Coercive control is a term we now hear regularly in conversations about family violence, separation and parenting disputes.

However, it is not always well understood.

Coercive control is not simply one argument, an unkind comment or one person being difficult. It generally involves behaviour that, over time, is used to dominate another person, restrict their independence or cause them to act out of fear, pressure or dependency.

The behaviour may be obvious. It may involve threats, intimidation, financial restriction or persistent monitoring.

It may also be much more subtle. A person may gradually lose confidence in their own judgment, withdraw from family and friends, change their behaviour to avoid a reaction or feel that they need permission to make ordinary decisions.

There may never have been physical violence. There may be no single incident that appears serious enough to explain the experience.

The concern may only become clear when the behaviour is considered together and over time.

What is coercive control?

Coercive control can involve physical or non-physical behaviour.

It may include:

• monitoring where a person goes, who they speak to or how they spend their time;
• requiring access to phones, email accounts, passwords or location information;
• restricting access to money or requiring a person to account for ordinary spending;
• isolating a person from family, friends, work or support services;
• repeatedly humiliating, belittling or undermining them;
• threatening consequences if the person does not comply;
• controlling medical care, medication, transport or access to important documents;
• using children or parenting arrangements to create pressure;
• interfering with a person’s employment, study or financial independence;
• damaging property or threatening harm to pets;
• making repeated complaints or threats involving police, courts, employers or professionals as part of a wider attempt to intimidate the person; or
• creating rules about ordinary daily life and enforcing those rules through fear, punishment or pressure.

No single behaviour automatically establishes coercive control.

The nature of the relationship, the surrounding circumstances, the frequency of the behaviour and its effect on the other person all matter.

The Australian Government describes coercive control as a pattern of abusive behaviour which creates fear and denies a person liberty and autonomy. The conduct may be subtle, individually tailored and difficult for people outside the relationship to recognise.

Why one incident may not tell the whole story

Coercive control is often difficult to recognise because the concern may not lie in one particular event.

A request, comment or disagreement may appear unremarkable when considered by itself. The significance of the behaviour may only become apparent when it is considered alongside what has happened before, what usually follows and the way the relationship operates in practice.

For example, asking a partner about spending is not necessarily financial control.

The position may be different where one person has no independent access to money, must justify ordinary purchases and knows that essential expenses may be withheld if they do not comply.

Similarly, asking for information about a child is ordinarily part of parenting.

It may raise different concerns where the requests are constant, go well beyond what is required for the child and are accompanied by monitoring, accusations or threatened consequences.

The law does not determine these issues by simply counting incidents. It considers whether the behaviour has affected the person’s ability to make ordinary decisions freely and without fear.

Is there a difference between coercion and control? The terms are often used together, but they describe slightly different ways in which family violence may occur

Control generally involves one person limiting another person’s choices or independence.

This might include restricting access to money, monitoring movements, isolating the person from support or imposing rules about ordinary daily life.

Coercion more commonly involves pressure being used to secure compliance.

The pressure may take the form of threats, intimidation, humiliation, emotional manipulation or making the person believe that something harmful will happen if they do not agree.

The distinction matters because behaviour does not necessarily have to contain both elements before it may be relevant under the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

Behaviour may be controlling, coercive or both.

In practical terms, the central concern is not the label attached to the behaviour. It is whether one person has been able to use the conduct to reduce the other person’s freedom, create fear or make compliance feel like the only realistic option.

Conflict and coercive control are not the same thing

Separating couples often disagree.

Parents may have different views about medical care, schooling, changeovers, communication or the time children spend with each household. Former partners may disagree about money, property or the steps required to resolve their legal matter.

A disagreement, even a serious or emotionally charged one, does not automatically amount to coercive control.

The fact that a person refuses a proposal, seeks legal advice, makes a court application or asks that an agreement be followed also does not establish family violence without more.

The difficulty is that behaviour which is reasonable in one family may operate very differently in another.

