SB 1371 would rewrite Missouri’s child custody statute to create a stronger presumption in favor of equal or substantially equal parenting time for both parents. It defines joint physical custody as equal or substantially equal time, requires courts to start from the assumption that such an arrangement is in the child’s best interests, and allows that presumption to be rebutted only by a preponderance of the evidence. The bill also requires written findings when courts reject a proposed custody arrangement and directs courts to consider a detailed list of factors, including each parent’s willingness to support contact with the other parent, the child’s adjustment, health and substance abuse issues, domestic violence, the distance between the parents’ residences, and the child’s independent preference if the child is mature enough to express one.
The bill preserves and reinforces existing protections for children and abuse victims by barring custody or unsupervised visitation for parents or household members convicted of specified child-sex and child-endangerment offenses, and by requiring courts to make specific findings when domestic violence is present. It also keeps the court’s ability to award third-party custody when both parents are unfit or the child’s welfare requires it. In addition, the bill expands procedural requirements by mandating written parenting plans, limiting local court rules that impose default parenting plans, and requiring both parents to have access to a child’s records unless restricted by a custody denial, domestic violence concerns, or address confidentiality protections.
In practical terms, the bill would significantly affect family law proceedings in Missouri by shifting custody disputes toward a default expectation of shared parenting time and by increasing the documentation burden on judges when they depart from that presumption. It would also affect parents, children, guardians, schools, medical providers, and courts by strengthening access to records, clarifying contempt and family access motion language in custody orders, and requiring courts to address noncompliance and information-sharing disputes more directly. The bill would amend and replace section 452.375, RSMo, the core custody statute.
Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no documented legislative debate or vote history to gauge support or opposition. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to reflect a policy preference for shared parenting and frequent contact with both parents after separation or divorce, while still preserving exceptions for domestic violence, abuse, and child safety. The main likely point of contention is whether the equal-parenting presumption is appropriate in all cases, especially where parents live far apart, have high conflict, or where one parent argues that a different arrangement better serves the child’s best interests.
SB 1371 would repeal and replace Missouri’s existing custody statute, section 452.375, RSMo, with a revised framework that makes equal or substantially equal parenting time the starting presumption in custody cases. It would alter how courts evaluate joint legal and joint physical custody, require more detailed written findings when custody is contested or a proposed arrangement is rejected, and expand procedural rules governing parenting plans, access to records, and enforcement of custody orders. The bill would directly affect family courts, divorcing or separated parents, third-party custodians, and institutions holding child records, while preserving exceptions for domestic violence, abuse, and certain criminal convictions involving children.
No committee discussion or vote record was provided, so there is no formal legislative sentiment available from the materials. The bill text suggests a generally pro-shared-parenting policy orientation, emphasizing frequent, continuing, and meaningful contact with both parents and encouraging cooperative decision-making. At the same time, the statute retains strong safety exceptions for abuse and domestic violence, indicating an attempt to balance parental access with child protection.
The central point of contention is the bill’s rebuttable presumption that equal or substantially equal parenting time is in the child’s best interests. Supporters would likely view this as promoting both parents’ involvement and reducing bias in custody decisions, while critics may argue it could constrain judicial discretion in cases involving conflict, distance, or other family-specific concerns. Additional tension may arise over the bill’s treatment of domestic violence exceptions, the requirement for written findings, and the limits on local court practices and default parenting plans, all of which increase uniformity but may be seen as reducing flexibility for trial courts.