Content note:
This blog discusses domestic and family violence, technology-facilitated abuse, coercive control, and workplace impacts. While the case study below is fictional, it reflects real behaviours documented in Australian research and practice guides.
(Reference: Australian Institute of Family Studies, Technology-Facilitated Coercive Control, https://aifs.gov.au/resources/practice-guides/technology-facilitated-coercive-control)
Introduction: Why a Case Study Matters
Technology-facilitated abuse can be difficult to see — and even harder to name. Many people imagine online abuse as hateful comments, excessive texting, or occasional harassment. But the reality is far more complex, far more invasive, and far more connected to broader patterns of coercive control.
In Australia, technology-facilitated coercive control has become one of the most rapidly growing forms of intimate partner violence. (AIFS, 2022).
It takes many forms:
- surveillance
- tracking
- monitoring
- hacking
- impersonation
- digital humiliation
- threats
- manipulation
- control of devices, logins, accounts or communications
For many victim-survivors, this abuse continues long after separation — and long after physical contact has ceased.
Workplaces are directly impacted. Abuse carried out through digital channels infiltrates employees’ workdays, compromises security, disrupts productivity, and creates profound psychological harm.
This blog uses a composite case study — “Emma” — to illustrate what tech-facilitated coercive control looks like, how it affects a person’s working life, and how workplaces can respond safely and effectively.
This scenario is a blend of real patterns, research findings and commonly reported behaviours. It is not based on one individual, but it reflects what thousands of Australian women experience every day.
Emma’s Story: A Case Study of Tech-Facilitated Coercive Control
A new beginning — or so she thought
Emma is a 32-year-old project coordinator working for a mid-sized consultancy in Melbourne. She works from home three days a week and spends the other two days in the office. After years in a controlling relationship with her ex-partner, Liam, she finally moved out six months ago and has been rebuilding her life slowly.
The relationship had not been physically violent, but it had become increasingly controlling, isolating and emotionally abusive. Liam criticised Emma’s friendships, managed the couple’s finances, questioned her whereabouts, and frequently accused her of cheating — despite no evidence.
When she moved out, Emma expected that distance would bring clarity and relief. Instead, Liam found new ways to maintain his control — through technology that Emma used every day for work, social connection and safety.
The Early Signs of Digital Intrusion
Persistent messaging dressed as “concern”
At first it seemed like Liam simply struggled with the breakup. He sent messages — dozens of them — asking if she was ok, asking where she was, asking why she hadn’t replied.
He framed it as concern:
“I just want to make sure you’re safe.”
“You didn’t answer your phone. Are you ignoring me?”
“You know I worry.”
“Why can’t you respect me enough to respond?”
The Australian Institute of Family Studies identifies this behaviour — excessive, demanding communication — as one of the earliest and most recognisable forms of tech-facilitated coercive control. (AIFS, 2022)
Emma tried to ignore the messages, but when she stopped responding, Liam became angry. The tone shifted quickly.
“You’re being selfish.”
“If you don’t answer, I’ll come find you.”
“Don’t forget I know how your routine works.”
The messages arrived during her work hours, interrupting meetings, deadlines, and her ability to concentrate. She turned off notifications, but the anxiety remained.
When Abuse Enters the Workplace System
Compromised work accounts
One morning, Emma arrived at work to find that several calendar appointments had been altered. She also noticed an unfamiliar device listed under her email login history.
Her employer used a cloud-based system. If someone had her password, they could access everything:
- her work emails
- her calendar
- internal documents
- videoconference links
- client information
- her home address (listed in her HR file)
Emma suddenly realised the danger.
This matched patterns described by frontline practitioners: perpetrators often use compromised passwords as a key method of control. (AIFS, 2022)
Sabotage through digital impersonation
One of the most distressing moments came when Liam sent a message to her manager pretending to be Emma. He used her email account and wrote:
“I need to take a few weeks off. Things are really overwhelming.”
Emma was mortified when her manager replied with concern, assuming the message had come from her.
