more_vert
Children’s experience of domestic violence is commonly framed in the context of physical violence; however, new research highlights how parental coercive control plays a critical role in shaping long-term wellbeing.
Children who experience domestic violence involving intimidation and control are almost four and a half times more likely to also be emotionally abused by a caregiver during childhood, and twice as likely to develop a mental illness in adulthood.
Using data from the Australian Child Maltreatment Study, two new studies Childhood domestic violence in Australia and Childhood domestic violence and mental disorders in adulthoodat the University of Queensland examine the impact of domestic violence involving intimidation and control experienced by children.
Rather than using parent reports or other substitute measures, the study asks individuals aged 16 years and over for their own accounts of childhood domestic violence.
Four different forms of childhood-experienced domestic violence were examined; physical violence, threats of harm, property damage including harm to pets, and intimidation and control — which captures coercively controlling behaviour.
While much of the focus around harms to children by domestic violence is centred around physical violence, experiences of intimidation and control paint a more consistent and concerning picture.
Intimidation and control occurred more often and over more years compared to other forms of domestic violence. It also extended later into childhood compared to other forms of domestic violence.
Two-thirds of individuals who reported a caregiver using intimidation and control said it was still occurring when they were 15-years of age, despite the high overlap with parental separation.
Men in the study who reported a caregiver using intimidation and control during childhood were also six times more likely be emotionally abused by a caregiver, and women more than three times as likely even after accounting for physical domestic violence.
Childhood experiences of domestic violence involving intimidation and control also increased the risk of developing post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) by almost two and a half times, independent of physical domestic violence, other experiences of abuse or neglect, and financial hardship.
Among men, intimidation and control was also the only form of childhood domestic violence linked to a higher risk of mental illness in adulthood, including PTSD, anxiety, depression, and suicide attempt.
While domestic violence is predominantly perpetrated by men, the studies highlights how boys are highly victimised by coercive control in childhood and may face unique emotional challenges in processing this abuse while simultaneously forming their own sense of masculinity and identity as they mature.
Domestic violence and child maltreatment
Qualitative research with children shows that parental coercive control and childhood emotional abuse are deeply intertwined, forming part of a broader regime of manipulation and intimidation aimed at dominating the entire family. Children do not simply witness this dynamic; they directly experience coercive control as cohabitants of homes marked by instability, fear and a loss of autonomy.
The study also found that all other forms of child maltreatment, including emotional abuse, physical abuse, sexual abuse and neglect, were all at least twice as common among those who experienced any childhood domestic violence compared to those who did not.
The weaponisation of children post-separation
Contrary to common belief that leaving ends domestic violence, children are often weaponised by coercively controlling parents to maintain power and control long after separation. The first year following separation is in fact the most dangerous time for women and their children, with heightened risks of escalating violence, post-separation abuse, and even homicide. Many mothers fear being unable to protect their children within shared custody arrangements, a process in which children’s voices are rarely heard by the systems intended to safeguard them.
Within the family court system, mothers’ allegations of child maltreatment by fathers are often dismissed or un-investigated. In many instances, mothers are instead portrayed as ‘alienating’ their children from the father, rather than acting to protect them from harm. Problematically, in Australia, family court rulings can currently override existing domestic violence protection orders.
It is critical that we address and prevent opportunities for perpetrators of domestic violence to exploit social and legal systems to exert power and control to ensure that children, along with their protective parent, are adequately protected and supported.
It is also vital to invest in training and support to assist health professionals to identify and document coercive control using frameworks that centre the perpetrator’s pattern of behaviour and its impact on the entire family.
This includes recognising that these behaviours often continue long after separation, with children routinely weaponised in these attempts. Perpetrators may erode the child’s bond with the safe parent, cut off financial support, disrupt their child’s normal routine, education or medical care to sabotage caregiving efforts of the safe parent, or manipulate their child into divulging information about their safe parent. These are just some of the ways coercive control is carried forward through children’s lives.
Identifying and appropriately documenting coercive control would help to address underlying sources of distress, mitigate ongoing harm, and strengthen perpetrator accountability across systems such as family law and new criminal law frameworks for coercive control. Greater investment is also needed in the prevention of domestic violence through child-centred and trauma and family-violence informed interventions that support children’s recovery along with stronger legal protections to prevent them from being weaponised in post-separation coercive control.
Conclusion
Ending domestic violence in a generation requires putting that next generation — today’s children — squarely at the centre of prevention and intervention efforts. Yet, children’s voices continue to go largely unheard when it comes to domestic violence responses, despite being recognised as victims in their own right in Australia’s current National Plan to End Violence Against Women and Children.
Our findings add to a growing body of evidence demonstrating how children are harmed by coercive control, demonstrating that the use of non-physical forms of violence such as intimidation and control, which are often considered as not directly affecting children, play a critical role in shaping long-term and wellbeing outcomes.
We must move beyond outdated and false perceptions that children are not directly and significantly harmed by domestic violence. Coercive control must be treated as a direct risk of harm to children, irrespective of physical violence.
The research is published in the Journal of Family Violence and the British Journal of Psychiatry.
Dr Julie Blake is an epidemiological researcher with the University of Queensland with an interest in domestic violence and coercive control, mental health and maternal and child health.
The statements or opinions expressed in this article reflect the views of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official policy of the AMA, the MJA or InSight+ unless so stated.
Subscribe to the free InSight+ weekly newsletter here. It is available to all readers, not just registered medical practitioners.
If you would like to submit an article for consideration, send a Word version to mjainsight-editor@ampco.com.au.