The statute, which can lead to reproductive coercion in a state that has banned abortion, has recently gained nationwide attention
At six months pregnant, H decided enough was enough. She had endured years of abuse from her husband and had recently discovered he was also physically violent towards her child. She contacted an attorney to help her get a divorce.
But she was stopped short. Her lawyer told her that she could not finalize a divorce in Missouri because she was pregnant. “I just absolutely felt defeated,” she said. H returned to the house she shared with her abuser, sleeping in her child’s room on the floor and continuing to face violence. On the night before she gave birth, she slept in the most secure room in the house: on the tile floor in the basement, with the family’s dogs.
Under a Missouri statute that has recently gained nationwide attention, every petitioner for divorce is required to disclose their pregnancy status. In practice, experts say, those who are pregnant are barred from legally dissolving their marriage. “The application [of the law] is an outright ban,” said Danielle Drake, attorney at Parks & Drake. When Drake learned her then husband was having an affair, her own divorce stalled because she was pregnant. Two other states have similar laws: Texas and Arkansas.
It was considered progressive at the time, passed by a Democratic legislature in fact.
This law was meant to stop men from divorcing pregnant women as a way to avoid child support. By forcing men to wait until after birth, courts could set up child support during the divorce proceedings.
You know, from that perspective I can understand the point of it, but there should have been guard rails built in for women to escape abusive relationships. That was an extreme oversight.
Why not just put them on the hook regardless? This seems like a really stupid way to achieve that goal, with horrific consequences.