Open for signatureElectronice-7741 · Parliament 45

Broaden coercive-control law

Sign on the House of Commons website

Petitioners ask the House of Commons to broaden federal coercive-control law beyond intimate partners to include people in positions of trust or authority and explicitly cover older, dependent and disabled adults and specified abusive patterns.

Why we would sign this petition

  • It extends legal protection beyond intimate partners to people abused by caregivers, trustees, guardians or others in positions of trust, reducing gaps that leave older or dependent adults unprotected.
  • Listing abusive patterns—financial exploitation, isolation, withholding care, controlling medication, restricting visitors or movement—helps authorities and support services identify and respond to coercive control.
  • Explicitly including decision-making and financial-control roles provides clearer grounds to investigate misuse of power and hold responsible persons to account.

Why we wouldn’t sign this petition

  • Broadening the definition could create vagueness that risks criminalizing ordinary caregiving choices or daily family decisions, complicating fair enforcement.
  • Expanding federal language may overlap with provincial responsibilities for health, elder care and adult protection, creating jurisdictional and implementation challenges.
  • Enumerating many behaviours risks an overly broad standard that’s hard to apply; narrower, clearer reforms or civil safeguards might better balance protection and legal certainty.

The summary and both sets of reasons are AI-generated from the petition and given equal weight. Claims are the petitioners’ own; consult the official record for the full text.

Official petition

Petition to the House of Commons in Parliament assembled Coercive control is a pattern of behaviour used to control, isolate, threaten, or exploit another person; Federal discussions about coercive control have mainly focused on intimate partner violence; The current language is too limiting because it does not fully reflect how coercive control can be used by people in positions of trust or care, especially against older adults and dependent persons; Coercive control can also happen in relationships where one person has trust, authority, care, financial control, or decision-making power over another person; This can include abuse of older adults, dependent adults, and people with disabilities by caregivers, adult children, attorneys under a power of attorney, guardians, trustees, substitute decision-makers, or others in positions of trust; Older adults can be especially vulnerable when another person controls their money, housing, medication, transportation, phone, visitors, appointments, food, or access to care; and If the law only recognizes coercive control in intimate partner relationships, people harmed by coercive control in other relationships of trust may be left without proper protection. We, the undersigned, residents of Canada, call upon the House of Commons to: 1. Broaden the current or proposed federal coercive control language so it is not limited to intimate partner relationships; 2. Include coercive control by a person in a position of trust, authority, care, dependency, financial control, or decision-making power; 3. Clearly recognize coercive control against older adults, dependent adults, and people with disabilities; and 4. Include patterns such as isolation, threats, intimidation, financial exploitation, withholding care, restricting communication, controlling medication or health care, blocking visitors, limiting movement, or misusing legal authority. 1. Broaden the current or proposed federal coercive control language so it is not limited to intimate partner relationships; 2. Include coercive control by a person in a position of trust, authority, care, dependency, financial control, or decision-making power; 3. Clearly recognize coercive control against older adults, dependent adults, and people with disabilities; and 4. Include patterns such as isolation, threats, intimidation, financial exploitation, withholding care, restricting communication, controlling medication or health care, blocking visitors, limiting movement, or misusing legal authority.

Government response

No government response is available yet.