Missouri Law Would
Deny Child Custody
To All TS Parents

By Sallyanne Ofner


The state legislature in Missouri is considering a bill to direct all child custody decisions, in cases of a transsexual divorce, to be made unrestrictedly in favor of the non-ts parent regardless of the wishes of the children or their best interests. This may have been a direct result of the recent publicized St. Charles case but has implications for all of us regardless of our state of residence and parental or maritial status.

Missouri Senate Bill 51 has passed that state's senate and is now under consideration by its house. I do not know the governor's willingness to sign such a bill, but it could become law there.

For information about this, see:

http://www.senate.state.mo.us and do a search on SB51 (no space) to find the wording of SB51 section 452.375, para. 7:

"452.375.5 - In order to further Missouri's public policy of assuring "frequent and meaningful contact with both parents" after separation or divorce (see Sections 452.340.5 and 452.375.4), language was added which makes joint physical and joint legal custody a rebuttable legal presumption. The new language puts the burden of coming forward with evidence on the parent who opposes an award of joint physical and joint legal custody. If the court finds that joint physical and joint legal custody is not in the child's best interests, the court shall specify the child support arrangements that are in the child's best interests.

No preference may be given to either parent based upon that parent's sex except if a parent has had a sex change since the birth of the child, preference shall be given to the other parent. "

http://www.house.state.mo.us and look up your state rep's name and email if you live in MO.

Do not for a moment think that this is a small issue for those living in a rural state. This type of bill has very wide implications: about our ability to see or care for our children, to adopt, to marry or about our fitness to be seen as a responsible person in any way. It is conceiveable, for example that an unhappy spouse, worried about her treatement in another state could move to Missouri and obtain a divorce and child custody there.

It is likely being passed and considered because people generally misunderstand transsexuals to be marginally sexually deviant, in the "sex trade" or otherwise unsavory characters. This misimpression has other not so beneficial results for us: consideration to be in a high risk for HIV and therefore uninsurable for life or medical coverage, for example.

Those who live in Missouri, can take direct action by contacting their legislator and the governor.

All of us can put some additional pressure on that state's government by pressing some of the larger Missouri corporations including Monsanto Chemical, Emerson Electric, McDonell Douglas, SouthWestern Bell and TWA to make known to the legislators there that not all transsexuals are marginal unproductive persons and that this law could be counterproductive to their interests in recruiting and retaining qualified employees as well as tarnishing their own public image and further marginalizing some who could be productive, contributing members of society. Industrial development boards need to be informed that a policy of antit* is counterproductive to their efforts, especially in the high tech industries which are often populated with talented t*s.

In addition, you need to know that there is also a "restroom" bill working its way through committee in that state as well. As a pre op ts entering RLT, this could cause me, or others like me, to drop from consideration the use of any air carrier which may stop or connect in Missouri (St Louis and Kansas City). I have already written TWA's CEO a letter regarding this matter on my company letterhead. I strongly recommend that others do the same. Holiday Inns International found out just how strong we can be.


Back to Transgender Forum's home page