally, the nature of coercive control often means there is a lack of physical evidence to present in a court setting, and so proving CCB continues to be quite difficult. Abusers commonly manipulate situations to appear innocent, making the case one person’s word against another’s. Victims continue to find it difficult to demonstrate a pattern of controlling behavior and often fear retaliation by their abuser enough to drop the case against them. In fact, the 2021 review showed that in roughly 50% of CCB charges, the victim did not support the action. Some victims also expressed a lack trust in the legal system, especially as it is still experiencing growing pains with the CCB law. (Shadows)
To help counteract the fear, intimidation, and embarrassment that may prevent victims from presenting evidence in court or from following through with legal proceedings against their abusers, the British Crown Prosecution Service did introduce new measures with some pilot projects in three metropolitan areas in 2016. These measures included ensuring victims have the opportunity to visit court before any trial to familiarize themselves with the surroundings, allowing victims to give evidence from behind a screen, offering separate courthouse entrances for victims and offenders where possible, offering childcare facilities, and improved support from an Independent Domestic Abuse Advisor (IDVA) (Noble). While these supports and accommodations are a step forward, they are not available everywhere and only address some of the factors that make it difficult for victims to build a CCB case against their abusers.
Emulation & Evolution
In January and April of 2019, less than four years after coercive control was criminalized in England and Wales, fellow British Isles nations Ireland and Scotland (respectively) enacted similar CCB laws. One significant difference in the provisions of the Scottish law compared to its predecessors is that police are able to charge perpetrators of physical and psychological abuse together under a single crime, rather than as separate incidents. This is seen by advocates as a reflection of the growing understanding of domestic violence as a pattern of abuse and as a better blueprint for other countries to follow in crafting their own laws in the future. In the first year of the Scottish law being in effect, a whopping 96% of recorded CCB incidents led to prosecutions, compared to 13% of English cases in their first year. Detective Superintendent Debra Forrester from Police Scotland believes this showed the legislation works (ABC).
Scotland had also attempted to head off some of the issues England and Wales had found with police not understanding the new law and how to use it. They allocated special funds to leading domestic violence charity Scottish Women’s Aid for dealing with coercive control and trained police officers in misconceptions around abuse before the law took effect. Laura Richards, a criminal behavioral analyst who runs law enforcement trainings, teaches officers not only to spot signs of coercive control, such as physical signs of fear or stress, but also to notice subtle ways in which a house is arranged, which could give clues to the situation. She cites an example of an officer who noticed a large dog cage in a woman’s house and asked her where the dog was. The woman replied that they didn’t have a dog and that the cage was for her. “If you don’t ask the right questions,” Richards concluded, “You’re not going to find the answers.” (Time)
A Transforming Understanding
Beyond new laws being implemented in neighboring nations, coercive control made headlines again in England in 2019. It was the case of Sally Challen that really highlighted new comprehensions and changing perspectives on coercive and controlling behavior. Challen beat her husband to death with a hammer and was convicted of murder in 2011, four years prior to the CCB law. In 2019, four years after the CCB law, her defense requested a retrial, arguing that Challen’s actions were the result of a psychological “adjustment disorder” caused by decades of coercive control by her husband. They sought to downgrade her charge to manslaughter, a plea that was dismissed at her original trial. This time, the plea was accepted, and, having already served more than the average manslaughter sentence, Challen was released immediately.
The Sally Challen appeal marked the first time coercive and controlling behavior contributed to the decision of the UK Court of Appeal to overturn a murder conviction. A high-profile witness at Challen’s retrial was forensic social worker Evan Stark, who popularized the term “coercive control” and whose book “Coercive Control: How Men Entrap Women in Personal Life” was even cited in the government guidelines for the 2015 law. Following her appeal, Challen was recast in the media as a victim of domestic violence instead of as a cold-blooded murderer. Her case was heralded as an example of how seriously the British government is taking coercive control. (Time)
Photo Credit: The Telegraph
UPDATE: On February 3, 2025, the Victim and Prisoners Act 2024 went into effect in England and Wales. This act requires offenders convicted of controlling or coercive behavior, and sentenced to 12 months or longer, to be automatically managed under “multi-agency public protection arrangements”, known as “Mappa” (BBC). This means agencies are legally required to cooperate to better manage the risks posed by these serious offenders. The legislation is a great step forward in recognizing the significant harm of CCB by putting it on par with other domestic abuse offenses. It also indicates an increased understanding the interconnectedness of coercive control and other forms domestic violence, as agencies manage and share information to reduce risk in related offenses. Evidence shows offenders who are managed under Mappa have a reoffending rate less than half of the national average (Gov.UK).
