The Legal Gap in Addressing Coercive Control in Non-Intimate Relationships

In 2015, England and Wales became the first countries to criminalize coercive control, recognizing that abuse can manifest beyond physical violence, including psychological manipulation and financial control. This legal framework, however, is limited to intimate relationships and close family ties, leaving individuals subjected to coercive control in non-intimate settings—such as religious or political groups—without legal recourse. Survivors like Rachael, who experienced controlling behavior from the Universal Church of the Kingdom of God (UCKG), highlight this gap, noting that police could not act on her allegations as they fell outside the scope of existing laws.

The Guardian

Rachael is now part of a campaign led by the Family Survival Trust (FST), advocating for the expansion of coercive control laws to encompass organizations and groups. Alexandra Stein, a psychologist affiliated with the FST, recounts instances where police expressed sympathy towards survivors but were unable to intervene due to the limitations of the law. The campaign aims to address the estimated 2,000 cults operating in the UK, which often employ coercive tactics to isolate and control members.

The Guardian

Despite the existence of coercive control laws, only a small number of cases have reached trial, and securing convictions remains challenging. Laura Richards, a key figure in the introduction of the law, emphasizes that coercive control dynamics are prevalent in group settings, yet legislative inertia has stalled broader protections. The increase in recorded cases—tenfold from 2017 to 2023—indicates a growing recognition of the issue, but the lack of legal tools hampers effective intervention.

The Guardian

Recent discussions in Parliament have indicated a slow but growing momentum towards addressing coercive control in non-intimate contexts. However, Home Office minister Sarah Jones stated that the current law was "explicitly designed" for personal relationships and that there are no immediate plans to expand it. Critics argue that such a narrow interpretation ignores the realities of control within cults and other organizations. Additionally, fears of an influx of claims and opposition from religious groups complicate the path to reform.

The Guardian

Survivors of groups like the Jesus Army express a unanimous desire for legal reform, believing it could facilitate justice and accountability for organizations. The absence of a legal framework leaves many victims without recourse, as seen in the case of the Jesus Army, where survivors received compensation outside of a legal process, raising concerns about fairness in the distribution of assets.

The Guardian

The current legal framework fails to recognize the pervasive control exerted by non-intimate groups, leaving victims trapped in cycles of abuse. As discussions around coercive control evolve, advocates stress the importance of legislative change to provide necessary protections. The experiences of survivors underscore the urgent need for society to confront and address the complexities of coercive control beyond intimate relationships, ensuring that all forms of abuse are recognized and actionable under the law.

The Guardian