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.

  • @mightyfoolish
    link
    -39 months ago

    I have two problems with this. (1) Logically speaking that can’t be true. The guy who wrote the bulk of the Constitution was a Christian. Sure you can argue that the government had non-Christian voices like Jefferson but it’s not like the US had a Hindu majority (or something) at the time. (2) It would be easier to understand what went wrong with Evangelism and right wing media then to try to get the majority of the country to hate Christianity. Don’t divide the people over religion; you force them to live by their words.