Difference Between Coercion and Undue Influence

Undue influence manipulates trust, exploits vulnerability, and controls decision-making. It uses subtle coercion and emotional manipulation to gain an unfair advantage. On the other hand, coercion forces actions against ones will through threats or force, eliminating free choice and independence. It instills fear or harm, leaving no alternative but compliance.

In this article, we will be exploring the difference between coercion and undue influence in detail.

Table of Contents

• Difference Between Coercion and Undue Influence
• What is Coercion?
• What is Undue Influence?

Difference Between Coercion and Undue Influence

Here is a tabular format that highlights the difference between coercion and undue influence:

What is Coercion?

Coercion refers to the act of compelling someone to do something against their will through the use of force, threats, intimidation, or other forms of pressure. It involves depriving an individual of their free choice and freedom to act independently. Coercion often involves explicit actions that create fear or harm, leaving the person with little to no alternative but to comply with the demands of the coercer.

In legal terms, coercion is considered an unlawful practice that undermines the voluntary nature of an agreement or action. It is typically seen as an offence or a violation of someone’s rights. Coercion can invalidate contracts or render them voidable, as it lacks the element of genuine consent.

Check out law courses

Features of Coercion

Here are some key features or characteristics of coercion:

• Use of Force or Threats: Coercion involves the use of force, threats, or intimidation to compel someone to act against their will. This can include physical force, verbal threats, blackmail, or other forms of aggression.
• Deprivation of Free Choice: Coercion aims to deprive the individual of their free choice and freedom to act independently. It seeks to eliminate or override their ability to make decisions based on their own desires, preferences, or values.
• Imposition of Fear or Harm: Coercion often relies on instilling fear or creating a sense of harm or negative consequences if the individual does not comply with the coercer’s demands. This fear or perception of harm is used as a means to control and manipulate the person’s actions.
• Lack of Voluntary Consent: Coercion negates the element of voluntary consent. The individual’s agreement or compliance is not given willingly but is forced or coerced under duress, leaving them with limited or no alternative options.
• Power Imbalance: Coercion is frequently associated with a power imbalance between the coercer and the coerced. The coercer may possess physical, emotional, social, or institutional power that they exploit to exert control over the other person.
• Violation of Autonomy and Rights: Coercion infringes upon an individual’s autonomy and violates their rights. It disregards their personal autonomy, self-determination, and the ability to make choices that align with their own interests and values.
• Unlawful and Ethically Wrong: Coercion is generally considered unlawful and ethically wrong. It is recognized as a violation of personal freedom, human rights, and principles of fairness and justice.
• Negative Emotional Impact: Coercion can have significant negative emotional and psychological impacts on the coerced individual. It can lead to anxiety, feelings of fear, helplessness, and loss of control.
• Invalidation of Consent: Coercion can invalidate agreements, contracts, or actions because the coerced person’s consent was obtained under duress and not based on their genuine willingness to participate.
• Potential Legal Consequences: Coercion can have legal consequences. In many jurisdictions, coercive acts may be considered as criminal offences, such as assault, blackmail, or extortion, and can result in penalties or punishment.

What is Undue Influence?

Undue influence refers to the exertion of unfair or excessive persuasion that manipulates or exploits someone’s trust, confidence, dependency, or vulnerability. It occurs when one party takes advantage of a position of power or influence to influence the decision-making of another party.

Unlike coercion, undue influence does not involve physical force or explicit threats. Instead, it relies on psychological manipulation, subtle coercion, or the exploitation of a relationship. Undue influence may occur in situations where there is a significant power imbalance, such as between a caregiver and an elderly person, or between an employer and an employee.

In legal contexts, undue influence is seen as a form of unfairness and a violation of the principles of equity and fairness. If proven, a court may deem a transaction, contract, or testamentary disposition as voidable due to the undue influence exerted upon the vulnerable party.

Explore free psychology courses

Features of Undue Influence

Here are some key features or characteristics of undue influence:

• Manipulation of Trust or Confidence: Undue influence involves the manipulation of trust, confidence, or emotional ties that exist between the influencer and the influenced party. The influencer takes advantage of the relationship to exert control over the decision-making process.
• Exploitation of Vulnerability: Undue influence often occurs in situations where one party has a significant power or knowledge advantage over the other, leading to a vulnerable position for the influenced party. The influencer capitalizes on this vulnerability to shape the decisions in their favor.
• Subtle Coercion or Persuasion: Undue influence relies on subtle coercion or persuasion techniques rather than explicit force or threats. It may involve tactics such as emotional manipulation, flattery, isolation, or persistent persuasion to sway the influenced party’s judgment.
• Power Imbalance: Similar to coercion, undue influence typically occurs in relationships characterized by a power imbalance. This could be between an employer and an employee, a caregiver and an elderly person, or someone in a position of authority over another.
• Lack of Independent Judgment: Undue influence compromises the influenced party’s ability to exercise independent judgment and make decisions based on their own best interests. Their choices are unduly influenced or controlled by the manipulative tactics of the influencer.
• Unfair Advantage: Undue influence is seen as unfair and inequitable because it gives the influencer an unfair advantage over the influenced party. It undermines the principle of free and informed consent in decision-making.
• Exploitative Outcome: The ultimate aim of undue influence is often to achieve an outcome that primarily benefits the influencer, potentially at the expense of the influenced party’s well-being or interests.
• Presumption of Invalidity: In legal contexts, undue influence creates a presumption of invalidity for certain transactions or agreements. If proven, a court may declare the transaction or agreement as voidable, providing a remedy for the influenced party.
• Focus on Influence, not Force: Unlike coercion, undue influence does not rely on physical force or explicit threats. It centres on the influencer’s ability to manipulate and control the decision-making process without resorting to direct coercion.
• Ethical and Legal Concerns: Undue influence raises ethical concerns due to its exploitative nature. It may also have legal implications, especially when it involves vulnerable individuals or situations where a fiduciary duty is breached.

Related Reads: