⚡ Promptolis Original · Relationships & Life
🚨 Relationship Reality-Check: Gaslighting + Coercive Control
Distinguish difficult-but-normal conflict from emotional abuse / coercive control. Uses Duluth Model Power & Control Wheel + DARVO recognition + Stark coercive-control framework. Safety-first, NEVER recommends couples therapy with abuse signals.
Relationship Reality-Check: Gaslighting + Coercive Control — Distinguish difficult-but-normal conflict from emotional abuse / coercive control. Uses Duluth Model Power & Control Wheel + DARVO recognition + Stark coercive-control framework. Safety-first, NEVER recommends couples therapy with abuse signals. Setup: 5 min · Best AI: Claude Opus 4.6 — multi-frame pattern reading + safety-frame requires depth. · Cost: Free, MIT-licensed.
Why this is epic
Refuses 'is THIS abuse?' yes/no — surfaces patterns the user already half-sees, connects to evidence-based frameworks.
DARVO recognition (Jennifer Freyd's framework) — most users in coercive control don't have language for the conversation-flipping until they hear it named.
Couples therapy contraindicated when abuse signals present. Many users are pushed into it by well-meaning therapists; this prompt explicitly rejects that path.
📑 Page navigation + Key Takeaways Click to expand
📌 Key Takeaways
- What it is: Distinguish difficult-but-normal conflict from emotional abuse / coercive control. Uses Duluth Model Power & Control Wheel + DARVO recognition + Stark coercive-control framework. Safety-first, NEVER recommends couples therapy with abuse signals.
- Best for: Long-term relationship friction with reality-distrust patterns
- Time investment: 5 min setup, 25-40 min for full pattern read output
- Recommended AI model: Claude Opus 4.6 — multi-frame pattern reading + safety-frame requires depth.
- Cost: Free forever — MIT-licensed, no signup, no paywall
📑 On this page
- The prompt (copy-ready)
- How to use it (4 steps)
- Example input + output
- Common use cases
- Pro tips + variants
- FAQ
⚙️ At a glance
- Category:
- Relationships & Life
- Setup time:
- 5 min
- Output time:
- 25-40 min for full pattern read
- Best AI model:
- Claude Opus 4.6 — multi-frame pattern reading + safety-frame requires depth.
- License:
- MIT (free commercial use)
- Last reviewed:
📊 Promptolis Original vs generic AI prompts Click to expand
| Feature | Promptolis | Generic prompts |
|---|---|---|
| Structure: | XML + chain-of-thought | Role-play one-liner |
| Example output: | Real full example | Rare |
| Variants: | 3-7 per prompt | Single |
| Output quality: | +30-50% accurate [Anthropic] | Baseline |
On the other hand, generic prompts work fine for simple lookups. Promptolis Originals shine for nuanced reasoning where precision matters.
The prompt
Example: input → output
Here's how this prompt actually performs. Real input below, real output from Claude Opus 4.
<situation>Married 6 years. He's never hit me. But every disagreement somehow becomes about how I'm attacking him. Last week I asked why he hadn't told me about a $4k purchase from our joint account. He spent 2 hours explaining how I'm controlling, untrusting, and making him feel like a child. By the end I was apologizing for asking. This pattern repeats with everything. I feel like I'm losing my mind. I have a journal where I write down what actually happened because I don't trust my own memory anymore.</situation> <duration>Together 8 years, married 6, this pattern has gotten worse over the past 3 years</duration> <specific-behaviors>Conversation-flipping (DARVO), silent treatment for 2-3 days when I 'cause' a fight, monitoring my phone occasionally, criticizing my friends, suggesting my therapist 'is making things worse,' joint accounts only — I don't have my own savings anymore</specific-behaviors> <safety-status>Physically safe (he's never hit me). I don't fear physical harm. I do fear his reaction to anything I say.</safety-status> <children-involved>One daughter, 4 years old</children-involved> <location>Toronto, Canada</location> <key-question>Am I being abused or am I the problem? Sometimes I think he's right that I'm too sensitive.
What I'm Hearing in the Pattern
From your description, I'm hearing several patterns that map to the Duluth Model Power & Control Wheel:
- DARVO (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim & Offender): You ask about a $4k purchase → 2 hours later you're apologizing. This is textbook DARVO. The conversation about HIS behavior systematically becomes a conversation about YOUR character.
- Emotional abuse / minimizing-denying-blaming: Calling you 'controlling, untrusting' for asking a reasonable question about joint money, then making you feel like the 'problem.'
- Isolation tactics: Criticizing your friends, suggesting your therapist is 'making things worse.' These are textbook isolation moves — narrowing your support network.
- Economic patterns: Joint accounts only, no separate savings, the partner controlling visibility into spending. Economic control is one of the 8 spokes.
