Background. The current narrative of IPV places heavy emphasis on physical violence. Some scholars have criticized this claiming that most abuse is not violent, rather it is characterized by coercive control tactics, such as isolation and intimidation.

Aim. The purpose of this study is to examine how domestic abuse is defined in the Swedish courts regarding Gross Violation of a Woman’s Integrity. Do the courts recognize coercive control, or is the focus mainly on violence?

Results. By conducting a content analysis on verdicts from the two highest courts in Sweden, this study concludes that although less serious indications of abuse are recognized to some extent, the courts tend to focus on physical violence and bodily injury. This paper questions the usefulness of this definition by criticizing it from a feminist perspective. In the long-term, this does nothing for victims of IPV. A shift in narrative is needed to identify unseen victims of abuse.