Women's Rights & Issues
Related: About this forumCalifornia Court Grants Restraining Order Based on Coercive Control (trigger warning)
(this is a lengthy, very difficult, very important, read)
California Court Grants Restraining Order Based on Coercive Control (trigger warning)
8/31/2023 by Carrie N. Baker
The judge essentially said, A marriage license does not give a person permission to subjugate their spouse,' said Lisa Fontes of the landmark ruling against coercive control, a type of domestic violence.
(FG Trade Latin / Getty Images)
In September 2020, California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) signed Senate Bill 1141, one of the countrys first laws explicitly allowing courts to consider coercive control as domestic violence in family court matters. The law defined coercive control as a pattern of behavior that unreasonably interferes with a persons free will and personal liberty. On Aug. 10, Vanessa A. Zechera judge of the Superior Court of Santa Clara County entered a permanent restraining order against a man for coercive control domestic abuse.
This case is one of the first cases in the United States where coercive control was considered domestic violence in the absence of physical abuse, said Lisa Fontes, a professor at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, an expert on coercive control and author of the second book ever written on coercive control, Invisible Chains. The judge essentially said, A marriage license does not give a person permission to subjugate their spouse.' With campaigns for similar laws moving forward in several states, the case gives advocates concrete evidence of how coercive control laws are critical for freeing survivors from the grasp of abusive partners.
A Denial of Free Will in Almost All Aspects of Her Life
The facts of the California case are shocking. The husband gave his wife pages of instructions and demands about how she had to behave. In her ruling, Zecher described how the husband used written documents, edicts and pronouncements to control his wifes every move, right down to the way she was supposed to wash the dishes. Zecher described the documents as directives which literally control every aspect of the petitioners life from how she cooks and keeps the house, including the kitchen, to the times which things need to be done
and pre-empts her from engaging in any decision making in her own home. The husband required his wife to meet with him each evening at 8:30 p.m. to discuss whether she had met his demands. In the documents, the husband complained of his wifes transgressions, including waking up a few minutes later than promised and getting breakfast on the table a few minutes later than promised. The wife testified that her husbands behavior was demoralizing, demeaning, and exhausting.
. . . .
When a human being has to worry about or consider an intimate partners reaction in every facet of their life, including whether the intimate partner approves of that action, then that human being really is not free in either decision making or movement, Zecher said of the ruling. This is where the line is crossed from micromanagement or an attempt to control external circumstances
to the control of another human being or coercive control. Zecher focused, in particular, on the husbands threats of punishment. Whether intended or not, the use of the words punishment and violations have no place in a spousal intimate relationship and the use of those words have the effect of creating a circumstance where the victim spouse is emotionally battered to the point where the lines are blurred between what the victim spouse really wants versus what the victim spouse believes will please the other spouse to avoid an argument or to avoid being placed in a financially desperate situation with a child.
. . . .
In the last three years, five states have passed coercive control laws: Hawaii, California, Washington, Connecticut and Colorado. Another 10 states and the District of Columbia have laws that cover coercively controlling behavior. These laws usually relate to protective orders and/or family law. Many more states are considering coercive control legislation, including Massachusetts, New York, Illinois, Maryland, Virginia, Vermont and New Jersey. I hope this case gives other victims hope that there is a pathway out, said Frye. I hope they will recognize that what they may think in their head or heart is normalthat they will realize its not. And then hopefully at some point in time, if they choose to leave, there will be a court, an attorney, a professional out there that will help them get out.
Attorneys seeking support for coercive control cases may contact Rebekah Frye at rebekah@fryefamilylaw.com.
https://msmagazine.com/2023/08/31/california-court-coercive-control-restraining-order-domestic-violence/