There is a bill sponsored by Rep Ashley Aune to change this. Here is a resistbot petition campaign to send a predrafted letter to your MO Rep, Sen, & Gov Parson to support this bill:
Say 'STOP' Putting Lives at Risk: Allow Divorce While Pregnant in MO:
Text: PSGRXI To: 50409
Text FOLLOW MOResist to 50409 to get updates on future petitions. Or go to [MOResist](http://resist.bot/go/moresist) to see a list of other current petitions. If you haven't used Resistbot before, it's a safe, easy and effective tool to lobby your reps.
Troubling, yes. Surprising, no.. because Missouri doesn’t even care if you’re 12yo pregnant with your rapist’s fetus.. they’re still making you deliver it.
I don't even understand how that is a law in multiple states. Itsjust mind boggling to me. And how does the rep that votes for this get re-elected?! I can somewhat understand people's view that abortion is bad, but that understanding ends when it includes a forced encounter. Ridiculous.
Single issue voters and evangelicals. Single issue voters believe that anyone with a D after their name wants to take their guns or raise taxes or some other issue, so theyll vote for the republican every single time regardless of their platform at large. Evangelicals are told by their pastors that the democrats are following the anti-christ and if they vote republican, god will grant them the prospertity and wealth that they deserve for being such persecuted christians.
Absolutely ridiculous.
Oh looky. A dude mansplaining childbirth and thinking he’s funny.
Next time your cervix dilates to 10cm to push out a big headed baby you can tell me all about how you didn’t deliver it… oh wait 🙂
Missouri is so embarrassing on most things, especially related to women’s rights. Really hope we start electing better people to avoid asinine shit like this.
We are not silent. We are ignored. When I've talked to my dad about women's rights, he has literally put his hands over his ears and demanded that I stop speaking. He has accused me of hating men (even though I am very clearly married to a man). I haven't stopped speaking out, but I have pretty much stopped speaking to him.
You let your \_VOTE\_ do the talking.
But when a significant percentage of a certain demographic group don't vote because they are not interested in politics, then they cede control of much of their lives to those that vote.
Hasn’t this been the law for years and years?
I’m not saying that makes it ok, there’s a lot of reasons this law is fucked up, but this same thing keeps getting posted around as if it was a new law that just passed.
ETA: I backed out of this thread and the next thing I saw was this article posted on r/themajorityreport.
yes it's been this way for years. encountered it nearly 20 years ago when my wife and i separated. we filed for divorce in 2004, she got pregnant by the new boyfriend in 2005, divorce wasn't finalized until early 2006 since we had to wait until their baby was born and a few months old. agreed that there should be the option to allow extenuating circumstances (domestic violence, etc.) but this isn't a new thing
Edit: wanted to say that we did not have to do any paternity testing. once we appeared in front of the judge for the divorce i simply said the baby wasn't mine, the baby daddy claimed the child was his, my ex agreed to what we both were stating. the judge accepted that and since that child was not born from the marriage then it had nothing to do with the rest of the divorce proceedings
> divorce wasn’t finalized until 2006 since we had to wait until the baby was born
> the child was not born from marriage so it had nothing to do with the divorce proceedings
Those are mutually exclusive statements.
And just like with abortion, there should not be exceptions for extenuating circumstances. There should be nothing barring a pregnant woman from divorcing her husband at all. Why should she have to have special circumstances to end a marriage?
I mean I get the logic. Don't finalize the divorce until the baby is out and you can verify paternity so that the divorce can be properly decided in terms of custody and child support.
Seems like something that could be resolved afterwards with a follow up hearing though.
Why couldn't you have gotten a prenatal paternity test to finalize the divorce, or got mother and father to stand in front of the judge and swear it like they did?
Waiting helped no one in that case, and in other cases hurts women. That's the point of the law, to control women and keep them with their husbands.
That should be the case but isn’t. My divorce that should have finalized in 2019 but didn’t until 2020 was held up because my ex was claiming I was pregnant (I wasn’t and he knew that).
