CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 123Intimate Partner and Family ViolenceFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsStalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment

When Coercive Control Continues to Harm Children: Post‐Separation Fathering, Stalking and Domestic Violence

Open access
Katz, Emma, Nikupeteri, Anna, Laitinen, Merja·2020·Child Abuse Review
DOI 10.1002/car.2611
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This article shows how domestic violence perpetrators can use coercive control against their children after their ex‐partner has separated from them. Coercive control can include violence, threats, intimidation, stalking, monitoring, emotional abuse and manipulation, interwoven with periods of seemingly ‘caring’ and ‘indulgent’ behaviour as part of the overall abuse. Crucially, what this article provides is knowledge, hitherto largely missing, about how children and young people can experience coercive control post‐separation. The article draws on two separate data sets, one from the UK and one from Finland, which together comprise qualitative interviews with 29 children who had coercive control perpetrating fathers/father‐figures. The data sets were separately thematically analysed, then combined using a qualitative interpretative meta‐synthesis. This produced three themes regarding children's experiences: (1) dangerous fathering that frightened children and made them feel unsafe; (2) ‘admirable’ fathering, where fathers/father‐figures appeared as ‘caring’, ‘concerned’, ‘indulgent’ and/or ‘vulnerable‐victims’; and (3) omnipresent fathering that continually constrained children's lives. Dangerous and ‘admirable’ fathering describe the behaviours of coercive control‐perpetrating fathers/father‐figures, while omnipresent fathering occurred in children as a fearful mental and emotional state. Perpetrators could also direct performances of ‘admirable’ fathering at professionals and communities in ways that obscured their coercive control. Implications for policy and practice are discussed. ‘What this article provides is knowledge, hitherto largely missing, about how children and young people can experience coercive control post‐separation’ Key Practitioner Messages: Children and young people can be direct victims/survivors of coercive control and they can experience it in much the same ways as adults do – feeling confused and afraid, living constrained lives, and being entrapped and harmed by the perpetrator. Coercive control can harm children and young people emotionally/psychologically, physically, socially and educationally. Robust measures are required to deal with coercive control perpetrating fathers/father‐figures, in order to prevent them from using father–child relationships to continue imposing coercive control on children and ex‐partners.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/car.2611

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Past experiences of violence produce a mental state where fear of the perpetrator is always present, leading to the inability to escape in time, place and space.

    “Past experiences of violence cast a long shadow, producing a mental state where fear of the perpetrator is always present, leading to the inability to escape in time, place and space (Henze-Pedersen, 2021; Humphreys et al., 2019; Katz et al., 2020).”

    From Post‐separation abuse: A concept analysis (2023) · cites this paper as Katz et al., 2020

    The Omnipresent Fathering section says that many children experienced ever-present fear that their father or father figure could appear anywhere, anytime, and that this fear restricted their activities. It describes continuous entrapment, but the cited findings concern children facing post-separation coercive control, not people with past experiences of violence generally. The claim also frames the fear as arising from past violence alone, whereas the paper describes an ongoing threat. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Threatening behaviour and an individual's perceived sense of threat based on the pattern of past violence may be largely invisible and not understood by professionals involved in family court litigation.

    “Threatening behaviour––and an individual's perceived sense of threat based on the pattern of past violence they have experienced––may be largely invisible and not understood by professionals involved in family court litigation (Haselschwerdt et al., 2011; Katz et al., 2020; Rivera et al., 2012; Saunders et al., 2013).”

    From Post‐separation abuse: A concept analysis (2023) · cites this paper as Katz et al., 2020

    The Dangerous Fathering section (p. 316) says threatening post-separation behaviour was largely hidden from professionals, and the Discussion and Implications for Practice names family court judges among professionals who need to understand children’s experiences of coercive control. The paper describes children living in fear, but does not specifically establish that professionals in family court litigation fail to understand an individual’s perceived threat based on a pattern of past violence. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Additional characteristics of abusive partners include high levels of denigration and disparagement, lack of insight or attention into how their own parenting impacts children, and a tendency to place sole blame for problems in the family on the survivor.

    “Additional characteristics of abusive partners include high levels of denigration and disparagement, lack of insight or attention into how their own parenting impacts children and a tendency to place sole blame for problems in the family on the survivor (Bancroft et al., 2002; Katz et al., 2020; Thompson-Walsh et al., 2018; Turhan, 2021).”

    From Post‐separation abuse: A concept analysis (2023) · cites this paper as Katz et al., 2020

    In ‘Admirable’ Fathering (p. 317), a child describes her father painting a bad picture of her mother and blaming her and the children for everything. The paper also describes fathers making ex-partners appear to be deficient mothers. These passages support disparagement and blame, but do not establish that abusive partners generally lack insight into how their own parenting affects children. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • In Katz et al.'s qualitative study with 29 children, children confirmed ongoing coercive control by fathers that directly affected them.

    “Further, a qualitative study by Katz et al. (2020) with 29 children confirmed ongoing coercive control by fathers that the children said directly affected them.”

    From “He Tells People That I Am Going to Kill My Children”: Post-Separation Coercive Control in Men Who Perpetrate IPV (2024) · cites this paper as Katz et al., 2020

  • Post-separation abuse is designed to make the former partner feel powerless, and power and control is central to understanding violence towards an intimate partner.

    “Post-separation abuse is designed to make the former partner feel powerless, and power and control is central to understanding violence towards an intimate partner (Godfrey & Robinson, 2014; Katz et al., 2020; Miller & Smolter, 2011; Stark & Hester, 2019).”

    From Post‐separation abuse: A concept analysis (2023) · cites this paper as Katz et al., 2020

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Mackay K. 2017. Child contact as a weapon of control. In The Routledge Handbook of Gender and Violence, Lombard N (ed). Routledge: Abingdon; 145-157.
  2. VV-D-14-00048 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Stark E. 2007. Coercive control: How men entrap women in personal life. Oxford University Press: Oxford.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Katz, E., Nikupeteri, A., & Laitinen, M.
Affiliations
  • Liverpool Hope University (GB)
  • University of Lapland (FI)
Corresponding author
Katz, Emma
ORCID
Venue
Child Abuse Review
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-05-19
Volume
29
Issue
4
Pages
310-324
ISSN
  • 0952-9136 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-0852
DOI
10.1002/car.2611
OpenAlex
W2997846606
Cited by
123
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 2
FWCI
7.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Child Abuse Review (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Hope's Institutional Research Archive (Liverpool Hope University) (acceptedVersion)
  • LaCRIS (University of Lapland) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Durham Research Online (Durham University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Edge Hill University Research Information Repository (Edge Hill University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Economic and Social Research Council (ES/I011935/1)
  • Academy of Finland (308470)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Family Dynamics and Relationships
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Stalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment
Keywords
coercive control, stalking, domestic violence, father figure, emotional abuse, child safety, father-child relationship, ex-partners

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review