DISRESPECT LOWERS YOUR PRICE

Covenant, Sham, and the Difference Between Love and Supply

Disrespect is not only an emotional wound. In the context of domestic abuse, coercive control and relational exploitation, repeated disrespect can become a legal, psychological and safeguarding signal.

The law now recognises that abuse is not limited to physical violence. Under the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, abusive behaviour includes controlling or coercive behaviour, economic abuse, psychological abuse, emotional abuse, threatening behaviour, physical abuse and sexual abuse. Economic abuse includes behaviour that substantially affects a person’s ability to acquire, use or maintain money, property, goods or services. (GOV.UK)

This matters because many survivors remain trapped not because they do not understand pain, but because they misunderstand covenant.

Marriage vows speak of endurance: for better, for worse; in sickness and in health. But those vows assume mutuality. They assume that both parties understand the sacred nature of commitment. They assume accountability, repair, compassion and good faith.

A covenant is not a licence for domination.

A covenant is not a prison.

A covenant is not a legal or spiritual excuse for one person to consume the life, labour, autonomy and dignity of another.

There is a difference between conflict in marriage and coercive control inside a relationship.

Healthy conflict seeks repair.
Coercive conflict seeks power.

Healthy disagreement allows both people to remain whole.
Coercive disagreement slowly reduces one person’s autonomy.

The statutory guidance on controlling or coercive behaviour recognises that coercive control can create “invisible chains” and reduce a victim’s ability to act. It can include emotional, psychological, economic and technology-facilitated abuse, even where there is no physical violence. (GOV.UK)

That is why the phrase “disrespect lowers your price” is not about vanity. It is about access.

When someone crosses a clear boundary and you remain without consequence, they learn what it costs to mistreat you. If nothing changes, the cost is nothing.

In business, if a client breaches a contract and you continue delivering the work for free, they do not necessarily respect your loyalty. They may simply learn that your labour can be taken without payment.

Relationships can operate the same way.

A person who repeatedly disrespects you, apologises without transformation, controls without accountability, and then expects continued access is not demonstrating love. They are testing the limits of extraction.

This is where the language of “narcissistic dynamic” becomes important. Not as a casual diagnosis, but as a description of a relational pattern: love-bombing, devaluation, blame-shifting, apology without change, image management, entitlement, and emotional extraction.

In such a dynamic, the survivor often believes they are honouring the marriage. But in reality, they may be preserving a performance.

One person entered with covenant.
The other entered with utility.

One person entered to build.
The other entered to use.

One person brought vows.
The other brought image management.

This is the sham: not necessarily the legal status of the marriage, but the relational deception beneath it.

The survivor believes they are a spouse.
The perpetrator treats them as supply.

The law’s recognition of coercive control is vital because it moves the conversation away from isolated incidents and toward patterns. Section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 created the offence of controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship where repeated or continuous behaviour has a serious effect on the victim and the perpetrator knows or ought to know that it will have that effect. (GOV.UK)

That legal framing matters because survivors are often asked the wrong question.

They are asked:
“Why did you stay?”

The better question is:
“What system of control made leaving so difficult?”

They are asked:
“Why did you forgive?”

The better question is:
“How was apology used to reset the cycle?”

They are asked:
“Why did you not see it sooner?”

The better question is:
“How did love, faith, vows, finances, children, housing, shame and fear become mechanisms of captivity?”

The family justice system also has a duty to recognise vulnerability and participation barriers. Family Procedure Rules Part 3A and Practice Direction 3AA require courts to consider the participation of vulnerable parties and witnesses, including where domestic abuse is present. PD3AA states that where a party or witness is, or is at risk of being, a victim of domestic abuse, vulnerability is automatically assumed for Part 3A purposes. (Ministry of Justice)

This is why domestic abuse cannot be reduced to “relationship conflict”.

When coercive control is present, the victim’s ability to participate, instruct, evidence, decide and protect themselves may already be impaired.

Autonomy is not abstract.
It is the foundation of dignity.

When autonomy disintegrates, the survivor is no longer choosing freely. They are surviving under pressure.

This is also why public bodies must understand domestic abuse as a safeguarding and equality issue. The Public Sector Equality Duty under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 requires public authorities to have due regard to eliminating discrimination, advancing equality of opportunity and fostering good relations when carrying out their functions. (GOV.UK)

For survivors, this means institutions cannot treat domestic abuse as background noise. Banks, courts, housing bodies, police, regulators and public authorities must understand that coercive control affects decision-making, evidence continuity, financial stability, housing security, health, participation and safety.

A survivor who stays after disrespect is not “weak”.

Often, they are operating inside a system of spiritual confusion, emotional conditioning, financial dependency, reputational fear and institutional disbelief.

But the truth remains:

Your presence is a privilege.
Your peace is not negotiable.
Your dignity is not a bargaining chip.
Your marriage vows were never meant to become a weapon against your survival.

Even scripture recognises the principle of withdrawal from places that reject peace. When Jesus told the disciples to shake the dust off their feet where they were not received, He did not instruct them to beg for respect or remain where peace was refused.

That is discernment.

Leaving a coercive dynamic is not the failure of covenant. Sometimes it is the first act of truth after years of deception.

Because you cannot build a sacred covenant with someone committed to extraction.

You cannot repair with someone who only resets.

You cannot love someone into accountability when they benefit from your silence.

And you cannot keep calling it marriage when your autonomy, dignity and health are being dismantled.

Disrespect lowers your price only when access remains unlimited.

The moment access is withdrawn, the price changes.

The moment dignity is no longer negotiated, the price changes.

The moment the survivor stops confusing covenant with captivity, the price changes.

That is not bitterness.
That is lawful, spiritual and psychological clarity.

If they cannot afford respect, they do not get access.

© 2026 Samantha Avril-Andreassen. All rights reserved.