SB 946 revises Missouri’s statutes governing dissolution of marriage and legal separation. The bill restates the basic residency and filing requirements for divorce and legal separation, but adds an explicit rule that pregnancy status alone cannot prevent a court from entering a judgment of dissolution or legal separation. It also requires judgments to include the last four digits of each party’s Social Security number, while the full numbers remain protected and retained under existing confidentiality procedures.
The bill also updates petition and response requirements in family-law cases. It requires petitions to state whether the wife is pregnant, but clarifies that pregnancy does not bar relief; it also requires the last four digits of Social Security numbers, child information, and custody/support arrangements. For cases involving custody or visitation, the bill expands and formalizes parenting-plan requirements, including detailed schedules for holidays, school breaks, transportation, communication, dispute resolution, decision-making authority, and allocation of child-related expenses. It also directs the Missouri Supreme Court to maintain parenting-plan guidelines on the state courts administrator’s website.
In practical terms, SB 946 would amend sections 452.305 and 452.310, RSMo, affecting divorce, legal separation, custody, and modification proceedings statewide. It would remove pregnancy as a legal barrier to finalizing a dissolution or separation, while preserving the court’s authority to address child custody, support, maintenance, and property issues. The bill also reinforces jurisdiction over children once a petition is filed and preserves existing confidentiality rules for full Social Security numbers.
The available context shows no recorded committee debate or votes, so there is no documented public sentiment from hearings or floor action in the materials provided. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears procedural and family-law focused rather than controversial on its face, though the pregnancy-related change and the expanded parenting-plan requirements could draw attention from family-law practitioners and parties in dissolution cases.
Notable points of potential contention include the explicit statement that pregnancy cannot prevent a divorce or legal separation judgment, which may raise policy or moral objections from some stakeholders. The detailed parenting-plan mandates may also be seen as increasing paperwork and litigation complexity, while supporters would likely view them as improving clarity, consistency, and child-centered decision-making in custody cases.
SB 946 would amend Missouri family-law statutes by repealing and reenacting sections 452.305 and 452.310. It would change the legal framework for dissolution of marriage and legal separation by expressly allowing courts to enter judgments regardless of pregnancy status, requiring partial Social Security numbers in judgments and pleadings, and expanding mandatory parenting-plan content in custody and visitation matters. The bill would affect divorcing spouses, parents, children subject to custody orders, and courts handling domestic relations cases.
No committee transcripts or vote records were provided, so there is no direct evidence of legislative debate or recorded support/opposition in the supplied materials. From the bill text, the measure appears largely administrative and procedural, suggesting a neutral-to-supportive posture focused on clarifying family-law practice and child-custody planning. The pregnancy-status provision is the most likely source of disagreement, but the available record does not show organized opposition or endorsement.
The main point of contention is the provision stating that pregnancy status shall not prevent a court from entering a dissolution or legal separation judgment. That change could be viewed as expanding access to divorce or separation proceedings, but it may also be opposed by those who believe pregnancy should affect timing or judicial discretion. A secondary area of concern is the bill’s detailed parenting-plan requirements, which may be welcomed by those seeking more structured custody arrangements but criticized by others as adding complexity and burden to family-court proceedings.