<\/p>\nwoman\u2019s application for a PPO was dismissed<\/p>\n
<\/a> after she failed to prove that her husband had committed family violence.<\/p>\n
In that case, District Judge Janice Chia noted that not every action causing distress amounts to emotional abuse.<\/p>\n
The central issue, she said, is how emotional and psychological abuse under the Women\u2019s Charter should be interpreted, as this can be subjective.<\/p>\n
She referred to examples cited during the second reading of the Amendment Bill in 2023 by then Minister of State for Social and Family Development Sun Xueling. These included threatening to withhold monthly allowances, constantly monitoring a victim\u2019s whereabouts, and isolating the victim from family and friends.<\/p>\n
The common thread among these examples, Judge Chia said, is coercive control \u2013 behaviour aimed at dominating or controlling another person and instilling fear.<\/p>\n
In another judgment released in June 2025, magistrate Soh Kian Peng granted a PPO to a man after finding that his former wife\u2019s conduct had taken a toll on him and affected both his personal life and professional relationships.<\/p>\n
Among the incidents of abuse cited was a false allegation the former wife made. She told the man\u2019s former boss that her former husband and his mother cast black magic on the boss\u2019 wife, causing her to be bedridden.<\/p>\n
The boss\u2019 wife later died.<\/p>\n
Mr Soh found that the allegation was part of a consistent pattern of abusive behaviour over several years.<\/p>\n
Singapore is not alone in recognising emotional and psychological abuse as domestic violence.<\/p>\n
For example, France criminalised psychological violence in intimate relationships in 2010. In 2015, coercive control became a crime in England.<\/p>\n
Ms Sugidha Nithiananthan, director of advocacy and research at the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware), said coercive control is not widely understood, both in Singapore or globally. Aware is currently conducting research to shed more light on the issue here.<\/p>\n
Mr Martin Chok, deputy director of family and community services at Care Corner Singapore, said coercive control often involves a pattern of demeaning, belittling and threatening behaviour that makes the victim fearful and compliant.<\/p>\n
In some cases, physical violence accompanies such behaviour.<\/p>\n
Mr Chok said emotional and psychological abuse can have a severe impact on victims, adding that a victim can plunge into depression or become unable to work or function in serious cases.<\/p>\n
But one challenge is proving that such abuse has taken place, lawyers say.<\/p>\n
Ms Chong Xin Yi, head of dispute resolution at Gloria James-Civetta & Co, said: \u201cSuch conduct typically occurs in private, without independent witnesses, and rarely leaves immediate or tangible physical markers.<\/p>\n
\u201cAs a result, there is often little or no contemporaneous documentary, audio or visual evidence, and the court is left to assess competing narratives, particularly where the alleged perpetrator denied that the acts complained of occurred at all.\u201d<\/p>\n
And even when the conduct under complaint is proven, applicants must still show that it crosses the legal threshold for emotional or psychological abuse, that the behaviour is not merely poor parenting, isolated lapses or conflict within the family, Ms Chong added.<\/p>\n
Lawyers say evidence such as text messages, and audio and video recordings can support applications for PPOs.<\/p>\n
Expert or medical evidence documenting the harm caused by the emotional and psychological abuse can also help applications, lawyers add.<\/p>\n
For George, getting the PPO was not a magic pill in stopping the abuse. He said his wife\u2019s behaviour has not changed much, and he is still figuring out what to do next.<\/p>\n
Lawyers said George could file a police report for a breach of the PPO, which is a criminal offence that is punishable with a fine or a jail term, or both.<\/p>\n