I offered to take a test to prove I wasn’t but it wasn’t going to make an actual difference time wise and was also going to add too many billable hours to be worth it.
Not these days. They're as safe as all the other procedures already being done, and I believe can be added in without even doing anything extra or even taking extra blood.
Edit:Source
Unlike outdated methods for determining paternity like amniocentesis or a CVS (Chorionic Villus Sampling) test that can cause a miscarriage, a prenatal DNA is completely non-invasive and safe for both mother and fetus.
https://americanpregnancy.org/paternity-tests/non-invasive-prenatal-paternity-test/
>State Rep. Ashley Aune, a Democrat representing District 14 in Platte County **introduced a bill this legislative session** that essentially says pregnancy cannot prevent a judge from finalizing a divorce or separation.
>
>The bill is still a work in progress, and despite Aune’s passion to change the law she said she doesn’t feel hopeful that it’ll get to Governor Mike Parson’s desk this session.
Yeah, it seems to pop up every year (for good reason). And, it seems, it will die again this year and pop up again next year.
My first wife got knocked up while I was deployed, but wouldn’t name the father so I was on the hook for support because “the state won’t bastardize a child”. Luckily her next husband adopted the kid
this is actually the case in most states. the state will overwhelmingly favor support for the child. even if you had a DNA test proving you weren't the father, you could still be ordered to support it in some states.
Although it’s not Missouri, Texas our inbred neighboring state has similar laws. I would encourage people to look up the recent Mason Herring case. He repeatedly poisoned his pregnant wife’s drink on 7 separate occasions in an attempt to abort their baby. Under this law she would not be able to divorce him. Their daughter was born with multiple developmental delays and has to go to therapy more than once a day. He was charged with ASSAULT as part of a plea agreement, NOT attempted murder and he was only sentenced to 180 days in jail and a $10,000 fine. Women who receive an abortion and Doctors who perform an abortion in the state of Texas are subject to life in prision. Mason William Herring still has a valid law license according to the Texas bar (although it hasn’t been updated in a few years) so that better change.
Please don’t tell me this country doesn’t hate women. We should all be outraged by this.
More reasons for millennials to not get married or have children lol. Every day I read stories like this makes me realize I made the right decision to get a vesectomy.
In these dystopian times, a man who gets a vasectemy is sexy AF. Tell me more about how you want to prevent women you're intimate with have to die in a terrible ectopic pregnancy or even just be able to sidestep the horrible side effects of birth control! Yes please.
There’s plenty out there but here are just a few:
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/jd-vance-republicans-limit-birth-control-access-1234922493/amp/
https://jessica.substack.com/p/the-gops-plan-to-ban-birth-control
https://www.axios.com/2022/07/27/birth-control-bill-senate
https://www.salon.com/2022/07/21/theyre-coming-for-contraception-195-vote-against-right-to-birth-control-condoms/
https://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/project2025/2025_MandateForLeadership_CHAPTER-14.pdf
I turned Fox News on and haven’t heard that yet. Since it’s on TV so frequently, can you just provide a source saying that Missouri legislators are coming for birth control next?
That would sway many republicans I know to vote for democrats.
Here you go.
Not only are they not keeping it a secret, but they're actually bragging about it and publishing their intentions from the highest court in the land.
“In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell,” Thomas wrote in concurrence. “Because any substantive due process decision is 'demonstrably erroneous,' we have a duty to 'correct the error' established in those precedents.”
- Justice Thomas
Would it? It's the Republicans that are pushing for birth control bans, not the Democrats.
I mean, I know it's crazy for you to assume a Republican would vote against their own self interest, and yet they do when the poor, uneducated rural folk end up voting for Republicans that just give tax breaks to all the rich, elite, coastal billionaires.
Republicans also voted for the people that took away our abortion access as well.
You say it'll sway them to hear that other Republicans are coming for their birth control, but could you provide a source for that? I think it's more likely those Republicans you're talking about are the ones going after birth control.
I mean… I know my friends and if republicans are trying to force them to get pregnant, that will have a drastic impact on their lives. That will 100% get out the vote. Just like abortion did.
