Emotional Abuse in Intimate Relationships: Recognition and Trauma-Informed Care

Narrative Clinical Review. This page provides the verified citation, abstract, and full-text PDF for the journal article.

Clinical boundary: Communication-skills work cannot remedy coercion when disagreement is punished. Joint work should not proceed while fear, retaliation, or surveillance make open speech unsafe.

Publication Details

Author: Christian Jonathan Haverkampf
Journal: The Journal of Psychiatry Psychotherapy and Communication
Publication date: 2025-03-31
Volume, issue, pages: 14(1), 11–20
Article type: Narrative Clinical Review

Recommended citation: Haverkampf, C. J. (2025). Emotional Abuse in Intimate Relationships: Recognition and Trauma-Informed Care. The Journal of Psychiatry Psychotherapy and Communication, 14(1), 11–20.

Abstract

Emotional abuse in intimate relationships is defined clinically by a repeated pattern, not by a single harsh exchange or a psychiatric diagnosis in either partner. Relevant conduct includes degradation, intimidation, isolation, surveillance, persistent distortion or denial of observable events, threats, and control over money, movement, care, sexuality, or social contact. Such patterns can restrict choice and contribute to fear, self-doubt, sleep disturbance, depression, anxiety, trauma symptoms, somatic complaints, and impaired functioning without visible injury. This narrative clinical review synthesizes research and guidance available through 28 February 2025. It distinguishes coercive control from conflict and poor communication, reviews epidemiological and measurement limitations, and proposes a pattern–impact–context formulation that separates safety assessment from diagnosis. Emotional abuse is a relational exposure rather than a discrete mental disorder, and its consequences should not be reduced to post-traumatic stress disorder. First-line care should be private, validating, autonomy-supportive, and linked to practical resources and individualized safety planning. Treatment should address diagnosed conditions, agency, social reconnection, and material constraints without making separation or reconciliation a therapeutic requirement. Communication remains clinically important, but skills training cannot remedy coercion when disagreement is punished. Joint work requires prior private assessment and should not proceed while fear, retaliation, or surveillance make open speech unsafe. The review proposes expanded safe choice—the patient's growing ability to seek care, use resources, maintain relationships, and make decisions without retaliation—as a clinically meaningful recovery endpoint.

Keywords

emotional abuse; psychological intimate partner violence; coercive control; safety planning; trauma-informed care; therapeutic alliance; communication

Full Text

Open the full-text PDF

The PDF is searchable and preserves the journal layout and pagination used in the citation.

Related Information

Health Information and Safety

This journal article is educational and research-oriented. It is not a personal diagnosis, treatment plan, medication instruction, crisis service, or substitute for assessment by a suitably qualified clinician who knows the person’s circumstances.

Do not start, stop, or change medication or another treatment solely because of information on this page. New, severe, persistent, or worsening symptoms, or uncertainty about risk, require individual professional assessment.

If there is immediate danger or a risk of harm, contact local emergency services or urgent support. In Ireland, see:

Website copy first made available on 26 August 2026. The journal citation retains the article’s issue date.