Regardless of compliance to coercion by an alleged perpetrator, child maltreatment is abuse in any form. However, the extent to which coercion is described as an obligation (mandatory compliance) or permission (optional compliance) is legally relevant. The present investigation examined how attorneys question children about coercion and how children describe coercion in courtroom investigations of alleged child sexual abuse, and whether such language influences jurors' perceptions of children's testimony. Study 1 assessed 64 transcripts of children's testimonies and revealed that both attorneys and children use coercive language. Problematically, terms of permission were used when describing sexual abuse, potentially implying compliance was optional. Study 2 presented 160 adults with transcript excerpts, varied by coercive language (obligation or permission) and maltreatment type (sexual abuse or punishment). Coercive language influenced perceptions of coercion and whether the adult was to blame. Maltreatment type influenced perceptions of severity, credibility, and verdict. Overall, coercive language and maltreatment type influence perceptions of how the event unfolded.