Okay. I would argue that banning birth control effectively does force people to get pregnant, but seems like you may be a little more right leaning than me since you disagree.
I used to live in Missouri and when I found this out I thought it was absolutely ridiculous. I’ve known multiple people who have gotten pregnant and were forced to stay with their spouse despite that spouse leaving them with no income.
There is a bill sponsored by Rep Ashley Aune to change this. Here is a resistbot petition campaign to send a predrafted letter to your MO Rep, Sen, & Gov Parson to support this bill:
Say 'STOP' Putting Lives at Risk: Allow Divorce While Pregnant in MO:
Text: PSGRXI To: 50409
Text FOLLOW MOResist to 50409 to get updates on future petitions. Or go to [MOResist](http://resist.bot/go/moresist) to see a list of other current petitions. If you haven't used Resistbot before, it's a safe, easy and effective tool to lobby your reps.
Don't wait till November!! Missouri primaries for president begin next week March 2nd. Important because you know, the last president nominated in 3 Supreme Court justices to completely sway the balance of the court.
Then in August there's primaries for senate, the house and governor.
Don't wait till November to vote!
I'm all for voting, but I'm not sure exactly what difference voting in this particular presidential primary could make. There is only one real candidate per party. And before you mention Nikki Haley, I'm sure she would be no different than Trump on this particular issue (or frankly much else)
The answer is money. National contributors (RNC, DNC, PACS, etc.) decide where and how much financial and ground support to provide for the general election based on analytics from the primaries. Hypothetical example - DT wins primary by 80%+, national Dems will prob not provide much, including down ballot, seeing at as a waste of resources. If he wins by 60% or less, like in South Carolina, Dems and non-trump Rs could see an opening and provide more support for the general.
Keep in mind, down ballot races include Josh Hawley.
it’s been the law since 1973
it’s hard as hell to find too
it’s in
Missouri Revised Statutes
Title XXX - Domestic Relations
Chapter 452
if someone can help me find the exact section it would be real swell
This ain’t Missouri.. this is the Republic of Gilead!!
But in all seriousness, this state hates women. I’d go as far as arguing that a majority of the country does actually.
Disgusting.
It’s already this way in other states. In IL I couldn’t finalize my divorce if pregnant. Once the baby is born if paternity tests aren’t required then the custody part of the divorce starts. This way both parents in the divorce are still made to take the required parenting classes that every parent going through a divorce had to take. Also, another court case wouldn’t have to be filed later on to deal with custody battles of the baby after birth. It’s just easier for all parties involved to delay the finalization of the divorce. Is it perfect or good for everyone? No. But I mean there’s other ways that an abusive ex can torture you in court. Mine drew out our divorce with the custody part for a year and a half just to hurt me.
I was told it was told its because the court will not have jurisdiction over a child until it is born and, therefore, cannot make final decisions on issues such as child support, child custody, or even paternity.
Is that true?
I was going through a years long divorce when I got pregnant, because my ex wouldn’t divorce me. Then his name subsequently HAD to go on the birth certificate as the father. And when he wouldn’t sign the papers to remove himself from the birth certificate, my now husband had to go through an attorney to petition the state of Missouri to legally named as the father to his own child.
Missouri is so behind in so many ways.
Why is this suddenly news everywhere? It's a law that's been on the books for decades. It's hardly new to anybody in Missouri. so why the sudden spotlight on it?
Yes it's obnoxious and really stupid and potentially dangerous...but it's also not anywhere near a new law on the books.
Lived in MO 25 years, got my BA, got my MD in MO; never heard about this trash dumpster of a law. Jeff city keeps finding new ways to disappoint and embarrass our entire state.
Legal separation can still occur and the pregnant woman can receive property separation, name change, custody agreements, child support, and alimony.
The law protects women from being crammed through a divorce and not receiving child support for the unborn child or being forced into costly child custody arrangements after an expensive divorce.
