Bandung Confinement Case: Expert Highlights Dangers of Coercive Control

A confinement case in Bandung has served as a stark reminder that violence in relationships does not always leave physical scars. Behind a seemingly ordinary relationship, a person can experience continuous control, manipulation, and intimidation until they lose their personal freedom. According to the Head of the Centre for Gender and Child Studies at IPB University, Yulina Eva Riany, this condition is known in psychology as coercive control. “Coercive control is a pattern of manipulative, intimidating, and threatening behaviour that causes the victim to gradually lose their freedom, sense of security, self-confidence, and ability to make decisions. What needs to be recognised is not just a single incident, but a pattern of relationship that continuously erodes the victim’s autonomy,” Yulina said in a statement on Tuesday. She explained that the concept introduced by Evan Stark can manifest in various forms, such as isolating the victim from family and friends, controlling communication and social media, restricting activities, unilaterally managing finances, and gaslighting that makes the victim doubt their own memory and judgement. Because it occurs gradually, this behaviour is often misinterpreted as a form of attention or affection. Yulina noted that many people ask why victims stay in unhealthy relationships. According to her, the answer is far more complex than simply not wanting to leave. “The more appropriate question is not ‘Why doesn’t the victim leave?’, but rather ‘What factors make it difficult for the victim to leave?’ Victims often face emotional dependency, economic pressure, concerns about children, threats from the perpetrator, and a lack of social support,” she stated. Psychologically, this condition is explained through attachment theory, the phenomenon of trauma bonding, and learned helplessness. Victims can form strong emotional bonds with the perpetrator due to a cycle of violence interspersed with apologies and promises to change. Repeated experiences of control can also make victims feel helpless and believe that nothing they do will change the situation. Yulina added that relationships leading to psychological violence usually develop slowly, making them difficult to recognise. The signs include excessive jealousy and possessiveness, controlling social circles, demanding full access to mobile phones and social media, belittling a partner, making a partner constantly feel guilty, using emotional threats, gaslighting, and love bombing that later turns into controlling behaviour. “Victims often do not realise they are experiencing psychological violence because the behaviour develops little by little and is normalised as a form of care,” she said. The impact of psychological violence cannot be underestimated. Victims are at risk of chronic stress, depression, anxiety disorders, and post-traumatic stress disorder. Constant manipulation can also destroy self-esteem, causing victims to lose trust in themselves and struggle to make decisions. “Psychological violence can be just as severe, and in some cases more lasting, than physical violence. Victims become very doubtful of themselves and find it difficult to set healthy boundaries in relationships,” she said. She stressed that family and the community have an important role in helping victims. Support should be given by listening without judgement, validating the victim’s experience, and encouraging them to seek psychological counselling or legal assistance if necessary. “Victims need support, not judgement. The most important thing is to make them feel heard, believed, and know that they are not alone in facing this situation,” she concluded.