As already outlined, there is evidence that Julia was experiencing coercive control by Brenda and that this was, to some extent, recognised by Brenda’s close friends. However, the evidence from IMRs, Julia’s friends and her sister suggests that Julia herself saw Brenda as a very important source of help and support and did not recognise Brenda’s behaviour as controlling or abusive. Julia has been described by her friends as seeing the best in people” “always and this seems to accurately reflect how she viewed Brenda. One exception to this was when Julia informed the police that Brenda had attempted to pressurise her not to continue with the prosecution against James. Again, this was an example of Brenda attempting to apply coercive control. On this occasion, Julia resisted this pressure and a successful prosecution followed. Key learning point 5 By its nature, coercive control is often very difficult to identify. At its most effective the victim themselves may not recognise such behaviour as a form of domestic abuse. Contributions from Julia’s friends and her sister suggest that this type of behaviour may have been a factor in this case. This highlights the importance of multi-agency policy, procedure and training which can assist front line staff in considering this type of abuse in the context of risk assessment processes and the development of effective prevention strategies. Where the victim is highly dependent on the potential perpetrator for emotional and practical support, this can greatly increase vulnerability to coercive control. It also highlights that friends and informal networks can play a key role in identifying coercive control issues and may also be a valuable resource in developing prevention strategies.
As already outlined, there is evidence that Julia was experiencing coercive control by Brenda and that this was, to some extent, recognised by Brenda’s close friends. However, the evidence from IMRs, Julia’s friends and her sister suggests that Julia herself saw Brenda as a very important source of help and support and did not recognise Brenda’s behaviour as controlling or abusive. Julia has been described by her friends as “always seeing the best in people” and this seems to accurately reflect how she viewed Brenda. One exception to this was when Julia informed the police that Brenda had attempted to pressurise her not to continue with the prosecution against James. Again, this was an example of Brenda attempting to apply coercive control. On this occasion, Julia resisted this pressure and a successful prosecution followed. Key learning point 5 By its nature, coercive control is often very difficult to identify. At its most effective the victim themselves may not recognise such behaviour as a form of domestic abuse. Contributions from Julia’s friends and her sister suggest that this type of behaviour may have been a factor in this case. This highlights the importance of multi-agency policy, procedure and training which can assist front line staff in considering this type of abuse in the context of risk assessment processes and the development of effective prevention strategies. Where the victim is highly dependent on the potential perpetrator for emotional and practical support, this can greatly increase vulnerability to coercive control. It also highlights that friends and informal networks can play a key role in identifying coercive control issues and may also be a valuable resource in developing prevention strategies.
DHR-Julia-exec-summary-FINAL.docx