Family Violence and Coercive Control

Spectrum Family Law is pleased to announce that their senior family law lawyer Peter Graburn has now expanded his family law practice to provide Mediation and Mediation-Arbitration services across Alberta. Peter now brings his over 35 years of experience in high-profile, high-conflict, complex litigation to help clients resolve their family law disputes in a more private, confidential and cost-effective manner.

Family Violence

Family violence (while decreasing in Canada) is still all too prevalent in Canadian family law. But family violence is not only restricted to spouses; children are all too often witnesses (if not direct victims) of this violence, leading to a risk to both their short and long term mental health. Family violence can take many forms, from physical, verbal and sexual violence, to emotional, psychological and financial abuse. It can be occasional, or chronic. But whatever its form or frequency, it’s sad, and it’s serious

Divorce Act

In 2021, the federal Divorce Act was amended to outline the various forms and possible consequences of family violence, including a definition of family violence as being [at s. 2(1)]:

“any conduct… by a family member towards another family member, that is violent or threatening or that constitutes a pattern of coercive and controlling behaviour or that causes that other family member to fear for their safety or for that of another person – and in the case of a child, the direct or indirect exposure to such conduct – …”.

Conduct that is physically, verbally or sexually violent or threatening is generally understood. But what about conduct “that constitutes a pattern of coercive and controlling behaviour”? This is not as clear. Fortunately, the Courts have recently given some clarity on the types of behaviour that constitute “coercive control”, and their possible consequences.

Coercive Control

“Coercive control” generally involves a pattern of behaviour by one spouse specifically designed to dominate and control the other spouse. An often-used definition of “coercive control” in family law (as per Impact) is “a continuing act or a pattern of acts of assault, threats, humiliation and intimidation or other abuse that is used to harm, punish or frighten.” In a previous article setting out some of the specific behaviours constituting coercive control including isolation, intimidation, surveillance, financial control and many others, it was noted that coercive control is said to involve “a complex and often subtle set of patterned behaviours” or tactics that, on their own, may not be sufficient to constitute coercive control but, when combined with other subtle strategies, can be viewed as abusive (Glenda Lux: “Coercive Control in Family Law Files: Beware of the ‘Just Enough’ Tactic”). More seriously, they are often viewed as a precursor to future (or already combined with) physical violence.

Behaviours Constituting Coercive Control

Fortunately, since the inclusion of “coercive control” in the definition of “family violence” in the Divorce Act in 2021, the Courts have been more specific as to some of the behaviours that constitute coercive control, and their consequences. In the 2022 Ontario case of MAB v. MGC (2022 ONSC 7207), Justice Chappel (after noting the need to pay particular attention to coercive and controlling behaviour as a form of family violence), went on to summarize examples of coercive and controlling behaviour from other recent cases, including (at para.’s 184 and 187):

• engaging in verbal abuse, yelling, name-calling and insults;
• making numerous unsubstantiated allegations against the other party;
• unilaterally changing court-ordered parenting time terms without justification;
• regularly engaging in behaviour that has the effect of undermining the other parent’s authority or influence and alienating the child from that parent; and
• making numerous unsubstantiated allegations of abuse to police, child protection authorities and other professionals.

More recently, in the 2025 Alberta case of Laurence v. Ross (2025 ABKB 131) allegations of family violence and coercive control [including verbal abuse (repeatedly ‘putting her down’), controlling behaviour (tearing up a piece of meat in her face), and exposing the child to unsafe situations (throwing a plate on the floor in front of the child)] were raised in supporting a child relocation (ie. “mobility”) application from Alberta to Quebec. More specifically, in granting substantial solicitor–client costs to the moving mother, Justice Loparco noted (among other factors) the coercive and controlling behaviour of the father, stating (2025 ABKB 292, at para’s 39-40):

“In this case, I also found Mr. Laurence engaged in coercive and controlling behaviour, which is a form of family violence. Although much of it was pre-litigation, it may be considered in the determination of proper costs where, in situations such as this, the conduct created an intolerable situation that prompted (in part) the motivation to relocate the child… Moreover, I note that the reprehensible conduct continued throughout the litigation. The Respondent continued to use abusive language toward Ms. Ross, created financial burdens by refusing to disclose the location of the boat to prevent bank repossession, failed to provide complete financial disclosure, commenced paying child support payments late, prompted police intervention due to his refusal to respond to calls, refused to return the child resulting in an Emergency Order, and provided misleading affidavit evidence and recalcitrant responses, which lengthened the duration of cross-examination.

Family violence. Coercive control. Reprehensible conduct. While the frequency of family violence appears to be decreasing, its significance and consequences in Canadian family law are greatly increasing (partly due to its direct reference in the amended Divorce Act). Courts are taking increased notice and concern of family violence (both direct and indirect), and of its effects on both spouses and children. In regard to the effects of family violence on children, the Supreme Court of Canada recently stated [Barendregt v. Grebliunas (2022 SCC 22) at para.’s 143 – 146]:

“The suggestion that domestic abuse or family violence has no impact on the children and has nothing to do with the perpetrator’s parenting ability is untenable. Research indicates that children who are exposed to family violence are at risk of emotional and behavioural problems throughout their lives. Harm can result from direct or indirect exposure to domestic conflicts, for example, by observing the incident, experiencing its aftermath, or hearing about it … The recent amendments to the Divorce Act recognize that findings of family violence are a critical consideration in the best interests analysis… Courts must consider family violence and its impact on the ability and willingness of any person who engaged in the family violence to care for and meet the needs of the child.”

Family violence. It’s sad. It’s serious. It’s affecting children. And the Courts are taking notice.

About Peter Graburn

Peter has broad experience in the areas of civil rights, aboriginal law and family law, in both mediation and advocacy roles. He works hard to ensure that his clients are seen, heard and well spoken for. Peter is a skilled and effective practitioner, able to assist his clients in resolving their differences in a practical, respectful, and cost-effective manner.

The Legal Review Process by Spectrum Family Law

• Spectrum strives for high-quality, legally verified content.
• Content is meticulously researched and reviewed by our legal writers/proofers (usually local law students).
• Details are sourced from trusted legal sources like the Family Law Act.
• Each article is edited for accuracy, clarity, and relevance.
• If you find any incorrect information or discrepancies in legal facts, we kindly ask that you contact us with a correction to ensure accuracy.