Most of the things you mention here are not criminal actions though and in certain contexts could be evidence of coercive control and in other contexts could be completely fine.

Not the stuff about abuse and threats over text, email, audio recordings etc, or the stuff about tracking on an app — that is definitely clear cut abuse to me and definitely could be defined as harassment or stalking and prosecuted under a possible coercive control law or indeed modifications to existing laws on stalking.

But the stuff about earnings and “who takes kids to school more often” is not clear cut evidence of abuse and could very well be just a relationship with a division of labour. You can’t merely take proof that one parent earns the money and one parent focuses on the home and kids as “coercive control” and I’m sure that’s not what you’re arguing, so how do we write legislation that clearly defines what is coercive control vs what isn’t? That’s my point, imo it seems extremely difficult.

For example in my family, my father was the breadwinner and my mother stayed home and took care of the kids, but she also controlled all of Dad’s bank accounts, controlled the spending and ended up emotionally and physically abusing him as well as controlling and abusing her kids. That’s not something that could be easily prosecuted though as there is almost no way to find “evidence” that she did anything illegal.

And what about cases like in the OP where it’s not documented by texts and is instead verbal and not recorded? It’s still coercive control but how can you get enough evidence to prosecute in this instance?

Please don’t put words in my mouth and imply that me bringing up difficulties with the LEGAL definition of coercive control being fuzzy and difficult to define means “I don’t think abuse victims matter I support abusers” — that is not what I’m saying.