One thing we always say about coercive control is that fear is in the eye of the beholder. For example, I could have my partner show up at my work every single day at lunch with flowers, and that's a lovely act to me. If someone else's partner is coercively controlling and does exactly the same thing, what they're actually doing is checking up on them, making sure they're not having lunch with anyone they're not supposed to and they're eating what they're supposed to be eating, and checking what exactly it is they're doing.
When we say that something is measured by an objective standard, we're giving all the power to the perpetrator or the system to define what those actions are. What we need to have is a survivor impact framework that looks at behaviours and the impact of those behaviours on the individual, because what we're seeing, often, is only the tip of the iceberg of a pattern of behaviour being used to control somebody.
That's why I also recommend that the evidentiary standards include the ability to have expert testimony from witnesses regarding the impact on the victim, as well as other corollary information that can track things like that, like digital trails and that sort of thing.