Beyond Duress: Why the Law Must Recognise Coercive Control

By Johanna de La Rosiere

In Law, Duress Changes Everything

• A contract signed under duress can be void.
• A crime committed under duress is judged differently.

The principle is simple: when will is overborne by threat, the law steps in.

But what about coercive control?

Unlike duress, coercive control rarely looks like an obvious threat. It unfolds slowly, through repeated behaviours:

• Financial control that traps a partner in dependency
• Constant surveillance that erodes privacy
• Gaslighting that makes victims doubt their own reality
• Gradual erosion of independence

The victim may never say, “I am under duress.” Yet their choices are no freer than someone signing a contract at gunpoint.

Why Naming Matters

Law is language. What is not named in law is not seen in law.

When coercive control is not explicitly recognised:

1. Evidence gets sidelined — gaslighting or stalking may be dismissed as “relationship background” or a mere “history of abuse.”
2. Sentencing falls short — courts may punish isolated incidents but ignore the ongoing pattern of domination.
3. Survivors lose credibility — their stories appear fragmented, when in reality the abuse is systemic.

By contrast, when the law names coercive control, the pattern itself becomes criminal. The UK and Scotland have legislated. New South Wales has passed reforms. But much of Australia—and beyond—still relies on outdated frameworks that only respond after visible violence.

Reframing Coercive Control as Continuing Duress

The law asks of duress: Was the person aware of an immediate threat? The law should ask of coercive control: Was the person’s capacity for free decision-making dismantled over time?

Both destroy autonomy. Both undermine consent. But only one is consistently recognised in law.

Coercive control is not just “toxic behaviour.” It is the lived experience of being under continuing duress, without knowing it.

If the law does not speak the words “coercive control,” it cannot capture the crime. Recognition is not symbolic, it is the gateway to evidence, sentencing, and justice.