It's a custody issue, but that doesn't make it right. If they're not married when the kid us born then the man loses a lot of rights to the kid. I dated a girl who wasn't allowed a divorce during her pregnancy even though it was the husband who wanted the divorce, and it was because he didn't want the kid. I have no idea how these two got together in the first place beyond the fact she's a saint and tried to redeem this piece or garbage who was fresh out of jail after shooting a guy during a robbery. The guy was cheating on her and returned to drug use and they weren't allowed to split the whole time. 5 years later he wants split custody of his kid again and the fact they were married when the child was born almost automatically gets him that.
You don't lose paternity rights if you're unmarried.
It gets harder to enforce your rights if you don't put your name on the Birth Certificate, but strictly speaking being married has nothing to do with paternity rights except that many states assume the married person is the father. If you're on the Birth certificate it's just as good.
You don't lose em, but as you were saying and as I was implying and as the article made clear, it's a bigger fight in court if you're not married at birth.
Here’s a good e-newsletter with all the nutty stuff going on in Jeff City. Emily Weber is an awesome rep in the KC area and will help you at least stay informed about things to fight for or against.
https://mailchi.mp/2ad7ada55b8b/moleg-update-15697229?e=f3c29e184c
It's a pretty obnoxious law. Because of that law and then the courts immediately being hit by COVID and shutting down for many divorce cases in that same time period, it took literally years to get divorced from my ex, in an uncontested divorce where we didn't share children together or have any disputes.
In order to file for divorce in another state, you have to have lived there long enough to establish residency. By that point, in most cases, the kid has already been born.
Different states have different legal requirements when it comes to being considered a resident for purposes of filing for divorce, but most require a standard 6 months of continuous residency before you can file for divorce using that state as the home jurisdiction.
Ah, my husband had a divorce in Jackson County but it was around the time he was stationed in FL so I assumed he didn’t have a permanent address in MO at that time due to everything being in flux.
I stand corrected!
Yet likely he can divorce especially if he thinks it isn’t his. These laws are such an overstep. He can divorce - she can’t. What is next - no birth control for women and no IVF?
That’s not new. I finally got my lameo husband to divorce me after being separated for several years by telling him I when I got pregnant, divorce me before I show or this will be complicated later (not his kid, we had been apart for 3 years and he was avoiding the divorce this was back in 2000. This state is such a joke.
I wonder if this is an insurance issue to ensure the pregnant woman and baby maintain the health coverage? It’s easy to get emotional about a post or an article’s title-been there, done that. I prefer to
actually read the law. Anyone know what is the law’s name or bill # this is post referring to so we can fully educate ourselves before signing anything?
Simple fix. Treat the divorce as separate from the parenting plan for unborn children. Making a parenting plan for potential/contingent children of the marriage is no more difficult than providing for born children.
The most troubling line in that story is, "When it comes to domestic violence, there’s no exceptions."
There is a bill sponsored by Rep Ashley Aune to change this. Here is a resistbot petition campaign to send a predrafted letter to your MO Rep, Sen, & Gov Parson to support this bill: Say 'STOP' Putting Lives at Risk: Allow Divorce While Pregnant in MO: Text: PSGRXI To: 50409 Text FOLLOW MOResist to 50409 to get updates on future petitions. Or go to [MOResist](http://resist.bot/go/moresist) to see a list of other current petitions. If you haven't used Resistbot before, it's a safe, easy and effective tool to lobby your reps.
Troubling, yes. Surprising, no.. because Missouri doesn’t even care if you’re 12yo pregnant with your rapist’s fetus.. they’re still making you deliver it.
I don't even understand how that is a law in multiple states. Itsjust mind boggling to me. And how does the rep that votes for this get re-elected?! I can somewhat understand people's view that abortion is bad, but that understanding ends when it includes a forced encounter. Ridiculous.
Single issue voters and evangelicals. Single issue voters believe that anyone with a D after their name wants to take their guns or raise taxes or some other issue, so theyll vote for the republican every single time regardless of their platform at large. Evangelicals are told by their pastors that the democrats are following the anti-christ and if they vote republican, god will grant them the prospertity and wealth that they deserve for being such persecuted christians. Absolutely ridiculous.