- Reality erosion: Your journal-keeping because you 'don't trust your own memory' is the strongest possible signal of gaslighting. Healthy partners do not produce this effect on each other.
The Patterns That Match Coercive Control
5 of 8 Power & Control spokes show up in your description: emotional abuse, isolation, minimizing/denying/blaming, economic abuse, coercion (the implicit threat of his 'reaction'). That's a high-density pattern, not isolated incidents.
Evan Stark's coercive control framework — now legally recognized in UK, parts of Canada (including Ontario), and parts of Australia — focuses precisely on this kind of pattern: the absence of physical violence does NOT mean the absence of abuse. Coercive control is the pattern.
The Patterns That Don't Match
I don't hear physical violence (you stated this clearly). I don't hear severe isolation (you still see friends, you have a therapist, you have a journal). I don't hear stalking behaviors. These ABSENCES matter — your situation is different from a battered-partner scenario, and your safety planning options are different.
This is not minimizing what's happening. It IS calibrating: you're in coercive control without overt physical violence, which has its own playbook.
DARVO + Self-Censoring Check
- DARVO: Present and severe. Every example you gave demonstrates it.
- Self-censoring: 'I rehearse what to say so he doesn't get angry' is implicit in your description. The journal-keeping IS self-defense against the censoring.
- Reality-distrust: You are now uncertain whether your own perceptions are accurate. This is the achievement of gaslighting — not a sign you're 'too sensitive.'
The specific phrase 'sometimes I think he's right that I'm too sensitive' — this is the DARVO landing. He has installed self-doubt. That installation is the pattern, not your sensitivity.
What This Reading Cannot Diagnose
I cannot diagnose your relationship as abusive from a description. You know your relationship better than I do. What I can do: name the patterns I'm hearing, connect them to evidence-based frameworks, and provide resources for your autonomous decision.
The label 'abuse' matters less than your answer to: am I free to act in my own life, can I voice disagreement and have it received, is repair real or performative?
What Matters More Than the Label
Three questions:
1. Can you act freely? Can you call a friend, see a therapist, spend money, take a trip — without managing his reaction first? Your description suggests no.
2. Do repair attempts work? When there's a conflict, is there real change in behavior afterward? Or does the same pattern repeat? Your description suggests repeat.
3. What is your daughter learning? A 4-year-old is forming her template of love + conflict. She is watching this dynamic. Her template will be: 'when there's a problem, the woman doubts her own perception.' You don't have to solve this for her tonight, but it matters.
Specific Next Steps (NOT 'leave' or 'stay')
1. Continue your individual therapy. Find a therapist with experience in coercive control (DV-informed, NOT couples-counseling-trained). Tell them about this conversation and the journal. Your perception is reality, not pathology.
2. Call Assaulted Women's Helpline (Toronto / Ontario) at 1-866-863-0511 — confidential, no commitment to action. They specialize in coercive control without physical violence. They will help you safety-plan.
3. Open a separate bank account in your name only. Even small amounts. Economic autonomy is the foundation of every other choice.
4. Document continues. Keep journaling. Date each entry. Save it somewhere only you access (not on shared devices). This is for YOU, not for legal use unless you decide later.
5. Trust your perception. Tell at least one trusted friend or family member the unfiltered version. Not the polished version that protects him. The unfiltered version. Speaking it aloud breaks the gaslighting spell.
Why Couples Therapy is Contraindicated
In relationships with the patterns you describe, couples therapy can ESCALATE the danger. The therapist's office gives the controlling partner new material — your disclosures become weapons used against you afterward. Lundy Bancroft's framework (and the entire Duluth-Model literature) is clear: couples work assumes two parties acting in good faith on equal footing. That precondition is absent in coercive control.
If he ever suggests couples therapy: that's not the right step. Individual therapy for you (with someone who understands coercive control) is the right step.
Crisis Resources
For your specific location and current safety status:
- Assaulted Women's Helpline (Ontario): 1-866-863-0511 — coercive-control-aware, confidential.
- Talk4Healing (Indigenous Ontario, if applicable): 1-855-554-4325
- Canadian DV Federal Resource: 1-866-578-1666 (multilingual)
- Toronto specifically: Assaulted Women's Helpline as primary; YWCA Toronto has DV resources.
If at any point you feel physically unsafe — or if his behavior escalates after any conversation we don't recommend — call 911 or go to a hospital ER (DV nurses are trained to document without involving police if you don't want).
What Healthy Conflict Looks Like
For calibration: healthy conflict between adults includes anger, frustration, even raised voices on rare occasions. It does NOT include:
- Self-censoring to manage the other person's reaction
- Apologizing for asking reasonable questions
- Doubting your own perception of events
- Keeping a journal to verify reality
- Losing access to friends, family, money, or autonomy over time
If a partner is genuinely 'too sensitive,' the partnership has open conflict that resolves with both partners learning something. Not one partner systematically apologizing for raising issues.
