Several states including Connecticut, California and Massachusetts have recognized coercive control as part of domestic violence, although the definitions vary. (Photo by Getty Images)
Agnes Brackett from Franklin County was in a 19-year abusive relationship that ended last year with her husband trying to burn down their home.
Though he was arrested for buying guns and going on a rampage that included arson and domestic violence, according to police reports, Brackett said the abuse started long before, when her husband cut her off from her friends, monitored the time and the routes she took when she ran errands, and did not allow their daughter on the playground if other children were present.
“It would get to the point where it gets in your head, and it’s insidious,” she said during a Monday public hearing before the Maine Legislature’s Committee on Judiciary. “It’s not just the hitting. It’s deeper than hitting because it’s a place that nobody else can see.”
She was one of several domestic violence survivors, mental health experts and advocates speaking in support of a new bill that would explicitly name such patterns of behavior in state statute under types of domestic violence, allowing victims to seek protection and abusers to be arrested or prosecuted.
These behaviors, called “coercive control,” are designed to “dominate, isolate, manipulate or exploit a person who is a dating partner or a family or household member,” according to the bill text. Advocates said many survivors face one or more of these as a precursor to physical or sexual violence.
The bill, introduced by Rep. Holly Rae Eaton (D-Deer Isle), includes several examples of coercive control such as limiting access to financial resources or employment; restricting or monitoring movements or communication, isolating partners from friends, family or support systems; using intimidation or threats to create fear or dependency; and exploiting victims’ vulnerabilities such as immigration status, or disabilities.
“Often, this type of behavior goes unnoticed by other people, but is all too clear to the victim,” said Candis Veilleux, another survivor from Kennebec County.
Several states including Connecticut, California and Massachusetts have recognized coercive control as part of domestic violence, according to Eaton, although the definitions vary.
The Maine Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers opposed the bill, saying the language was vague and lacks clear direction on how it can be enforced.
“This lack of clear legal standards could lead to significant unintended consequences, including the misuse of protective orders in contentious family disputes, particularly in divorce and child custody cases, as well as increased criminal prosecutions under these vague definitions,” attorney and MACDL member Eric Thistle of the Portland-based Thistle, Weaver and Morris wrote in submitted testimony.
Current Maine statute does protect against most of the controlling behaviors, according to Andrea Mancuso of the Maine Coalition to End Domestic Violence. However, the coalition testified neither for nor against the bill, acknowledging that while it may not expand eligibility for the types of behaviors that could warrant a Protection from Abuse order, it does help make the protections more explicit.
“From our perspective, it does not expand eligibility for what types of behaviors you can walk into court and walk out with an order for, but it might allow more victims,” she said. “Clearly, it will allow more victims to see their own lived experience reflected in the statute.”
Mancuso said that if the bill passes, domestic violence victims seeking protection orders without the help of an attorney will be able to explicitly use the coercive control definitions to seek protection from courts.
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.