Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Coercive Control as the Context for Intimate Partner Violence: The Challenge for the Legal System

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Criminalising Coercive Control

Abstract

The last 30 years have seen considerable change in the legal landscape to better address the harm of intimate partner violence (IPV), including the introduction of stalking and intimidation offences, as well as civil protection orders, yet many gaps and issues remain. The creation of an offence that seeks to capture the harm of coercive control is presented as one way in which to fill some of the gaps between the experience of IPV and the way the criminal law has traditionally conceived of this harm. In this chapter, I raise questions about whether such an offence will achieve its aims if attention is not also paid to the practice and implementation of current (and new) laws. In particular, I discuss the dominance of the incident framework not only in terms of criminal law responses, but also in terms of those responses designed to better address the pattern of IPV, namely, civil protection orders. A key concern of this chapter is the conceptual gap that emerges between the intentions of law reform and the practice or implementation of that law. In so doing, I draw on recent cautions voiced by Julia Tolmie (2018a) and Sandra Walklate and colleagues (2018). I argue that an understanding of coercive control is necessary for all legal engagements that seek to address the harm of IPV, and that if attention was centred on whether there should be a discrete offence it may distract from the need to simultaneously do more work to ensure that a deeper understanding of coercive control informs all areas of legal practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Armstrong, J. (2018, November 22). Violent boyfriend cleared after judge says partner is ‘too strong’ to be a victim. Mirror Online (UK). Retrieved from https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/violent-boyfriend-cleared-after-judge-13629612.

  • Australian Law Reform Commission. (2017). Pathways to Justice—Inquiry into the Incarceration Rate of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, ALRC Report No 133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Law Reform Commission and NSW Law Reform Commission. (2010). Family Violence—A National Legal Response, ALRC Report No 114, NSWLRC Report No 128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bettinson, V., & Bishop, C. (2015). Is the creation of a discrete offence of coercive control necessary to combat domestic violence? Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly, 66(2), 179–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, C., & Bettinson, V. (2018). Evidencing domestic violence, including behaviour that falls under the new offence of ‘controlling and coercive behaviour. International Journal of Evidence & Proof, 22(1), 3–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, S., & Lindy, R. (2016). Violence against women and the B.C. Family Law Act: Early jurisprudence. Canadian Family Law Quarterly, 35(2), 101–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, A. (2007). Domestic violence as a crime of pattern and intent: An alternative reconceptualization. George Washington Law Review, 75(3), 552–612.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burman, M. (2018). Domestic abuse: A continuing challenge for criminal justice. In O. Brooks-Hay, M. Burman, & C. McFeely (Eds.), Domestic abuse: Contemporary perspectives and innovative practices. Edinburgh: Dunedin Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burman, M., & Brooks-Hay, O. (2018). Aligning policy and law? The creation of a domestic abuse offence incorporating coercive control. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 18(1), 67–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cavanagh, K., Dobash, R., Dobash, R., & Lewis, R. (2001). ‘Remedial work’: Men’s strategic responses to their violence against intimate female partners. Sociology, 35(3), 695–714.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, P. (2016). Violence against women: Additional analysis of the Australian bureau of statistics’ personal safety survey, 2012. Sydney, NSW: ANROWS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobash, R. E., & Dobash, R. (1979). Violence Against Wives: A Case Against the Patriarchy. New York, NY: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, H. (2015). Do we need a specific domestic violence offence? Melbourne University Law Review, 39(2), 434–471.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, H., & Burdon, M. (2018). Legal responses to non-consensual smartphone recordings in the context of domestic and family violence. University of New South Wales Law Journal, 41(1), 157–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, H., & Fitzgerald, R. (2018). The domestic violence protection order system as entry to the criminal justice system for Aboriginal and Torres +Strait Islander people. International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, 7(3), 51–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dutton, M. A., & Goodman, L. (2005). Coercion in intimate partner violence: Toward a new conceptualization. Sex Roles, 52(11/12), 743–756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Family Court of Australia and the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. (2016). Family Violence Best Practice Principles (4th ed).