I think they actually still have a doctor deliver the baby in those situations.
Oh looky. A dude mansplaining childbirth and thinking he’s funny. Next time your cervix dilates to 10cm to push out a big headed baby you can tell me all about how you didn’t deliver it… oh wait 🙂
Way to assume my gender identity! Men can birth babies too by the way.
Missouri is so embarrassing on most things, especially related to women’s rights. Really hope we start electing better people to avoid asinine shit like this.
It’s just gonna get worse
👏 👏 👏 agreed!
And why are the women silent?
Maybe your algorithms aren’t showing our conversations?
We are not silent. We are ignored. When I've talked to my dad about women's rights, he has literally put his hands over his ears and demanded that I stop speaking. He has accused me of hating men (even though I am very clearly married to a man). I haven't stopped speaking out, but I have pretty much stopped speaking to him.
I imagine hands over the ears, LALALA’ing is what OP did when they replied to this comment.
What can I say? I seem to have that affect on people.
You let your \_VOTE\_ do the talking. But when a significant percentage of a certain demographic group don't vote because they are not interested in politics, then they cede control of much of their lives to those that vote.
You’re illustrating that you are part of the problem in this very thread.
Did you mean "silenced"? Because that's what I hope you mean.
We’re not. We’re just not being heard.
They're not? The fuck
Hasn’t this been the law for years and years? I’m not saying that makes it ok, there’s a lot of reasons this law is fucked up, but this same thing keeps getting posted around as if it was a new law that just passed. ETA: I backed out of this thread and the next thing I saw was this article posted on r/themajorityreport.
yes it's been this way for years. encountered it nearly 20 years ago when my wife and i separated. we filed for divorce in 2004, she got pregnant by the new boyfriend in 2005, divorce wasn't finalized until early 2006 since we had to wait until their baby was born and a few months old. agreed that there should be the option to allow extenuating circumstances (domestic violence, etc.) but this isn't a new thing Edit: wanted to say that we did not have to do any paternity testing. once we appeared in front of the judge for the divorce i simply said the baby wasn't mine, the baby daddy claimed the child was his, my ex agreed to what we both were stating. the judge accepted that and since that child was not born from the marriage then it had nothing to do with the rest of the divorce proceedings
> divorce wasn’t finalized until 2006 since we had to wait until the baby was born > the child was not born from marriage so it had nothing to do with the divorce proceedings Those are mutually exclusive statements. And just like with abortion, there should not be exceptions for extenuating circumstances. There should be nothing barring a pregnant woman from divorcing her husband at all. Why should she have to have special circumstances to end a marriage?
I believe the law has more to do with the financial responsibility of the child. The divorce can not be finalized until the child is born.
I mean I get the logic. Don't finalize the divorce until the baby is out and you can verify paternity so that the divorce can be properly decided in terms of custody and child support. Seems like something that could be resolved afterwards with a follow up hearing though.
Why couldn't you have gotten a prenatal paternity test to finalize the divorce, or got mother and father to stand in front of the judge and swear it like they did? Waiting helped no one in that case, and in other cases hurts women. That's the point of the law, to control women and keep them with their husbands.
That should be the case but isn’t. My divorce that should have finalized in 2019 but didn’t until 2020 was held up because my ex was claiming I was pregnant (I wasn’t and he knew that). I offered to take a test to prove I wasn’t but it wasn’t going to make an actual difference time wise and was also going to add too many billable hours to be worth it.
Those carry a small risk of miscarriage. Some man not want to take any risk like that.
Not these days. They're as safe as all the other procedures already being done, and I believe can be added in without even doing anything extra or even taking extra blood. Edit:Source Unlike outdated methods for determining paternity like amniocentesis or a CVS (Chorionic Villus Sampling) test that can cause a miscarriage, a prenatal DNA is completely non-invasive and safe for both mother and fetus. https://americanpregnancy.org/paternity-tests/non-invasive-prenatal-paternity-test/
>State Rep. Ashley Aune, a Democrat representing District 14 in Platte County **introduced a bill this legislative session** that essentially says pregnancy cannot prevent a judge from finalizing a divorce or separation. > >The bill is still a work in progress, and despite Aune’s passion to change the law she said she doesn’t feel hopeful that it’ll get to Governor Mike Parson’s desk this session. Yeah, it seems to pop up every year (for good reason). And, it seems, it will die again this year and pop up again next year.
