Key Takeaways
- Bill C‑16 (the Protecting Victims Act) would create a new Criminal Code offence for coercive control, but the definition is limited to current or former intimate‑partner relationships.
- Statistics Canada reported a 49 % rise in family‑violence rates against seniors since 2018, with 7,622 police‑reported senior victims in 2024 (98 per 100,000 aged 65+).
- Over half of senior victims of family violence are women, and many experience abuse not from spouses but from adult children, other relatives, or informal caregivers.
- Experts testified that excluding caregiver relationships from the coercive‑control offence leaves a significant protection gap for older adults who suffer similar patterns of domination, isolation, and intimidation.
- Warning signs of elder abuse are often subtle—declines in personal hygiene, missed medical aids, withdrawal from social activities, and shifts in personality—and are harder to detect because seniors’ social circles tend to be tighter.
- Power imbalances inherent in caregiving can be exploited in ways functionally identical to intimate‑partner coercive control, underscoring the need for broader legal coverage.
Background on Bill C‑16 and the Coercive‑Control Offence
Bill C‑16, formally known as the Protecting Victims Act, is progressing through Parliament with the aim of addressing intimate‑partner violence by creating a new Criminal Code offence for coercive control. The legislation defines coercive control as a pattern of behaviour intended to dominate, isolate, or intimidate a partner, and it explicitly applies to current or former romantic partners. Proponents argue that naming this behaviour as a distinct crime will improve police responses and provide victims with clearer pathways to protection. However, the bill’s narrow focus has sparked concern among advocates who work with older adults, warning that the same abusive dynamics frequently occur outside of intimate‑partner relationships, particularly within families and caregiving contexts.
Rising Rates of Elder Abuse in Canada
Statistics Canada data released in October 2025 reveal a troubling upward trend: the rate of family violence against seniors has climbed 49 % since 2018. In 2024, police recorded 7,622 senior victims of family violence, translating to 98 victims per 100,000 Canadians aged 65 and older. While the overall number remains modest compared with younger age groups, the percentage increase signals a growing problem that warrants heightened attention. Moreover, the data show that more than one‑third (34 %) of these senior victims were harmed by a family member, and 57 % were women, highlighting gendered patterns in elder abuse that mirror those seen in intimate‑partner violence.
Limitations of the Intimate‑Partner‑Only Definition
During testimony before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights on April 20, legal researcher Rizwan Khan of the National Institute on Aging cautioned that limiting the coercive‑control offence to intimate partners fails to capture the full spectrum of abuse experienced by older women. Khan explained that many older women are not subjected to control by a spouse or partner; instead, they may be dominated by sons, other relatives, or informal caregivers. Because the proposed offence would not apply when the perpetrator is a son rather than a husband, a substantial portion of coercive‑control behaviour targeting seniors would remain outside the reach of the new law, leaving a legal gap that could undermine protection efforts.
Insights from Front‑Line Advocates
Joanne Blinco, executive director of the Alberta Elder Abuse Awareness Council, echoed these concerns, describing how elder abuse often masquerades as caregiving. She noted that, in her organization’s statistics, men aged 45 to 49—frequently adult sons—are the most common perpetrators of harm. These individuals often present themselves as helpers, offering support under the guise of providing care, while actually exerting control over the older adult’s finances, medication, or daily routines. Blinco emphasized that the subtlety of such abuse makes it difficult for outsiders to recognize, especially when the alleged caregiver is perceived as acting in the senior’s best interest.
Recognizing the Subtle Signs of Elder Abuse
Blinco outlined several warning signs that may indicate coercive control or other forms of elder abuse. These include noticeable declines in personal health—such as missing hearing aids or unreplaced glasses—disheveled appearance, reduced participation in community or religious activities, and shifts in personality where an once‑outgoing individual becomes withdrawn or fearful. Because these indicators can be mistaken for normal aging or health deterioration, vigilance from family members, friends, and professionals is essential. Early detection hinges on observing changes in routine and wellbeing rather than waiting for overt physical injury.
The Role of Social Isolation in Concealing Abuse
Social isolation further complicates the identification of elder abuse. Blinco pointed out that older adults often have tighter circles of contact than children; they may no longer attend school, work, or regular community programs, making it easier for abuse to go unnoticed. When seniors stop attending church, senior centers, or social gatherings, there are fewer external observers who could detect changes in behavior or living conditions. This isolation not only facilitates the exertion of control but also reduces the likelihood that victims will seek help or that others will intervene.
Gender Dynamics and the Lifespan Shift of Coercive Control
Khan highlighted that coercive control disproportionately targets women, a pattern that begins in younger intimate‑partner relationships and evolves as individuals age. As older adults become more dependent on others for daily living, the source of control often shifts from spouses to adult children or other loved ones who provide caregiving support. This transition reflects changing dependency needs and trust relationships, yet the underlying behaviour—patterns of domination, isolation, and intimidation—remains consistent. Consequently, legal frameworks that only address intimate‑partner abuse miss a critical phase of risk for many older women.
Caregiving Relationships as Potential Sites of Exploitation
While acknowledging that most caregivers provide compassionate and appropriate support, Khan warned that caregiving inherently creates a power imbalance: one person relies on another for essential needs such as medication, meals, or mobility. When that dependence is exploited, the resulting conduct can be functionally indistinguishable from coercive control by an intimate partner. He argued that leaving caregivers outside the scope of the new offence creates an additional and significant gap in protection, allowing abusive dynamics to persist unchecked under the veneer of legitimate care.
Implications and the Need for Broader Legal Coverage
The testimony presented to the committee underscores a pressing need to expand the definition of coercive control in Bill C‑16 beyond intimate‑partner relationships to encompass familial and caregiving contexts. Doing so would align Canadian law with the lived reality of many older adults who suffer patterns of domination, isolation, and intimidation from adult children, relatives, or paid helpers. By recognizing these relationships as potential sites of coercive control, legislators could equip police and prosecutors with a clearer tool to intervene, improve data collection on elder‑specific abuse, and ultimately enhance the safety and dignity of Canada’s aging population. Without such amendments, a substantial segment of senior victims may remain unprotected despite the bill’s intentions to combat coercive control broadly.