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.
|