Is Coercive Control Recognized in Vermont?
Yes, and directly tied to custody. Act 103 (2023, No. 103 (Adj. Sess.)) took effect July 1, 2024, adding “coercive controlling behavior” to the definition of “abuse” at 15 V.S.A. § 1101. Unlike some states where the connection to custody is indirect, Vermont's custody statute explicitly cross-references this exact definition. Here's what it says.
What 15 V.S.A. § 1101 actually says
Section 1101(1) defines “abuse” as either (A) one or more of: attempting to cause or causing physical harm; placing another in fear of imminent serious physical harm; abuse to children as defined elsewhere in Vermont law; stalking; or sexual assault — or (B) coercive controlling behavior between family or household members. “Coercive controlling behavior” is then defined as a pattern of behavior that in purpose or effect unreasonably interferes with a person's free will and personal liberty, including unreasonably: isolating the person from friends, relatives, or other sources of support; depriving them of basic necessities; controlling, regulating, or monitoring their movements, communications, daily behavior, finances, economic resources, or access to services; compelling them by force, threat, or intimidation — including threats based on actual or suspected immigration status — to engage in conduct they have a right to abstain from, or abstain from conduct they have a right to pursue; committing or threatening cruelty to animals that intimidates them; or forced sex acts or threats of a sexual nature, including threats based on sexuality or threats to release sexual images.
A direct custody cross-reference: 15 V.S.A. § 665(a)(9)
Vermont's parental rights and responsibilities statute — the custody statute — lists the factors a court must consider in deciding what's in a child's best interests. Factor (9), at 15 V.S.A. § 665(a)(9), is “evidence of abuse, as defined in section 1101 of this title, and the impact of the abuse on the child and on the relationship between the child and the abusing parent.” Because § 1101's abuse definition now includes coercive controlling behavior as an independent alternative — not just physical harm — a documented pattern of coercive control is, on its own, evidence a Vermont family court must weigh as a best-interests factor when deciding parental rights and responsibilities. This is a direct statutory link, not an inferred one.
Why this makes text messages relevant evidence
The statute's list of examples — monitoring someone's communications, controlling their finances, restricting their movements — is close to a description of what a preserved text thread can show over time. Because coercive controlling behavior is defined as a pattern, a single message rarely proves it; a full, timestamped export spanning weeks or months is far more effective evidence of a pattern than an isolated screenshot, and it's exactly the kind of record § 665(a)(9) asks a court to weigh.
This is general information about Vermont law as currently written, not legal advice. Verity is not a law firm. Talk to a Vermont family law attorney about how this applies to your situation before relying on anything here.
See the pattern across the whole thread
Upload your export and get a free health score in minutes — the analysis runs in your browser, nothing is uploaded.
Get your free health score →