Resistance and Domestic Abuse

A single incident rarely tells the whole story. What happened before, what the relationship has been like over time, who held power, and what each person feared at the time all shape what a behaviour actually means.

Looking at one moment in isolation can make a defensive reaction look like aggression, or a desperate attempt to escape look like an attack. Context is not an excuse; it is what makes fair interpretation possible.

Domestic abuse is defined by patterns of behaviour that are used to control, coerce or frighten another person—not by a single argument. Key questions include:

• Is there a pattern of controlling behaviour over time?
• Who holds more power in the relationship—financially, socially, physically?
• What is each person afraid of, and what are the consequences of defying the other?
• What is the impact on each person’s freedom, safety and wellbeing?

These questions matter because two people can both behave badly in a moment, while only one is using a pattern of control.

People subjected to abuse may resist, fight back, shout, or take actions to protect themselves or their children. This can include physical resistance, verbal anger, or behaviour that—viewed alone—looks aggressive.

Resistance is often a response to fear and to a pattern of control, not an equal and independent choice to abuse. The purpose is usually to stop harm, escape danger or protect someone, not to control the other person.

The term “mutual abuse” is often misused. While both people in a relationship can behave harmfully, true mutual abuse—where both use patterns of coercive control against the other—is rare.

Labelling a victim’s resistance or self-defence as “mutual abuse” can:

• Obscure who is using the pattern of control.
• Increase danger by suggesting the victim is equally responsible.
• Be used to discourage victims from seeking help.
• Shift responsibility away from the person using abuse.

A more careful approach is to assess the pattern, the power balance and the purpose of each behaviour, rather than treating each incident as equivalent.

A single text, a clip of an argument, or one reaction can be presented as if it proves someone is “just as bad”. But isolated fragments are easily misleading.

A message sent in fear, a recording that begins after the provocation, or a reaction captured without what led up to it can all distort the reality. Meaningful assessment looks at the whole picture, not a curated selection.

A person using abuse may focus attention on the other person’s response—“look what they did”—in order to avoid examining their own behaviour. This is a common minimising tactic.

Pointing to a victim’s anger, resistance or a single reaction does not cancel out a pattern of control. Responsibility for one’s own behaviour is not reduced by what the other person did.

There is an important difference between honestly acknowledging that another person also behaved badly, and using that to avoid responsibility for your own behaviour.

Someone genuinely committed to change can say, “They also did things that were wrong, and I am still responsible for what I did.” Someone avoiding accountability says, “They did things too, so I am not responsible for mine.”

If you are concerned about your own behaviour, the focus belongs on your choices—not on building a case about the other person.’s.

Professionals—social workers, Cafcass officers, police, court staff—are trained to assess risk by looking at patterns, power, fear and impact, not by counting incidents or treating each side as equivalent.

This is why practitioners should not rely on simplistic labels like “mutual abuse” without a full assessment. Getting this wrong can put victims and children at greater risk.

Children experience coercive control even when they are not directly physically harmed. Living with a pattern of control, fear and unpredictability affects their safety, development and wellbeing.

A child’s response—clinginess, anger, withdrawal, or taking sides—is shaped by the environment they live in, not by a single event. Understanding a child’s behaviour means understanding the pattern around them.

If you are concerned that you have used abusive or controlling behaviour, the most useful focus is your own choices—not the other person’s responses. Questions to ask yourself:

• Am I using a pattern of behaviour to control, coerce or frighten someone?
• Am I focusing on what they did to avoid looking at what I did?
• Am I respecting their boundaries, or trying to overcome them?
• Am I seeking specialist support for my own behaviour?

The Respect Phoneline offers confidential support for people concerned about their own behaviour. The article on recognising early warning patterns offers a fuller checklist.

Where self-defence or criminal allegations are involved, this article cannot and does not give legal conclusions. These are matters for specialist legal advice based on the specific facts.

If you face criminal allegations, or if you are a victim considering your legal position, seek advice from a solicitor qualified in the relevant jurisdiction. Do not rely on general information for decisions with serious legal consequences.