Manslaughter by Coercive Control
While coercive control is now seen as the contributing factor in Sally Challen’s manslaughter of her abusive husband, in 2023, a petition gained traction in England regarding the opposite outcome. The campaign called for coercive control to be recognized as a form of manslaughter by abusers when their CCB causes victims to commit suicide. In March 2023, Sharon Holland’s 23-year-old daughter Chloe took her own life to escape her partner’s coercive control. Chloe’s partner was convicted of CCB and sentenced to 41 months imprisonment, but Sharon believed he was guilty of the greater crime of manslaughter and started a petition to create the new offense of “Manslaughter by Coercive Control”. The petition was supported by British domestic abuse charity Aurora New Dawn, who said that Chloe’s death was, unfortunately, “not a unique story”. (BBC)
In December 2023, the petition reached 10,000 signatures, the threshold at which the government is required to respond. A response was issued in January 2024, stating that the government, “recognises the serious harm caused by controlling and coercive behaviour especially when that behaviour sadly results in the victim taking their own life.” However, it further stated that, “The Government does not believe it is necessary to create a specific offence of manslaughter caused by coercive or controlling behaviour [because the]… offence of manslaughter can already cover circumstances where death results from controlling or coercive behaviour or any other unlawful act.” (Petitions)
CCB Consideration in Manslaughter Sentencing
While the move to create a “Manslaughter by Coercive Control” offense did not result in new legislation, there has been a review of sentencing guidelines in manslaughter cases with particular attention on coercive control factors. The UK Sentencing Council reviewed recommendations on sentencing guidelines and issued a response in September 2023. Prior guidelines provided that a history of violence or abuse by an offender toward a victim should be a factor which indicates higher culpability and that a history of violence or abuse by a victim toward an offender should be a factor which indicates lower culpability. In other words, if an abuser is accused of manslaughter of their victim, the abuse should be considered a reason to find them guilty. On the other hand, if a victim is accused of manslaughter of their abuser, the abuse should be considered a reason to find them innocent. In the September 2023 review, the Council agreed to consult on amending these guidelines to include not only a history of violence or abuse but also of coercive or controlling behavior as a sentencing factor in these respects. (Council)
Progress Around the World
Since the first coercive control legislation came into effect in 2015 in England and Wales, and neighbors Ireland and Scotland followed suit in 2019, other countries have begun to consider and implement coercive control laws. As mentioned, seven US states have some form of laws regarding coercive control. Similarly, Australia has taken a state-by-state approach, with laws responding to CCB in Tasmania, New South Wales criminalizing coercive control in 2024, and comparable criminal legislation set to take effect in Queensland in 2025. New Zealand’s Family Violence (Amendments) Act 2018 expanded their definition of family violence to emphasize coercive control, including isolating individuals from family or friends through physical, sexual, and psychological abuse. In 2021, the European Court of Human Rights, which presides over 46 member states of the Council of Europe, called for their legal definition of domestic violence to cover controlling and coercive behavior. Canada voted to criminalize coercive control in June 2024, though the specific legislation is still under consideration at the time of this writing. (Shadows) More and more governments around the world are recognizing the devastating effects of coercive control and are taking steps against it.
The example of England and Wales’ pioneering CCB legislation provides a significant study into the benefits and challenges of future coercive control laws around the world. It serves as a framework to build on and from which to improve and expand language, implementation procedures, training, evaluation, and the importance of increased public awareness. The more coercive control is recognized and criminalized worldwide, the better understanding will be gained about how to prosecute and enforce these laws and how they can better help support and protect victims. It is the dawn of a new era where governments acknowledge coercive control, understand its devastating effects, and recognize it as a serious crime with serious legal consequences.
Please check this monthly blog to read updates about DVSN
and stay informed about domestic violence.
Or, join our mailing list to get the information sent conveniently to your inbox!