Impersonation — including through email or social media — is a common tactic in tech-facilitated abuse. (eSafety Commissioner, Image-Based and Online Abuse)
It can be used to:
- damage a person’s reputation
- sabotage their employment
- create conflict with colleagues
- spread misinformation
- isolate the victim further
Workplace impersonation is particularly harmful because it threatens a victim-survivor’s livelihood and credibility.
Monitoring live meetings
As hybrid work increased during the COVID-19 period and beyond, so did the ability for perpetrators to eavesdrop on work meetings. Studies show that abusers may secretly join online meetings, listen in from another device, or coerce a victim into muting disclosures. (AIFS, 2022; eSafety Commissioner, 2022)
Emma began noticing strange sounds during meetings — subtle clicking, faint breathing, or a participant appearing as “Guest” and muting instantly.
At first she thought it was a glitch.
Then she remembered: her meeting links were accessible through her compromised calendar.
Liam had access to everything.
The Psychological Impact of Digital Coercive Control
Hypervigilance: “I felt like I was never alone”
Victim-survivors of digital coercive control frequently report:
- hypervigilance
- exhaustion
- panic
- inability to focus
- disassociation
- anticipatory anxiety
Emma described feeling like she lived in a state of constant alertness.
She double-checked devices, checked doors unnecessarily, sat facing entrances in cafes, and avoided speaking her mind in meetings, fearing Liam might hear.
The erosion of autonomy
Coercive control is not a series of isolated incidents. It is a pattern designed to erode autonomy, confidence and independence.
Emma found herself hesitating before:
- emailing colleagues
- calling clients
- joining meetings
- leaving the house
- updating her calendar
- using her own phone
Her world became smaller, dictated by the possibility that Liam was watching.
This loss of autonomy is a key marker of coercive control. (See: Stark, E. Coercive Control: How Men Entrap Women in Personal Life, 2007)
Professional consequences
Emma’s work began to suffer:
- She missed deadlines because she was preoccupied.
- She avoided phone calls.
- She withdrew from collaborative projects.
- She took increasing amounts of sick leave.
- She considered quitting — a common outcome among victim-survivors experiencing workplace interference. (ABC News, 2021)
Her manager noticed the changes but didn’t know how to ask.
The Breaking Point: When Tech Abuse Becomes Life-Disrupting
The threatening message that changed everything
One Friday afternoon, Liam sent Emma a message:
“I saw your meeting with that guy at 2pm. You think I don’t know what you’re doing? Keep lying to me and I’ll make things hard for you at work.”
Emma froze. She had attended a meeting with a new male colleague earlier that day. Nothing in her calendar or emails showed it as a one-on-one. She realised he must have watched the meeting.
This was no longer vague suspicion — it was confirmation.
The safety risk escalates
Professionals warn that coercive control often escalates when a victim attempts to regain autonomy. (AIFS, 2022)
Emma tried to block Liam’s number. She changed her passwords. She logged out of accounts. But Liam retaliated by using her compromised email to:
- contact her mother
- message her colleagues
- send himself documents that looked like confidential workplace files
- suggest he would “go public” if she didn’t comply
The threat of reputational damage — or even false allegations — is a powerful tool in a perpetrator’s arsenal.
Emma realised she needed help.
The Workplace Response: What Happened When Emma Disclosed
The moment of disclosure
On Monday, Emma finally asked her manager if they could talk privately.
She walked into the meeting pale, tired and visibly distressed. It took her 20 minutes to explain everything. Her manager listened without interrupting.
This approach — patient, calm, non-judgemental listening — is recommended by domestic violence specialists. (1800RESPECT, How to Respond When Someone Discloses, 2023)
How her employer supported her
Emma’s employer responded well. They:
- Contacted IT immediately
Her accounts were secured, a forensic check was conducted, and suspicious devices were removed. - Provided a new work phone and laptop
Both were set up with strong security and multi-factor authentication. - Helped her change all passwords
Using secure passphrases and two-factor authentication. - Created a workplace safety plan
Including alternative meeting links, privacy controls, and secure communication protocols. - Gave her flexible leave
To attend legal appointments and speak with support services. - Connected her with the EAP and specialist services
Including 1800RESPECT and WIRE. - Ensured confidentiality
Only two people in HR and IT were informed, with Emma’s consent.
