“The world in which domestic abuse is perpetrated is changing, but domestic abuse persists at worrying levels. Perpetrators of domestic abuse now routinely use technology and social media to control and instil fear in those they victimise.” All-Party Parliamentary Group on Domestic Violence

What is digital coercive control?

Digital coercive control is the use of technology and online platforms to monitor, harass, isolate, or threaten an intimate partner or family member. Examples of this can include restricting someone’s access to their devices, cyberstalking, using social media, messaging services, tracking apps, hidden cameras, or even smarthome devices like thermostats or speakers.

Coercive control has been a crime in the UK since 2015, but it wasn’t until the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 that the definition was expanded to include coercive control through technology.

The Online Safety Bill, passed in 2023, also identified controlling and coercive behaviour as a “priority offence”, which means tech companies need to both prevent and remove coercive control content from their sites. Under the Act, Ofcom holds the power to impose huge fines of up to £18 million or 10% of a company’s qualifying worldwide revenue, whichever is greater, against technology firms that fail to enforce their terms of service or adequately protect users from illegal harms. 

However, digital coercive control is difficult to enforce when it takes place away from social media platforms, for example over text messages.

To meet rising demand, Refuge - the largest specialist domestic abuse organisation in the UK - set up a specialist technology-facilitated abuse service in 2017. From 2017 to 2024, they saw a 207% increase in referrals.

How digital coercive control crimes are investigated and the response

This is a global issue and a study undertaken by the Australian Institute of Criminology in 2024 found that:

• Most victims and workers interviewed reported significant gaps and areas for improvement in justice and support services.
• There was a lack of understanding of technology-facilitated coercive control among frontline workers, including police, and in the community more broadly. This means that victims do not always recognise that what is happening to them is a form of domestic and family violence.
• When victims do realise that what is occurring is dangerous, police frequently view their reports as isolated incidents, rather than as patterns of behaviour, and diminish or dismiss them, overlooking the risks to women and children.
• There is a lack of funding for specialist suppliers to conduct technology safety scans, with some services relying on local telecommunications stores or students to check devices.

A report by Liverpool University looked at several police forces in the North of England. The report found that even when coercive control was suspected, officers could not easily distinguish it from behaviour that was not abusive. For example, sending lots of messages in the early days of a relationship could be the sign of excitement and mutual attraction or it could indicate monitoring. 

The report also found that when police were gathering evidence of these crimes basic - but essential - information was missing. This included telephone numbers, profile names and screenshots which could have been used as initial evidence or to identify the correct social media profile.

Police forces say that they’ve made changes to address these concerns. For example, in the last year, Cumbria Police has increased the number of specialist investigators looking specifically at technology-related crimes and developed a “digital toolkit” to provide training and resources on how to spot digital coercive control.

Conclusion 

Digital coercive control is yet another example of how online technology can be used to harass, intimidate, abuse and control and as a result domestic violence is on the rise. The research shows that a more consistent response to this form of crime by the police, prosecutors and online provides is required.