Case No. EWFC-85

73.This allegation is one of coercive and controlling behaviour of the mother by the father. The mother alleges ‘gaslighting’, usually defined as psychological manipulation designed to undermine a person and make them doubt their sanity. The mother alleges the father sent a Valentine’s Day card to himself and lied about it; told her he was planning suicide simply to alarm her; shouted at her and slammed doors; and told her she was paranoid and narcissistic (her first statement paragraphs 11-13 p153). She says the stress of all of this is what prompted her to go to the police on 8 August 2019. The mother also asserts that she was the victim of financial control (para 4-7 p151-2), with the motivation being to manipulate and undermine her. 74.In its judgment in Re H-N, the Court of Appeal said, at paragraph 32: ‘It is equally important to be clear that not all directive, assertive, stubborn or selfish behaviour, will be ‘abuse’ in the context of proceedings concerning the welfare of a child; much will turn on the intention of the perpetrator of the alleged abuse and on the harmful impact of the behaviour. We would endorse the approach taken by Peter Jackson LJ in Re L (Relocation: Second Appeal) [2017] EWCA Civ 2121 (paragraph 61): “Few relationships lack instances of bad behaviour on the part of one or both parties at some time and it is a rare family case that does not contain complaints by one party against the other, and often complaints are made by both. Yet not all such behaviour will amount to ‘domestic abuse’, where ‘coercive behaviour’ is defined as behaviour that is ‘used to harm, punish, or frighten the victim…’ and ‘controlling behaviour’ as behaviour ‘designed to make a person subordinate…’ In cases where the alleged behaviour does not have this character it is likely to be unnecessary and disproportionate for detailed findings of fact to be made about the complaints; indeed, in such cases it will not be in the interests of the child or of justice for the court to allow itself to become another battleground for adult conflict’. 75.The father’s behaviour in commissioning a Valentine’s card to be sent to himself from a stranger, in which the stranger referred to the father as ‘hubby’ is odd behaviour and the father accepts he lied to the mother about it and that she found the card. The father accepts that there were arguments and that he expressed concerns about the mother’s mental health (p124). 76.The medical letter from the father’s GP (p115-116) confirms the father consulted his GP suffering from low mood in May 2019. The mother describes the stress at home as making her physically sick (para 13 p153). The breakup of their marriage over the course of 2019 was obviously acutely stressful for both parties. 77.The mother also asserts financial control. It is common ground that the family were short of money and the father had significant debts which he was attempting to repay - the mother mentions this to the police on 8 August 2019 (p 334). The father was the breadwinner and the mother’s income was limited to ad hoc payments, for example for babysitting. The father seems to have paid the family’s bills using a combination of his income and the tax credits, and the mother was left with her limited earnings and the child benefit to pay her phone bills and anything else she wanted to buy. 78.In my judgement the behaviour complained of by the mother at allegation 3 does not amount to behaviour that the court should categorise as coercive and/or controlling behaviour amounting to domestic abuse. The mother did not have access to much money, but money was obviously very tight and needed for housing costs, utility bills and essentials for the family. I do not find that the father kept the mother short of money to harm or punish her or to make her subordinate. The Valentine’s card, distress and arguments were obviously upsetting, but do not in my judgement have the character of coercive and/or controlling abuse. It is unnecessary and disproportionate for the court to engage in further enquiry as to these allegations: it would not be relevant to decision-making for the children going forwards.