Is it coercive control? / ISO / ISO-4

ISO-4

Restricting movement and physical access to the world

Definition

Forbidding destinations, taking transportation, or requiring permission or escorts, so independent movement depends on the abuser's approval.

How it operates

Detaining the target in the house, including keeping the target from leaving often or at all. Taking transport and keys, hiding keys, disabling vehicles, and denying phones or cars as a method of confinement, including rural households organized around a single car the abuser controls. Relocating the household to a more remote geography, moving the family onto a remote property, destroying other relationships, and restricting technology so miles and cutoff work together. Urban isolation more often drives away friends and work rather than relying on distance. Punishing outings and imposing timed return, including punishment for coffee, a walk, or speaking to a neighbor, calls to check whether shopping took too long, timed return, bans on after-school clubs, and bans on children's parties after accusations that those outings were disloyal. Pairing physical restriction with digital isolation so the target cannot reach support in person once the phone is also gone. Smart locks and other connected devices that restrict exit are ISO-4. The same devices are SUR when they watch. Intruding physically after separation so new geography collapses, including sitting outside a house or workplace. Dual-code HAR when the function is to make independent movement feel pointless.

Function

Make independent movement a privilege the abuser can grant or withdraw. The body cannot reach help if keys, vehicles, and exits already belong to the abuser, or if the household has been moved beyond reach of help.

Harm

Contraction of the target's lived geography. House detention, disabled vehicles, remote relocation, and timed errands convert ordinary mobility into an infraction. Independent movement feels pointless once the abuser can still appear at a new house or workplace.

Why this is coercive control

Ordinary logistical coordination of a shared car or calendar does not convert leaving the house into an infraction. The conduct here confines the body so the social world cannot be reached.

Constructed example

You don't need to go to that class. Everything you need is here. End of discussion.

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

Harris & Woodlock 2019; Johnson 2008; Katz 2016; Pence & Paymar 1993; Stark 2007, 2012; Skoog Waller & Forinder 2025; Woodlock 2017.

Also in ISO

Literature this family is drawn from

  • Stark, E. (2007). Coercive control: How men entrap women in personal life. Oxford University Press.
  • Stark, E., & Hester, M. (2019). Coercive control: Update and review. Violence Against Women, 25(1), 81-104.
  • Pence, E., & Paymar, M. (1993). Education groups for men who batter: The Duluth model. Springer.
  • Katz, E. (2016). Beyond the physical incident model: How children living with domestic violence are harmed by and resist regimes of coercive control. Child Abuse Review, 25(1), 46-59.
  • Harris, B., & Woodlock, D. (2019). Digital coercive control: Insights from two landmark domestic violence studies. The British Journal of Criminology, 59(3), 530-550.
  • ANROWS. (2021). Defining and responding to coercive control: Policy brief. Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety.
  • Fontes, L. A. (2015). Invisible chains: Overcoming coercive control in your intimate relationship. Guilford Press.
  • Crossman, K. A., Hardesty, J. L., & Raffaelli, M. (2016). “He could scare me without laying a hand on me”: Mothers’ experiences of nonviolent coercive control during marriage and after separation. Violence Against Women, 22(4), 454-473.
  • Serious Crime Act 2015, s. 76 (England and Wales) (controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship).
  • Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018.
  • Crimes Legislation Amendment (Coercive Control) Act 2022 (NSW), offense commencing July 1, 2024.
  • Cal. Fam. Code § 6320(c), as amended by 2020 Cal. Stat. ch. 248 (SB 1141).
  • 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?: ISO-4. Carlton Research Instruments. /codebook/iso-4. Last reviewed August 31, 2026.