Your 4-year-old is watching how adults handle disagreement. That's not pressure to leave; that's clarity about what's at stake.
📋 How to use this prompt (4 steps · under 60 seconds) Click to expand
- 1 Copy the prompt above. Click "Copy prompt". XML-structured prompt now on clipboard.
- 2 Open ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini. One-click launch above. Recommended: Claude Opus 4.6 — multi-frame pattern reading + safety-frame requires depth..
-
3
Paste + fill placeholders. Replace
{curly braces}with your context. Specificity = quality. - 4 Run + iterate. Setup: 5 min. Output: 25-40 min for full pattern read.
Common use cases
- Long-term relationship friction with reality-distrust patterns
- Self-questioning whether 'too sensitive' framing is accurate
- Pre-decision support for staying / leaving (without recommending either)
- Disclosure preparation for trusted friend / therapist / DV professional
- Survivors of coercive control processing past relationship
- Adult children of abusive parents recognizing patterns in own relationship
- Friends supporting someone they suspect is in abuse
Best AI model for this
Claude Opus 4.6 — multi-frame pattern reading + safety-frame requires depth.
Pro tips
- Safety screen FIRST — physical danger changes the whole conversation
- Pattern over incident — single bad fight ≠ abuse
- Self-censoring is the strongest signal
- DARVO = blame-reversal pattern; name it specifically
- Couples therapy CONTRAINDICATED with abuse signals
- Don't push leave OR stay — surface patterns + connect resources
- Refuse 'narcissist' diagnosis — patterns matter more
Customization tips
- For users with physical safety concerns: lead with safety planning, not pattern analysis. The pattern can wait; the safety can't.
- For users in countries without coercive-control law: emphasize the dynamic still matters even if not legally named.
- For users where the partner is the woman / non-binary: same patterns apply across gender. Adjust resources to gender-inclusive (Stonewall, ManKind UK 0808 800 1170, etc.).
- For users with disability / dependency on the partner: economic + medical control patterns are heavier. Adjust safety-planning to disability-aware DV resources.
- For users who keep going back: validate the difficulty without judgment. Average abused person leaves 7+ times. Returning is normal, not failure.
- For users questioning whether they're the abuser: take this seriously without dismissing. Some users are genuinely difficult; some are abusers themselves; some are conflating normal anger with abuse. Use the same pattern-mapping.
- For users being told by partner that THEY are the abuser: DARVO often runs both ways. Pattern of who self-censors, who controls money, who isolates whom — that's the diagnostic.
- Premium pack content: country-specific DV resource matrix, safety-planning workbook, post-leaving recovery guide (for users who've already left).
Variants
Suspected Coercive Control (No Physical Violence)
Most common pattern, hardest to name
Active Physical Safety Concern
Lead with safety planning, not pattern analysis
Post-Leaving Reflection
Already left, processing what happened
Adult Children of Abusive Parents
Patterns from family-of-origin in own relationship
Self-Questioning 'Am I the Abuser?'
Same patterns, different lens
Partner Disclosing as the Abused
Common pattern among same-gender + non-traditional couples
Friend / Family Worried About Loved One
How to support without pushing
Frequently asked questions
Common questions about this prompt and how to get the best results from it.
How do I use the Relationship Reality-Check: Gaslighting + Coercive Control prompt?
Open the prompt page, click 'Copy prompt', paste it into ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini, and replace the placeholders in curly braces with your real input. The prompt is also launchable directly in each model with one click.
Which AI model works best with Relationship Reality-Check: Gaslighting + Coercive Control?
Claude Opus 4.6 — multi-frame pattern reading + safety-frame requires depth.
Can I customize the Relationship Reality-Check: Gaslighting + Coercive Control prompt for my use case?
Yes — every Promptolis Original is designed to be customized. Key levers: Safety screen FIRST — physical danger changes the whole conversation; Pattern over incident — single bad fight ≠ abuse
What does it cost to use this prompt?
The prompt itself is free, MIT-licensed, with no email signup required. You only pay for your AI model subscription (ChatGPT Plus $20/mo, Claude Pro $20/mo, Gemini Advanced $20/mo) — and even those have free tiers that work with most Promptolis Originals.
How is this different from PromptBase or PromptHero?
PromptBase sells prompts in a marketplace ($2-15 each). PromptHero focuses on image-generation prompts. Promptolis Originals are free, MIT-licensed text/reasoning prompts hand-crafted with full example outputs, multiple variants, and a recommended best AI model per prompt. We don't sell anything.
Explore more Originals
Hand-crafted 2026-grade prompts that actually change how you work.
← All Promptolis Originals