By Maria R. Riegger, Attorney and Certified Trauma-Informed Parenting Coach
We are often told that when a relationship becomes unhealthy, the solution is to seek professional help.
Go to couples therapy. Learn to communicate better. Work on conflict resolution. Take responsibility for your part in the relationship.
These recommendations may be entirely appropriate for couples experiencing ordinary relationship difficulties.
But what happens when the problem isn’t poor communication, incompatible personalities, or an inability to resolve conflict?
What happens when the problem is abuse?
For individuals experiencing coercive control, traditional couples therapy can be not only ineffective but potentially harmful. And perhaps one of the most troubling aspects of this reality is that many therapists, including some who describe themselves as trauma-informed, lack the specialized training necessary to recognize the dynamics of domestic abuse.
The consequences can be devastating, and end up retraumatizing victims, confirming that they are truly alone with no one to help them.
When a victim finally finds the courage to disclose abusive behavior, only to have that disclosure minimized, reframed as a communication problem, or treated as one side of a mutual conflict, the therapeutic experience can reinforce the very helplessness and self-doubt that the abuse has created.
I know this because I experienced it myself.
When a Cry for Help Is Met With Minimization
During my former marriage, my husband once threw a plate against the floor immediately after I walked out of a room.
This was not simply a disagreement about household responsibilities or a difference in communication styles. Throwing and breaking objects during conflict can be a form of physical intimidation, even when the object is not thrown directly at another person.
When I described the incident during couples therapy, I told the therapist:
“I feel like an abused wife.”
Their response?
“I see why that would be upsetting.”
That was it.
No meaningful exploration of whether I felt safe. No acknowledgment that throwing objects in anger can be an intimidating or abusive act. No apparent effort to assess whether the incident was part of a broader pattern of coercive control (it was, and not even the worst example).
Instead, the behavior was effectively reduced to something that had upset me.
Consider the difference between these two responses:
“I see why that would be upsetting.”
And:
“Throwing and breaking objects in anger can be a form of intimidation. I want to understand whether this is part of a larger pattern and whether you feel safe.”
The first response focuses on the victim’s emotional reaction.
The second recognizes the potentially dangerous behavior and opens the door to understanding the relationship dynamics.
When I disclosed that incident and explicitly said I felt like an abused wife, I was trying to communicate something far more significant than ordinary distress.
I was attempting to name what I was experiencing.
The therapist’s response left me feeling invalidated and reinforced my belief that I was completely alone, with no meaningful help available.
When a victim reaches out for help and the professional fails to recognize the abuse, the silence can become another layer of harm.
The Fundamental Problem with Traditional Couples Therapy
To understand why this happens, we need to examine how couples therapists are often trained to approach relationship problems.
Many traditional couples therapy models emphasize mutual responsibility, communication patterns, conflict resolution, and the ways each partner contributes to relational distress.
In relationships where both partners are acting in good faith, this approach can be valuable.
The therapist might explore how one partner withdraws during conflict while the other becomes more demanding, creating a cycle that leaves both feeling misunderstood.
The goal is to help both partners recognize their contributions to the problem and develop healthier ways of relating.
But this framework becomes fundamentally problematic when one partner is using coercion, intimidation, manipulation, or fear to control the other.
Abuse is not a communication problem. It is a problem of power and control.
When a therapist approaches an abusive relationship as though both partners bear comparable responsibility for its dysfunction, the therapist risks creating a false equivalence between the abuser’s conduct and the victim’s response.
For example, an abuser may deliberately provoke an argument, deprive the victim of sleep, engage in hours of verbal aggression, or create a crisis that requires the victim’s immediate attention.
Eventually, the victim may become frustrated, raise her voice, withdraw emotionally, or react defensively.
A therapist operating primarily through a mutual-conflict framework may focus on both partners’ reactions:
“You both need to work on how you communicate.”
“You both contribute to this cycle.”
“You need to take responsibility for your reactions.”
Indeed, when I withdrew from my ex-husband’s tirades to protect my nervous system, he accused me of giving him the silent treatment.
These statements can overlook the central issue: one partner may be deliberately creating the conditions that produce the other’s distress.
The victim’s emotional response is then treated as equivalent to the abuser’s controlling behavior.
This is particularly dangerous because it can reinforce the abuser’s narrative that the victim is equally responsible for the abuse.
Of course, victims remain responsible for their own behavior, and not every harmful interaction is necessarily coercive control. But accountability must be grounded in an accurate understanding of the power dynamics, context, and purpose of the behavior.
A victim’s response to coercion is not automatically equivalent to the coercion itself.
Coercive Control Is a Pattern, Not an Isolated Incident
Another reason therapists may fail to recognize coercive control is that they focus too heavily on individual incidents rather than the cumulative pattern of behavior.
An abuser may not engage in frequent physical violence. Instead, the abuse may consist of psychological manipulation, intimidation, financial control, sleep deprivation, manufactured crises, threats, humiliation, or the gradual erosion of the victim’s independence.