This comprehensive support aligns with best-practice safety responses.
(AIFS; eSafety Commissioner; DVRCV; ANROWS)
Why workplace support matters
Employment provides:
- financial independence
- routine
- social connection
- safety away from the perpetrator
- identity and purpose
Research shows that perpetrators often deliberately disrupt employment to increase dependence. (ANROWS, Economic Abuse and Coercive Control, 2020)
By supporting Emma, her workplace helped protect:
- her income
- her psychological wellbeing
- her long-term safety
- her sense of control
It also prevented further cybersecurity breaches — which could have harmed the organisation as well.
What This Case Study Teaches Us About Tech-Facilitated Abuse
Abuse does not require physical presence
Liam controlled Emma without being in the same room, the same suburb, or even the same house. Technology extended his reach far beyond physical proximity.
As AIFS notes, “technology facilitates constant intrusion, even across time and space.” (AIFS, 2022)
Technology is not the root problem — power is
Technology is simply the tool. The underlying issue is coercive control:
- entitlement
- domination
- surveillance
- punishment
- intimidation
- erosion of freedom
Removing the tech does not remove the mindset — but securing technology can reduce the perpetrator’s power.
The workplace is a key site of both vulnerability and safety
Work tech systems often unintentionally enable abuse:
- shared logins
- unprotected devices
- predictable meeting links
- insecure calendars
- remote access functions
- geolocation features
But workplaces also have the power to provide stability, resources and protection.
Digital abuse is gendered
Australian research consistently finds that women are disproportionately targeted with digital coercion, tracking, spyware, and monitoring. (eSafety Commissioner, 2022; ANROWS, 2020)
This reflects broader gendered patterns of intimate partner violence.
Separation increases risk
Liam’s behaviour followed a common pattern: escalation after Emma left.
Separation is one of the most dangerous times for women experiencing DV.
(ANROWS; Domestic Violence Victoria, 2022)
Technology allows perpetrators to continue abuse even after physical distance is created.
Lessons for Australian Workplaces
Provide training on tech-facilitated abuse
Managers, HR teams and IT personnel need training on:
- recognising signs
- responding safely
- understanding coercive control
- knowing legal obligations
- identifying compromised devices
- understanding spyware
- implementing safety plans
Strengthen account and device security
This means:
- mandatory MFA
- complex passphrases
- secure device management
- regular security checks
- safe meeting protocols
- minimising unnecessary access
Cybersecurity is also employee safety.
Develop clear guidelines for respectful technology use
Policies should explicitly address:
- harassment via digital tools
- inappropriate monitoring
- misuse of workplace systems
- impersonation
- accessing someone else’s account
Clear consequences must accompany policies.
Implement safe and confidential disclosure channels
Employees must know:
- who to speak to
- how privacy will be maintained
- what support is available
- what happens after disclosure
Uncertainty prevents disclosure.
Offer flexible work and leave options
Victim-survivors may need:
- time for court
- time to speak with police
- time to attend counselling
- time to secure devices
- time to relocate
Flexibility can prevent job loss — and therefore prevent further dependence.
Collaborate across HR, IT, Legal and WHS
Responses must be multi-disciplinary. Tech abuse is:
- a cybersecurity issue
- a privacy issue
- a workplace safety issue
- a gender equality issue
- a wellbeing issue
No single team can manage it alone.
Conclusion: Technology Should Connect Us, Not Control Us
Emma’s story shows how technology, when weaponised, becomes an invisible net that tightens over every part of a person’s life — including work.
But it also shows that workplaces can be powerful spaces of intervention, stability and safety.
Tech-facilitated coercive control is:
- real
- gendered
- widespread
- increasing
- deeply connected to work
- preventable
Workplaces have a responsibility — and an opportunity — to ensure their systems, culture and responses make employees safer, not more vulnerable.
By understanding the patterns, strengthening digital safety, and responding with compassion and clarity, employers can ensure there is truly #noexcuse for online abuse.
