Commencing prior to 1970, the battered women’s movement, spearheaded by survivors and driven by aspirations to diminish domestic violence and safeguard women seeking refuge, initially framed domestic violence through a lens that persists in law enforcement and the legal system today. This lens, known as the violent incident model, continues to shape perceptions and responses to domestic violence. The violent incident model proves to be especially inadequate when applied to the intricate and nuanced patterns of behavior characteristic of domestic abuse, domestic violence, and coercive control. Why? Because relying solely on this lens to evaluate cases, particularly those involving coercive control, is akin to judging a book solely by its cover. By focusing solely on individual incidents, the most crucial elements of the pattern—the context—are overlooked, thereby

Have you ever found yourself unjustly shouldering the blame for the actions of your coercive controller? Victim-blaming is a pervasive issue, particularly in cases involving coercive control. Unveiling the invisible nature of coercive control is crucial to understanding this phenomenon. Despite its prevalence, coercive control remains unnoticed in plain sight. Imagine a scenario where evidence is abundantly available, easily identifiable for those in the know, yet elusive to those unaware of its existence – a hidden reality right before our eyes. Let’s explore the reasons behind victim-blaming, demystify the covert nature of coercive control, and empower ourselves with knowledge to break free from its insidious grasp. In this discussion, I’ll explore the Karpman Triangle, a well-known model for understanding dysfunction in relationships. We’ll delve into how

Coercive control laws are being proposed and passed around the world. Laws that define coercive and controlling behaviors began in the UK, and Australia, Scotland, Canada and the US are taking steps to address coercive control in criminal and/or civil legislation. But coercive control legislation is moving slowly, and I believe one big reason for that is not that we haven’t defined what coercive control IS, but that we have not defined what it is NOT.  You see, at it’s most basic, coercive control is a pattern of behaviors that violate another person’s autonomy. It is a pattern of abuses of power. When one person ignores another person’s right to their own thoughts, feelings and behaviors, in order to control or dominate them, that IS coercive control. And definitions of coercive control

This blog is a shout out to my colleague Elle Kamihira for her podcast Subject to Power and the terrific interview she conducted with Riane Eisler, titled Systems of Peace. As I continue to develop my Quicksand Model™ of Coercive Control I often come across new, and not so new, research and theories that are compatible and useful enhancements to my model. Riane Eisler’s work on partnership systems and domination systems definitely fits that bill.  “Riane Eisler is a social systems scientist, cultural historian, futurist, and attorney whose research, writing, and speaking has transformed the lives of people worldwide.” Just like the Quicksand Model™, the partnership domination continuum is a systems-based approach to transformation (which can be especially important when addressing things like domestic abuse and coercive control). I have a deep appreciation for this model!