In my previous article, I described a dynamic I call constructive isolation, in which an abuser keeps the victim so emotionally and physically exhausted that she gradually withdraws from friends, family, and ordinary social activities.
The abuser may never explicitly forbid her from leaving the house.
He simply creates conditions that leave her too depleted to participate in life outside the relationship.
A therapist unfamiliar with coercive control might interpret the victim’s withdrawal as depression, avoidance, poor boundaries, or a failure to maintain healthy social connections. In fact, I have known many women who were prescribed antidepressants as a result.
The therapist may encourage the victim to become more assertive, establish boundaries, or schedule more time with friends.
These suggestions may sound empowering.
But they can miss the actual problem.
The victim may already be attempting to establish boundaries, only to have those boundaries repeatedly violated. She may want to spend time with friends but lacks the energy because she has spent the previous night managing another abusive confrontation.
And asserting herself more forcefully may provoke retaliation.
Without understanding the underlying power dynamics, well-intentioned therapeutic advice can inadvertently place additional responsibility on the victim to solve a problem she did not create.
Why Abusers Can Appear So Reasonable in Therapy
One of the most difficult aspects of coercive control is that abusive individuals do not necessarily present as aggressive, intimidating, or unreasonable in public.
Some are articulate, charming, emotionally controlled, and highly skilled at managing how others perceive them.
They may present themselves as concerned spouses who simply want to improve the relationship.
They may describe their partners as overly sensitive, emotionally unstable, unreasonable, or unwilling to communicate.
They may even appear more composed than the victim during therapy sessions.
Meanwhile, the victim may be exhausted, anxious, frustrated, confused, or emotionally overwhelmed after months or years of managing the abuser’s behavior.
To a therapist who is not trained to recognize coercive control, the composed partner may appear more credible, while the distressed partner may appear to be contributing disproportionately to the relationship’s problems.
This is one reason it is so important for therapists to look beyond how each partner presents during a session.
A calm presentation is not proof of innocence, and an emotional presentation is not proof of instability.
The relevant questions are not simply who communicates more effectively or who becomes more emotional during conflict.
The questions are whether one partner uses fear, intimidation, manipulation, or other controlling behaviors to undermine the other’s autonomy, and whether there is a persistent imbalance of power within the relationship.
Being “Trauma-Informed” Is Not the Same as Understanding Domestic Abuse
In recent years, the term trauma-informed has become increasingly popular among mental health professionals.
That is, in many respects, a welcome development.
But the term is not a guarantee of specialized competence in domestic abuse.
A therapist may understand trauma responses, attachment patterns, childhood adversity, or nervous system dysregulation without having sufficient training to identify coercive control.
A therapist may recognize that a client experiences anxiety, hypervigilance, or emotional dysregulation while failing to recognize that those symptoms are being perpetuated by an ongoing abusive relationship.
In some cases, the therapist may focus so heavily on the victim’s childhood trauma that the abusive behavior occurring in the present becomes secondary.
The victim may be encouraged to examine her attachment wounds, regulate her nervous system, or identify how past experiences influence her reactions.
These interventions can be useful when appropriately applied.
But they become problematic when they shift attention away from the person engaging in abusive conduct.
You cannot resolve an ongoing pattern of coercive control simply by teaching the victim to regulate her response to it.
And a therapist who fails to recognize the distinction between trauma symptoms and ongoing victimization may inadvertently encourage the victim to become more tolerant of mistreatment rather than helping her recognize it.
Being genuinely trauma-informed requires more than understanding how trauma affects the nervous system.
It also requires recognizing when the environment itself is unsafe, understanding how power and control operate, and avoiding interventions that increase the victim’s vulnerability.
Why Couples Therapy Can Become Another Tool of Control
When coercive control is present, couples therapy can sometimes provide an abusive partner with additional opportunities to manipulate the victim.
The abuser may use information disclosed during therapy to criticize, shame, or retaliate against the victim afterward.
He may adopt therapeutic language to portray himself as emotionally mature while accusing the victim of being reactive, dysregulated, or unwilling to take accountability.
He may use the therapist’s observations selectively to validate his own narrative.
For example, a therapist might tell the victim that she needs to work on expressing frustration more calmly.
The abuser may later repeat that statement whenever the victim objects to his behavior:
“Even the therapist says you have anger issues.”
Or:
“Our therapist agrees that you’re part of the problem.”
The therapy itself can become another arena in which the abuser attempts to establish control.
This is why many domestic violence specialists caution against traditional couples counseling when coercive control or intimate partner abuse is ongoing.
Joint therapy can make it difficult for the victim to speak honestly, particularly when she fears consequences after the session.
A therapist who does not conduct appropriate individual screening and safety assessments may never learn what is actually happening behind closed doors.
The Particular Harm of Therapeutic Invalidation
For someone experiencing coercive control, confusion and self-doubt are often central features of the abuse.
The victim may repeatedly hear that she is exaggerating, overreacting, misremembering events, or misunderstanding the abuser’s intentions. She doubts herself constantly and has already given the abuser the benefit of the doubt multiple times.