A request for information about a child’s health may be entirely appropriate. Repeated demands for unnecessary information, accompanied by accusations, surveillance or threats, may require a different assessment.

A proposal for structured changeovers may be intended to reduce conflict. In another case, repeated last-minute changes and threats to withhold the children may be used to keep the other parent unsettled and compliant.

In Pickford & Pickford, the Full Court recognised that parenting proposals may be appropriate in one context and potentially controlling in another. The Court distinguished parental conflict from family violence and made clear that disagreement between parents is not necessarily family violence.

The Court therefore considers what actually occurred and the circumstances surrounding it.

This includes the history between the parties, the reason given for the conduct, whether it was repeated and what the evidence shows about its practical effect.

It is important not to minimise concerning behaviour by dismissing it as “just conflict”.

It is equally important not to assume that every difficult interaction during separation is coercive control.

Can coercive control continue after separation?

Yes. Ending a relationship does not always end the behaviour.

The methods may simply change.

A person who previously exercised influence through money, monitoring or everyday decision-making may attempt to maintain that influence through parenting communication, financial pressure, technology, repeated complaints or threatened legal action.

This might include:

• sending a high volume of messages and demanding immediate replies;
• withholding money or documents required for ordinary living or legal advice;
• using parenting arrangements to force agreement on unrelated issues;
• questioning the children about the other household;
• accessing accounts, devices or location information;
• repeatedly threatening police or court involvement to secure compliance; or
• contacting schools, employers, doctors or other professionals as part of an ongoing attempt to intimidate or discredit the other person.

These examples must still be approached carefully.

A person is entitled to report a genuine concern, obtain legal advice and ask a court to determine a dispute.

The relevant question is whether those steps are being taken for a proper purpose or are being deployed as part of wider conduct designed to wear the other person down, frighten them or prevent them acting independently.

What can coercive control mean for children?

Children can be affected by coercive control even where no one alleges that they have been physically harmed.

A child may witness one parent monitoring, criticising or intimidating the other.

The child may learn to modify their own behaviour to avoid conflict or may feel responsible for keeping the peace.

Following separation, children may be asked to carry messages, provide information about the other household or support one parent’s position. They may be exposed to tense changeovers, repeated disruption or adult conversations about court, money and allegations.

The impact may also be indirect.

A parent who is dealing with persistent pressure, surveillance or financial restriction may find it more difficult to make decisions, communicate confidently and provide the stability the children need.

This does not reflect a failure by that parent. It may demonstrate how the behaviour is affecting the family more broadly.

When parenting arrangements are being considered, the Court may need to understand not only what the children have directly seen or heard, but also how the conduct has affected their day-to-day security and the capacity of each parent to meet their needs.

Is coercive control already recognised by the law?

Yes, although the position is sometimes misunderstood.

The Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) defines family violence as violent, threatening or other behaviour that coerces or controls a family member or causes that family member to be fearful.

Coercive or controlling behaviour may therefore be relevant in parenting proceedings, even where there has been no physical violence.

Victorian family violence law also recognises coercive behaviour within the broader definition of family violence. A person does not need to wait for a new standalone criminal offence before seeking advice about a Family Violence Intervention Order or other legal protection.

A Family Violence Intervention Order is a civil protective order. However, breaching an intervention order may result in criminal charges.

Whether particular conduct constitutes family violence, coercive control or another criminal offence depends on the facts and should be assessed individually.

What is the proposed new Victorian law?

On 11 August 2026, the Victorian Government introduced the Justice Legislation Amendment (Family Violence, Coercive Control, Good Character, Risk Assessment and Other Matters) Bill 2026.

The Bill proposes a standalone criminal offence of coercive control, together with a broader package of reforms concerning family violence intervention orders, information sharing, risk assessment, sentencing and protections for people subjected to family violence.

As at 21 August 2026, the Bill has not passed Parliament and the proposed standalone offence is not yet Victorian law.

