Chris Dahlitz has spent more than a decade advocating for changes to how coercive control is dealt with.
The campaigning started in 2006 after he witnessed a person psychologically harming another person.
He said the consequences of coercive control could have far-reaching impacts, leading to estrangement of people, while sometimes leading to violent altercations.
"It's very upsetting for everybody involved," he said.
Mr Dahlitz did not want to reveal too much detail about his experience out of concern for legal action by other parties.
He said he had once tried to get a person exhibiting coercive control a mental health assessment through psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health triages and even a church, but had no luck because the person had not agreed.
Under current regulations and the state's Mental Health Act, compulsory assessments can only be ordered if police or the courts are involved, or if someone threatens themselves or others.
Not the answer
Mr Dahlitz, who lives in Narrandera in southern New South Wales, does not think the proposed coercive control bill introduced to state parliament last week is the solution.
The bill's features include a proposed seven-year jail term for perpetrators.
After at least seven rounds of consultation, the bill has passed the lower house of the NSW parliament with support across the Chamber.
The state government says if the bill were to pass through parliament, it could be the first state in the country to make coercive control a stand-alone offence.
NSW Attorney-General Mark Speakman said criminalising coercive control was a delicate process.
"We have to proceed very cautiously to make sure this doesn't unintentionally harm the very people in our community we're seeking to help," he said.
Mr Speakman said amendments had been added to the bill with unanimous support in the House to address feedback from the domestic and family violence sector.
"To put beyond doubt that the implementation taskforce will include NSW Police Force, the chair of the Domestic and Family Violence and Sexual Assault Council and a member from the sector with substantial expertise and experience in domestic and family violence service delivery."
The Coercive Control Bill, which relies on amending the Crimes Act, consists of five elements to be proved beyond reasonable doubt.
They include an adult displaying abusive behaviour repeatedly or continuously, a reasonable person considering the activity would cause a fear of violence against them, or if the behaviour is directed at a current or former partner.
Early support
Mr Dahlitz said the proposed Coercive Control Bill allowed matters to deteriorate to when authorities were involved.
He has developed a proposal based on his own experiences which involves amending the NSW Mental Health Act and sent it to ministers across Australia for their consideration.
He said coercive control was a sub-set of psychological harm, which should be recognised in the act.
It echoed what New South Wales Deputy State Coroner Paul McMahon said in 2014 when he handed down findings into the Antony Waterlow killings, where a man murdered his father and sister.
Mr Dahlitz also said mental health regulations and guidelines should provide a pathway for compulsory mental health assessment of an alleged perpetrator by a professional after a friend, GP or family member requested it.
"What we need is a mechanism for early intervention under the Mental Health Act ... and not wait until things get to such a stage that you've got to use the crimes act and potentially lock someone up for seven years," he said.
He said the hope would be that in some cases a mental illness could be diagnosed, then treated, potentially having an impact on coercive behaviour.
Mr Dahlitz said he had made multiple submissions to mental health regulation and legislation reviews, but had "generally been disappointed with the government response".
Uncharted territory
Sydney University's co-director of health and policy at the Brain and Mind Centre, Ian Hickie, said Mr Dahlitz's proposal would not work.
"Trying to persuade people to have mental health assessments, who don't want to, isn't going to happen," Professor Hickie said.
"My view is to make better use of the mechanisms through the court once the new standard for these behaviours is established."
He said while not all cases of coercive control involve mental illness, the rights of the individual and the rights of others to be safe and protected by the law had to be balanced.
He also said if the legal system was going to order mental health assessments for coercive control cases, there needed to be an investment in services available to cater for that.
The NSW government said once the bill was passed, it will be at least a further 14 months, and up to 19 months until the law began to allow time for education, training, community awareness and resources.
