Beyond the Bruises: Why Georgia Should Take a Closer Look at Coercive Control

"Domestic violence is not always measured by physical injury. Sometimes it is measured by the gradual loss of another person's freedom, autonomy, and sense of safety." - Victoria A. Coffelt

The Way We Have Traditionally Defined Domestic Violence

For much of our history, the public conversation about domestic violence has focused on what we can see: bruises, broken bones, police reports, emergency room visits, and protective orders. Those are serious realities that deserve the full attention of our legal system.

Yet over the past several decades, researchers, domestic violence organizations, mental health professionals, and many courts around the world have expanded our understanding of how abuse often operates. Increasingly, they describe domestic violence not simply as a series of violent acts, but as a continuing pattern of power and control.

That distinction matters.

The Modern Understanding of Power and Control

The National Domestic Violence Hotline explains that domestic abuse frequently involves behaviors intended to gain or maintain power over another person. The widely recognized Power and Control Wheel illustrates tactics such as intimidation, isolation, emotional abuse, financial control, coercion, threats, manipulation, and the use of children to maintain dominance.

These behaviors may occur with or without physical violence, yet they can profoundly affect a victim's safety, independence, and ability to leave an abusive relationship.

Many survivors would recognize these behaviors immediately. Many legal professionals have encountered them in family court. Yet our legal system has historically been built around identifying individual incidents rather than evaluating long-term patterns of control.

That creates difficult questions for courts.

Where Georgia Law Stands Today

Georgia has enacted important laws to protect victims of family violence. The Georgia Family Violence Act authorizes protective orders for qualifying acts of family violence. Georgia criminal law addresses offenses such as assault, battery, stalking, terroristic threats, unlawful restraint, and criminal trespass. In custody matters, courts are required to consider family violence when determining the best interests of the child.

These statutes provide essential protections, and they have undoubtedly saved lives.

At the same time, they were largely developed around identifiable criminal conduct or discrete acts of violence. They do not expressly define or address coercive control as a pattern of behavior. Nor do they specifically examine related concepts such as post-separation abuse, litigation abuse, or financial coercion as recurring methods by which one person may continue to exercise power over another.

That observation is not a criticism of Georgia's laws. Rather, it reflects how our understanding of domestic violence has evolved.

The Gap Between Incidents and Patterns

Many family law practitioners have encountered cases in which no single event fully explains the dynamics of the relationship. Instead, the evidence may reveal years of intimidation, financial dependence, surveillance, manipulation, isolation, repeated threats, or the strategic use of litigation to exhaust the other party emotionally and financially.

Each event, standing alone, may appear relatively minor.

Viewed together, they may tell an entirely different story.

When the law examines each incident separately, it may overlook the pattern that gives those incidents their meaning.

Why This Matters After Separation

This distinction becomes especially significant after separation. Many people assume that once an abusive relationship ends, the abuse ends as well. Unfortunately, that is not always the case.

For parents involved in custody litigation, the legal system itself can become the setting in which control continues to be exercised. Repeated court filings, unnecessary motions, prolonged discovery disputes, financial pressure, interference with parenting, manipulation through the children, and relentless conflict may continue long after the parties no longer share a home.

Each filing may appear procedurally appropriate when viewed in isolation. Collectively, however, they may reflect an ongoing pattern of domination that is difficult to describe using traditional legal terminology.

This is one reason why awareness of coercive control has become an increasingly important topic within the broader domestic violence community.

Distinguishing Conflict from Coercive Control

The question is not whether every contentious divorce involves coercive control. Most do not.

Nor is the question whether every difficult litigant is an abuser. They are not.

The more important question is whether our legal system possesses adequate tools to distinguish ordinary family conflict from patterns of coercive and controlling behavior that may have profound consequences for victims and children.

That is a question worthy of careful study.

Why a Legislative Study Committee Makes Sense

It is also the question that inspired me to draft proposed legislation creating a Georgia legislative study committee to examine coercive control, financial abuse, post-separation abuse, litigation abuse, and related issues affecting domestic relations proceedings.

The proposal does not presume that Georgia's existing laws are inadequate, nor does it advocate for sweeping changes without careful analysis. Instead, it asks lawmakers to bring together judges, attorneys, prosecutors, domestic violence professionals, mental health experts, researchers, law enforcement, and survivors to examine the evidence, identify strengths within our current legal framework, and determine whether additional statutory guidance or judicial education would benefit Georgia families.

Thoughtful legislation begins with thoughtful study.

Respecting the Complexity of the Courts

As someone who has spent years researching family law, drafting legal documents, and navigating the family court system from multiple perspectives, I have come to appreciate both the strengths of our judicial system and the complexity of the cases it handles every day.

Family court judges make extraordinarily difficult decisions, often with incomplete information and under significant time constraints. Attorneys advocate zealously for their clients while operating within existing legal standards. Legislators must balance competing policy considerations when deciding whether reform is warranted.

Those realities deserve respect.

They also underscore why conversations about coercive control should remain measured, evidence-based, and focused on improving—not criticizing—our legal institutions.

Why Public Policy Must Evolve

Public policy evolves because our understanding evolves.

Years ago, many forms of domestic violence that we recognize today received little public attention. Today, concepts such as financial abuse, technological abuse, reproductive coercion, post-separation abuse, and coercive control are increasingly discussed by researchers and advocacy organizations.

As our understanding continues to develop, it is appropriate to ask whether our legal framework should evolve as well.

That conversation should not be driven by emotion alone. It should be informed by research, careful statutory analysis, judicial experience, and the voices of those who have encountered these issues firsthand.

Looking Ahead

My hope is that this blog contributes to that conversation.

In the weeks ahead, I will explore the intersection of Georgia family law, domestic violence, coercive control, litigation abuse, and judicial reform. I will examine existing statutes, discuss emerging legal concepts, analyze current policy, and offer thoughtful proposals for consideration.

My goal is not to assign blame or advocate for any particular outcome in individual cases. Rather, it is to encourage meaningful dialogue about how Georgia can continue strengthening its response to families experiencing abuse while preserving fairness, due process, and the integrity of our courts.

Domestic violence is not always visible.

Sometimes the deepest injuries are measured not by bruises, but by years spent living under another person's control.

If greater awareness leads to better questions, better questions may ultimately lead to better laws—and better outcomes for Georgia's children and families.