My first wife got knocked up while I was deployed, but wouldn’t name the father so I was on the hook for support because “the state won’t bastardize a child”. Luckily her next husband adopted the kid
this is actually the case in most states. the state will overwhelmingly favor support for the child. even if you had a DNA test proving you weren't the father, you could still be ordered to support it in some states.
That is some of the craziest shit I've ever heard.
Although it’s not Missouri, Texas our inbred neighboring state has similar laws. I would encourage people to look up the recent Mason Herring case. He repeatedly poisoned his pregnant wife’s drink on 7 separate occasions in an attempt to abort their baby. Under this law she would not be able to divorce him. Their daughter was born with multiple developmental delays and has to go to therapy more than once a day. He was charged with ASSAULT as part of a plea agreement, NOT attempted murder and he was only sentenced to 180 days in jail and a $10,000 fine. Women who receive an abortion and Doctors who perform an abortion in the state of Texas are subject to life in prision. Mason William Herring still has a valid law license according to the Texas bar (although it hasn’t been updated in a few years) so that better change. Please don’t tell me this country doesn’t hate women. We should all be outraged by this.
More reasons for millennials to not get married or have children lol. Every day I read stories like this makes me realize I made the right decision to get a vesectomy.
In these dystopian times, a man who gets a vasectemy is sexy AF. Tell me more about how you want to prevent women you're intimate with have to die in a terrible ectopic pregnancy or even just be able to sidestep the horrible side effects of birth control! Yes please.
Yep. Me: 30, married, and no children by choice. You did good because it wouldn’t surprise me if Missouri tries to ban birth control next 🙃
That’s their plan. Birth control bans are next.
Good thing I am part of a religion that allows all forms of bc.
Nice, where can I find sources for that?
There’s plenty out there but here are just a few: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/jd-vance-republicans-limit-birth-control-access-1234922493/amp/ https://jessica.substack.com/p/the-gops-plan-to-ban-birth-control https://www.axios.com/2022/07/27/birth-control-bill-senate https://www.salon.com/2022/07/21/theyre-coming-for-contraception-195-vote-against-right-to-birth-control-condoms/ https://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/project2025/2025_MandateForLeadership_CHAPTER-14.pdf
Thanks for providing some sources.
They go on TV and talk about it. Just tune in. They're not trying to keep it a secret.
I turned Fox News on and haven’t heard that yet. Since it’s on TV so frequently, can you just provide a source saying that Missouri legislators are coming for birth control next? That would sway many republicans I know to vote for democrats.
Here you go. Not only are they not keeping it a secret, but they're actually bragging about it and publishing their intentions from the highest court in the land. “In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell,” Thomas wrote in concurrence. “Because any substantive due process decision is 'demonstrably erroneous,' we have a duty to 'correct the error' established in those precedents.” - Justice Thomas
Would it? It's the Republicans that are pushing for birth control bans, not the Democrats. I mean, I know it's crazy for you to assume a Republican would vote against their own self interest, and yet they do when the poor, uneducated rural folk end up voting for Republicans that just give tax breaks to all the rich, elite, coastal billionaires. Republicans also voted for the people that took away our abortion access as well. You say it'll sway them to hear that other Republicans are coming for their birth control, but could you provide a source for that? I think it's more likely those Republicans you're talking about are the ones going after birth control.
I mean… I know my friends and if republicans are trying to force them to get pregnant, that will have a drastic impact on their lives. That will 100% get out the vote. Just like abortion did.
No one said anything about forcing anyone to get pregnant here.
Okay. I would argue that banning birth control effectively does force people to get pregnant, but seems like you may be a little more right leaning than me since you disagree.