    Google Scholar 

  • Graycar, R., & Morgan, J. (2005). Law reform: What’s in it for women? Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice, 23(2), 393–419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services. (2017). A progress report on the police response to domestic abuse. London: HMICFRS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hester, M. (2011). The three planet model: Towards an understanding of contradictions in approaches to women and children’s safety on contexts of domestic violence. British Journal of Social Work, 41(5), 837–853.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Office, Home. (2015). Controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship: Statutory guidance framework. London: Home Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschel, D., & Buzawa, E. (2002). Understanding the context of dual arrest with directions for future Research. Violence Against Women, 8(12), 1449–1473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschel, D., & Deveau, L. (2017). The impact of primary aggressor laws on single versus dual arrest in incidents of intimate partner violence. Violence Against Women, 23(1), 1155–1176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, R. (2008). Domestic violence law reform and women’s experiences in court: The implementation of feminist reforms in civil proceedings. Amherst, NY: Cambria Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, R. (2006). Narratives of domestic violence. Sydney Law Review, 28(4), 733–776.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M. (2008). A typology of domestic violence: Intimate terrorism, violent resistance, and situational couple violence. Lebanon, NH: Northeastern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, K., & Barlow, C. (2018, February 15). Researching police responses to coercive control. N8 Policing Research Partnership. Retrieved from https://n8prp.org.uk/researching-police-responses-to-coercive-control/.

  • Justice Committee, Comataidh a’ Cheartais, The Scottish Parliament Pàrlamaid na h-Alba. (2017). Stage 1 Report on the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Bill. Edinburgh: Scottish Parliament Corporate Body.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaspiew, R., Carson, R., Qu, L., Horsfall, B., Tayton, S., Moore, S., Coulson, M., & Dunstan, J. (2015). Court Outcomes Project (Evaluation of the 2012 Family Violence Amendments). Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, L., & Westmarland, N. (2016). Naming and defining ‘domestic violence: Lessons from research with violent men. Feminist Review, 112(1), 113–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, M. (1991). Legal images of battered women: Redefining the issues of separation. Michigan Law Review, 90(1), 1–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Law Reform Commission (ACT). (1986). Domestic Violence. Report No. 30. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClenaghan M., & Boutard, C. (2017, November 24). Questions raised over patchy take-up of domestic violence law. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism. Retrieved from https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2017-11-24/coercive-control-concerns.

  • McKenzie, M., Kirkwood, D., Tyson, D., & Naylor, B. (2016). Out of Character? Legal Responses to intimate partner homicides by men in Victoria 2005-2014. Discussion Paper. Melbourne, VIC: Domestic Violence Resource Centre Victoria.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMahon, M., & McGorrery, P. (2016). Criminalising emotional abuse, intimidation and economic abuse in the context of family violence: The Tasmanian experience. University of Tasmania Law Review, 35(2), 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meier, J. (2017). Dangerous liaisons: A domestic violence typology in custody litigation. Rutgers University Law Review, 70(1), 115–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melton, H., & Sillito, C. (2012). The role of gender in officially reported intimate partner violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27(6), 1090–1111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, S. (2001). The paradox of women arrested for domestic violence: Criminal justice professionals and service providers respond. Violence Against Women, 7(12), 1339–1376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, S., & Powell, A. (2011). Domestic violence: Australian public policy. Melbourne, VIC: Australian Scholarly.

    Google Scholar 

  • NSW Domestic Violence Death Review Team. (2017). Report 2015–2017. Sydney, NSW: DVDRT.

