Is it coercive control? / INST / INST-3

INST-3

Manipulating third-party professionals and audiences

Definition

Performing for, recruiting, or deceiving evaluators, therapists, mediators, teachers, custody professionals, or mutual contacts in order to isolate or discredit the target.

How it operates

Statements that an evaluator, therapist, or other professional "loved" the abuser or saw the target exactly as the abuser predicted. Coaching or rehearsing presentations to professionals. Selective disclosure of the target's history to third parties to discredit. Recruitment of mutual contacts into the abuser's narrative.

Function

Enlist institutional and social audiences into the control structure so that the abuser appears credible and the target appears unstable, alienating, or non-credible.

Harm

The loss of external validation, the recruitment of potential sources of support into the abuser's narrative, and intensified isolation. The abuser extends domination beyond the dyad into the professional and social networks the target must rely upon for recognition and safety. By constructing the target as "the problem" to the very people and systems positioned to help, the abuser converts help-seeking into further evidence of unreliability and seals the target's isolation.

Why this is coercive control

Ordinary, non-manipulative communication with professionals or mutual contacts that does not function to isolate or discredit. The conduct here enlists institutional and social audiences into the control structure so that the abuser appears credible and the target appears unstable, alienating, or non-credible.

Constructed example

The evaluator loved me, by the way. You came across exactly how I said you would.

Fictitious. Written to illustrate the behavior. Not a case.

Douglas 2018; Sweet 2019, 2021; Watson & Ancis 2013.

Literature this family is drawn from

  • Sweet, P. L. (2019). The sociology of gaslighting. American Sociological Review, 84(5), 851-875.
  • Douglas, H. (2018). Legal systems abuse and coercive control. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 18(1), 84-99.
  • Miller, S. L., & Smolter, N. L. (2011). “Paper abuse”: When all else fails, batterers use procedural stalking. Violence Against Women, 17(5), 637-650.
  • Bettinson, V. (2022). A comparative analysis of the defence of duress in England and Wales and Scotland: Implications for victims of coercive control. Journal of Criminal Law.
  • Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46b-1(b) (Jennifer’s Law, 2021).

Literature map

Forums that enumerate this family

A statute that names a tactic is not a finding that the tactic is present.

Identifying a behavior described here does not establish a pattern of behavior and does not establish coercive control. A tactic is not a regime. The instrument consolidates peer-reviewed literature so a reader can check when in doubt. The instrument is not a coding manual. Carlton Research does not provide the instrument as a weapon.

© 2026 Carisa Carlton.

How to cite

Carlton, C. (2026). Is it coercive control?: INST-3. Carlton Research Instruments. /codebook/inst-3. Last reviewed August 31, 2026.