She may experience cognitive dissonance because the abuser’s reassuring words are inconsistent with his harmful behavior.
Over time, she may begin questioning her own perceptions.
When she finally turns to a therapist, she is often seeking something fundamental: help understanding what is happening to her.
She may not even be ready to call it abuse.
She may simply know that something feels terribly wrong.
If the therapist minimizes the conduct or frames it as mutual conflict without adequately assessing the possibility of abuse, the victim may interpret that response as confirmation that her concerns are unjustified.
She may think:
“Maybe I’m exaggerating.”
“Maybe this is just what marriage is like.”
“Maybe I really am the problem.”
“Maybe nobody will believe me.”
This can deepen her isolation and make it even harder to seek help again.
That was the impact of my own experience.
When I said, “I feel like an abused wife,” I was expressing an emerging recognition of my circumstances.
The response I received did not help me understand the behavior I had described.
It reinforced the belief that I was alone.
A therapist does not need to make an immediate diagnosis or legal determination of abuse to take a disclosure seriously. But a therapist should recognize when a disclosure calls for further assessment rather than simple validation of hurt feelings.
What Competent, Abuse-Informed Therapy Should Look Like
Not every therapist fails domestic abuse victims. Many provide skilled, compassionate, and potentially life-changing support.
But selecting the right professional is essential.
A therapist who understands coercive control should be able to distinguish ordinary relationship conflict from patterns of intimidation, manipulation, and domination.
Rather than assuming mutual responsibility, the therapist should examine the context of the behavior and whether one partner’s actions are systematically undermining the other’s autonomy.
An appropriately trained therapist should also understand that:
- Physical intimidation can occur without direct physical contact.
- Psychological abuse can have serious consequences even in the absence of physical violence.
- Sleep deprivation, threats, isolation, and repeated emotional destabilization may be components of coercive control.
- Victims may appear angry, confused, anxious, or emotionally reactive because they are living under chronic stress.
- Encouraging a victim to confront an abusive partner or enforce boundaries without assessing safety may increase risk.
- Couples counseling may be inappropriate when one partner is using coercive control.
Most importantly, the therapist should approach disclosures of possible abuse with curiosity, seriousness, and a commitment to safety, not an automatic assumption that both parties share responsibility.
How to Find a Therapist Who Understands Coercive Control
If you suspect that you are experiencing psychological abuse or coercive control, consider seeking an individual therapist with specific training and experience in domestic violence.
Do not rely solely on a website describing the therapist as trauma-informed.
Ask direct questions.
“Do you have specialized training in coercive control and intimate partner abuse?”
“How do you distinguish mutual relationship conflict from an abusive power imbalance?”
“What is your approach when one partner uses intimidation, sleep deprivation, or psychological manipulation?”
“Do you believe both partners are equally responsible when coercive control is present?”
“How do you assess safety before recommending boundaries, confrontation, or couples counseling?”
Pay attention not only to the therapist’s answers but also to whether you feel heard and whether the professional demonstrates an understanding of the distinction between conflict and abuse.
You are entitled to ask questions, seek a second opinion, and change therapists if the therapeutic relationship is not meeting your needs.
And if you are currently in an abusive relationship, remember that confronting your partner, disclosing your plans, or abruptly changing the relationship dynamic may carry risks. A qualified domestic violence advocate can help you consider your options and develop an individualized safety plan.
We Need to Stop Treating Abuse as a Relationship Problem
As both an attorney and a certified trauma-informed parenting coach, I believe we need a fundamental shift in how professionals understand and respond to coercive control.
The legal system often struggles to recognize psychological abuse because its effects are cumulative, difficult to document, and not always reflected in discrete incidents that satisfy statutory requirements.
But the therapeutic system can fail victims in a different way.
By treating coercive control as mutual relationship dysfunction, therapists may inadvertently legitimize the abuser’s narrative and deepen the victim’s confusion.
The solution is not to abandon therapy.
It is to demand better training, better screening, and a more sophisticated understanding of how abuse operates.
Therapists must recognize that not every relationship problem is shared equally.
Not every conflict is mutual.
Not every emotional reaction is evidence of equal responsibility.
And not every calm, articulate partner is a safe partner.
When a person discloses that her spouse has thrown and shattered an object in anger, and says, “I feel like an abused wife,” that statement deserves more than a sympathetic acknowledgment that the incident was upsetting.
It deserves thoughtful inquiry into the possibility of intimidation, coercive control, and danger.
Because sometimes the most important thing a therapist can do is recognize that the person sitting in front of them is not describing a communication problem.
She is describing abuse.
And she deserves to be heard.
If you are experiencing domestic abuse or coercive control, support is available. In the United States, the National Domestic Violence Hotline can be reached at 800-799-SAFE (7233) or through thehotline.org. If you believe your devices or internet activity are being monitored, consider using a safer device to seek assistance.
Disclaimer: This article is provided for educational and informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice, mental health treatment, or the establishment of an attorney-client or client relationship. The experiences described are intended to illustrate potential failures in recognizing coercive control, not to suggest that all therapists or therapeutic approaches are ineffective.