    Google Scholar 

  • NSW Task Force on Domestic Violence. (1981). Report of the New South Wales Task Force on Domestic Violence to Honourable NK Wran QC, MP Premier of NSW. Sydney, NSW: Women’s Coordination Unit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Padfield, N. (2016). Editorial: Controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship. Criminal Law Review, 3, 149–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pence, E., & Paymar, M. (1993). Education groups for men who batter: The duluth model. New York, NY: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ptacek, J. (1999). Battered women in the courtroom: The power of judicial responses. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rathus, Z. (2013). Shifting language and meanings between social science and the law: Defining family violence. University of New South Wales Law Journal, 36(2), 359–389.

    Google Scholar 

  • Royal Commission into Family Violence (Victoria). (2016a). Summary and recommendations. Melbourne, VIC: Royal Commission into Family Violence Victoria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Royal Commission into Family Violence (Victoria). (2016b). Report and recommendations: Vol III. Melbourne, VIC: Royal Commission into Family Violence.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ringland, C., & Fitzgerald, J. (2010). Factors which influence the sentencing of domestic violence offenders. Crime and Justice Statistics Bureau Brief, Issue Paper No. 38. Sydney, NSW: Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schechter, S. (1982). Women and male violence: The visions and struggles of the battered women’s movement. London: Pluto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, E. (2000). Battered women and feminist lawmaking. New Haven, NJ: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheehy, E. (2018). Expert evidence on coercive control in support of self-defence: The trial of Teresa Craig. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 18(1), 100–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smart, C. (1986). Feminism and law: Some problems of analysis and strategy. International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 14(2), 109–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Special Taskforce on Domestic and Family Violence in Queensland. (2015). Not now, not ever: Putting an end to domestic and family violence in queensland. Brisbane, QLD: Special Taskforce on Domestic and Family Violence in Queensland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stark, E. (2007). Coercive control: How men entrap women in personal life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stark, E., & Hester, M. (2019). Coercive control: Update and review. Violence Against Women, 25(1), 81–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stubbs, J., & Wangmann, J. (2015). Competing conceptions of victims of domestic violence within legal processes. In D. Wilson & S. Ross (Eds.), Crime, Victims and Policy: International Contexts, Local Experiences. Palgrave Macmillan: Bassingstoke.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, M. (1991). Feminism and the contradictions of law reform. International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 19(4), 453–474.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tolmie, J. (2018a). Coercive control: To criminalize or not to criminalize? Criminology & Criminal Justice, 18(1), 50–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tolmie, J. (2018b). Considering victim safety when sentencing intimate partner violence offenders. In K. Fitz-Gibbon, S. Walklate, J. McCulloch, & J. Maher (Eds.), Intimate partner violence, risk and security: Securing women’s lives in a global world. Oxon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Travis, A. (2017, December 29). Police ‘not equipped’ to enforce new domestic violence laws. The Guardian (online). Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/dec/29/police-not-equipped-to-enforce-new-domestic-abuse-laws.

  • Tuerkheimer, D. (2004). Recognizing and remedying the harm of battering: A call to criminalize domestic violence. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 94(4), 959–1031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urbis Keys Young. (2008). Review of the family violence act 2004. Hobart: Anglicare Tasmania.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walklate, S., Fitz-Gibbon, K., & McCulloch, J. (2018). Is more law the answer? Seeking justice for victims of intimate partner violence through the reform of legal categories. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 18(1), 115–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wangmann, J. (2012). Incidents v context: How does the NSW protection order system understand intimate partner violence? Sydney Law Review, 34(4), 695–719.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wangmann, J. (2016). Different types of intimate partner violence—What do family law decisions reveal? Australian Journal of Family Law, 30(2), 77–111.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, University of Technology Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Jane Wangmann

Authors
  1. Jane Wangmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jane Wangmann .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Law, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, Australia

    Marilyn McMahon

  2. School of Law, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, Australia

    Paul McGorrery

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Wangmann, J. (2020). Coercive Control as the Context for Intimate Partner Violence: The Challenge for the Legal System. In: McMahon, M., McGorrery, P. (eds) Criminalising Coercive Control . Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-0653-6_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-0653-6_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-15-0652-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-15-0653-6

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation