A word of caution to the overly optimistic.  Although, as per the newspaper article,

The [Missouri Supreme] court said that judges should use the state statute instead of precedents set by past cases,

that must not be taken to mean that judges must do so. Without any doubt, if the wording in the preceding paragraph reflects accurately what the Supreme Court judges said, that leaves the door wide open for liberal judicial discretion in the lower courts. Only time will tell. I'm sure that what will actually happen now will be affected largely by how much this ruling might cut into the earnings of the divorce industry.

The court said that under the statute, relocation requests should be judged on whether the move is in the best interests of the child and whether the relocating parent is acting in good faith. If the relocation is permitted, courts must order visitation and telephone access or custody that ensures "the child has frequent, continuing and meaningful contact with the nonrelocating" parent.

Courts also are supposed to specify who pays for transportation costs.

Let's hope for the best. At least it is a step in the right direction.

—Walter

The transcript of :

Opinion
Supreme Court of Missouri
Case Style: Laurie (Woods) Stowe, Respondent v. Donald Ray Spence, Jr., et al.,(FN1), Appellants.

See also:

California "Move Away" Bill Defeated By Massive Opposition, Men's News Daily, May 10, 2006