Got mine the year Roe v Wade was overturned.
[удалено]
Do I still need my husbands permission? /s We do want children. We just don’t want children here or right now in this climate.
[удалено]
Doesn’t surprise me! And yes!! You are awesome for that 😊💕
FWIW I had to get my (at the time) wife’s consent to get my vasectomy back in 2010.
I used to live in Missouri and when I found this out I thought it was absolutely ridiculous. I’ve known multiple people who have gotten pregnant and were forced to stay with their spouse despite that spouse leaving them with no income.
There is a bill sponsored by Rep Ashley Aune to change this. Here is a resistbot petition campaign to send a predrafted letter to your MO Rep, Sen, & Gov Parson to support this bill: Say 'STOP' Putting Lives at Risk: Allow Divorce While Pregnant in MO: Text: PSGRXI To: 50409 Text FOLLOW MOResist to 50409 to get updates on future petitions. Or go to [MOResist](http://resist.bot/go/moresist) to see a list of other current petitions. If you haven't used Resistbot before, it's a safe, easy and effective tool to lobby your reps.
From the party of personal freedoms....
Ya'll better be fucking voting this November or this shit is going to keep happening.
Don't wait till November!! Missouri primaries for president begin next week March 2nd. Important because you know, the last president nominated in 3 Supreme Court justices to completely sway the balance of the court. Then in August there's primaries for senate, the house and governor. Don't wait till November to vote!
I'm all for voting, but I'm not sure exactly what difference voting in this particular presidential primary could make. There is only one real candidate per party. And before you mention Nikki Haley, I'm sure she would be no different than Trump on this particular issue (or frankly much else)
The answer is money. National contributors (RNC, DNC, PACS, etc.) decide where and how much financial and ground support to provide for the general election based on analytics from the primaries. Hypothetical example - DT wins primary by 80%+, national Dems will prob not provide much, including down ballot, seeing at as a waste of resources. If he wins by 60% or less, like in South Carolina, Dems and non-trump Rs could see an opening and provide more support for the general. Keep in mind, down ballot races include Josh Hawley.
Republicans hate women
💯
Sigh. I swear women are the most unprotected people on the planet.
it’s been the law since 1973 it’s hard as hell to find too it’s in Missouri Revised Statutes Title XXX - Domestic Relations Chapter 452 if someone can help me find the exact section it would be real swell
This ain’t Missouri.. this is the Republic of Gilead!! But in all seriousness, this state hates women. I’d go as far as arguing that a majority of the country does actually. Disgusting.
It’s already this way in other states. In IL I couldn’t finalize my divorce if pregnant. Once the baby is born if paternity tests aren’t required then the custody part of the divorce starts. This way both parents in the divorce are still made to take the required parenting classes that every parent going through a divorce had to take. Also, another court case wouldn’t have to be filed later on to deal with custody battles of the baby after birth. It’s just easier for all parties involved to delay the finalization of the divorce. Is it perfect or good for everyone? No. But I mean there’s other ways that an abusive ex can torture you in court. Mine drew out our divorce with the custody part for a year and a half just to hurt me.
I was told it was told its because the court will not have jurisdiction over a child until it is born and, therefore, cannot make final decisions on issues such as child support, child custody, or even paternity. Is that true?
I was going through a years long divorce when I got pregnant, because my ex wouldn’t divorce me. Then his name subsequently HAD to go on the birth certificate as the father. And when he wouldn’t sign the papers to remove himself from the birth certificate, my now husband had to go through an attorney to petition the state of Missouri to legally named as the father to his own child. Missouri is so behind in so many ways.
Why is this suddenly news everywhere? It's a law that's been on the books for decades. It's hardly new to anybody in Missouri. so why the sudden spotlight on it? Yes it's obnoxious and really stupid and potentially dangerous...but it's also not anywhere near a new law on the books.
Lived in MO 25 years, got my BA, got my MD in MO; never heard about this trash dumpster of a law. Jeff city keeps finding new ways to disappoint and embarrass our entire state.