The Bill is presently at the second-reading stage in the Legislative Assembly.

The proposal has generated different views.

There is broad recognition of the serious and lasting harm caused by coercive control. There are also concerns that a standalone criminal offence must be accompanied by appropriate training, services and safeguards against misidentification, systems abuse and unintended harm to victim-survivors.

These issues do not change the practical position for families now.

Coercive and controlling behaviour may already be relevant to intervention-order proceedings, parenting proceedings and, depending on the conduct involved, existing criminal offences.

What information may help explain coercive control?

Using the words “coercive control” does not, by itself, explain what happened.

A lawyer or court will usually need to understand the particular behaviour relied upon, how it developed and what difference it made to the person’s safety, freedom or decision-making.

Relevant information may include:

• complete text-message or email conversations;
• records showing access to or restriction of money;
• evidence of location tracking or account monitoring;
• communications involving children or parenting arrangements;
• diary notes or a chronology;
• records from police, doctors, counsellors or support services;
• evidence from people who observed particular incidents or changes; and
• information showing how the conduct affected daily life.

There may be no single document that proves the issue.

Much of this behaviour occurs privately. The person experiencing it may also have adapted to it gradually and may not have identified it as family violence at the time.

A useful account should therefore explain more than dates and incidents.

It may be relevant to explain:

• what the person was expected to do;
• what happened if they resisted or disagreed;
• whether they began changing their behaviour to avoid consequences;
• whether their access to money, support or information was reduced; and
• how the behaviour affected the children or parenting arrangements.

The purpose is not to use dramatic language.

It is to give a clear and accurate account of how the relationship operated in practice.

What should I do if I am experiencing coercive control?

If you believe you may be experiencing coercive control, consider your immediate safety first.

If it is safe to do so:

• speak with a trusted support person or professional;
• obtain legal advice before announcing significant plans or confronting the other person;
• keep important documents and information in a safe place;
• preserve relevant communications and financial information;
• consider whether your phone, email, accounts or location may be monitored;
• record events in a secure chronology; and seek advice about intervention orders, parenting arrangements, property matters and safe communication.

If you are in immediate danger, contact emergency services.

If you believe your internet use may be monitored, use a safer device where possible and take care when saving records or contacting services.

What should I do if I have been accused?

An allegation of coercive control is serious, but an allegation is not itself a finding.

If you have been accused:

• comply strictly with any Family Violence Safety Notice, intervention order or parenting order;
• do not contact the other person in breach of an order or condition;
• avoid retaliatory messages, threats or allegations;
• preserve communications and relevant records;
• keep communications brief, factual and child-focused where communication is permitted;
• do not delete or alter material;
• obtain advice about the specific conduct alleged and the interaction between any intervention-order, criminal and family law proceedings; and
• consider whether changes to communication or behaviour are required, even if you dispute the allegation.

The legal assessment will depend on the evidence and the circumstances of the particular family.

Moving forward with clarity

Coercive control is not always obvious.

It can develop gradually and may only become recognisable when someone steps back and considers how much of their ordinary life has come to be shaped by another person’s expectations or reactions.

At the same time, the term should be used carefully.

A difficult relationship, poor communication or a serious disagreement does not necessarily amount to coercive control.

The difference lies in what the behaviour has done within the relationship.

Has it limited freedom?

Has it created fear?

Has it produced compliance through pressure?

Has it made one person feel that ordinary choices are no longer safely available?

At Hazel Family Law & Mediation, we help clients identify the legal issues without reducing their experience to a label. We consider the history carefully, explain the available options and provide practical advice about safety, parenting, intervention orders and financial matters.

We also advise people responding to allegations, with a focus on compliance, evidence and a measured response.

Our approach is guided by clarity, compassion and resolution.

Phone (03) 7020 6529

Email info@hazelfamilylaw.com.au

We welcome the opportunity to discuss your situation confidentially, by phone, in person or online.