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.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    -19
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I am kinda calling BS on this, as I got divorced in Arkansas and there was never a question about my ex wife being pregnant nor was it ever mentioned by any attorney or judge. Maybe it’s only used when there is a clear sign of pregnancy or when the husband wants to control the wife who may have filed for divorce. This could be a new law as I got divorced over 10 years ago.

    • Promethiel
      link
      fedilink
      16
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Oh!? A law that wasn’t in effect when you went through the same life situation wasn’t in effect when you went through it, so it’s BS?

      Was Henry Ford’s Model T car, the printing press, and the fact that it used to be legal to own people also BS because those things weren’t at the store last time you went?

      It is not a case of whatever the fuck it is you want to think it maybe it. It is exactly the evil those who kinda call BS have sown, and the thresher is reaping its way to you eventually too.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      123 months ago

      “I’m calling bs on this” WTF??? Are you misogynistic, ignorant, just stupid, or all the above? Your reasoning is that you didn’t hear about it personally 10 years ago when it might have been relevant to you?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        -133 months ago

        When my personal experiences go against what a news article claims, I start to think critically about the source. I’m not disclaiming or debating anything about Missouri law, but by throwing in that comment about Arkansas seems like they are being a bit sensational to get a wider audience reaction. I would not doubt for a second if this law exists in either of those states, but it’s most likely enforced by choice.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          23 months ago

          Calling bs is disclaiming… think man think… your tone is strong but tpur words are weak. Why do you think this is?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        03 months ago

        No, the law was passed in 1973. At the time, the Missouri legislature was still controlled by Democrats.

        It was trying to stop men who would finalize a divorce before the birth of their child in order to avoid establishing their paternity.

    • Null User Object
      link
      13 months ago

      Do they not teach geography in Arkansas? I guess not, so, FYI, Missouri is not Arkansas. They’re different states with different state laws.