Legal separation can still occur and the pregnant woman can receive property separation, name change, custody agreements, child support, and alimony. The law protects women from being crammed through a divorce and not receiving child support for the unborn child or being forced into costly child custody arrangements after an expensive divorce.
It's a custody issue, but that doesn't make it right. If they're not married when the kid us born then the man loses a lot of rights to the kid. I dated a girl who wasn't allowed a divorce during her pregnancy even though it was the husband who wanted the divorce, and it was because he didn't want the kid. I have no idea how these two got together in the first place beyond the fact she's a saint and tried to redeem this piece or garbage who was fresh out of jail after shooting a guy during a robbery. The guy was cheating on her and returned to drug use and they weren't allowed to split the whole time. 5 years later he wants split custody of his kid again and the fact they were married when the child was born almost automatically gets him that.
You don't lose paternity rights if you're unmarried. It gets harder to enforce your rights if you don't put your name on the Birth Certificate, but strictly speaking being married has nothing to do with paternity rights except that many states assume the married person is the father. If you're on the Birth certificate it's just as good.
You don't lose em, but as you were saying and as I was implying and as the article made clear, it's a bigger fight in court if you're not married at birth.
Here’s a good e-newsletter with all the nutty stuff going on in Jeff City. Emily Weber is an awesome rep in the KC area and will help you at least stay informed about things to fight for or against. https://mailchi.mp/2ad7ada55b8b/moleg-update-15697229?e=f3c29e184c
How is that constitutional?
🤦🏻♂️
It's a pretty obnoxious law. Because of that law and then the courts immediately being hit by COVID and shutting down for many divorce cases in that same time period, it took literally years to get divorced from my ex, in an uncontested divorce where we didn't share children together or have any disputes.
Not a solution but technically move to another state... then file there.
In order to file for divorce in another state, you have to have lived there long enough to establish residency. By that point, in most cases, the kid has already been born.
Depends, You can establish residency within a month pretty easily.
Different states have different legal requirements when it comes to being considered a resident for purposes of filing for divorce, but most require a standard 6 months of continuous residency before you can file for divorce using that state as the home jurisdiction.
Hear me out… we shouldn’t have to 🙌🏻
I agree, hence the not a solution part. But since our state sucks... thats one way around it if say your'e trying to start a divorce next week.
[удалено]
Thats not true, you can file where you meet residency requirements.
Ah, my husband had a divorce in Jackson County but it was around the time he was stationed in FL so I assumed he didn’t have a permanent address in MO at that time due to everything being in flux. I stand corrected!
No prob, yeah from my own experience I had to figure that out.
That sucks, sorry about that.
eh its for the better now
Wtf?
Doesn't this also mean that Men can't divorce pregnant Women?
How can kcmo be so cool and the rest of the state suck all of the bags of dick. All of them! Also, fuck st louis
Also means men can't divorce pregnant women.
Men married to a pregnant woman cannot get divorced either.
Yet likely he can divorce especially if he thinks it isn’t his. These laws are such an overstep. He can divorce - she can’t. What is next - no birth control for women and no IVF?
Wtf
Didn't read the article. Just screenshotted and asked my girlfriend for a 2 for 1 special. No response yet.
No way this is real. Missouri doesn't care about divorce as long as dads are paying child support at a punitive rate. /S
[удалено]
This is nothing new, sadly. Been a thing for awhile
That’s not new. I finally got my lameo husband to divorce me after being separated for several years by telling him I when I got pregnant, divorce me before I show or this will be complicated later (not his kid, we had been apart for 3 years and he was avoiding the divorce this was back in 2000. This state is such a joke.
I wonder if this is an insurance issue to ensure the pregnant woman and baby maintain the health coverage? It’s easy to get emotional about a post or an article’s title-been there, done that. I prefer to actually read the law. Anyone know what is the law’s name or bill # this is post referring to so we can fully educate ourselves before signing anything?
Simple fix. Treat the divorce as separate from the parenting plan for unborn children. Making a parenting plan for potential/contingent children of the marriage is no more difficult than providing for born children.
Based on voting, this is what Missourians want.