Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 1.205 (2026)

Life begins at conception

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

1.205. Life begins at conception — unborn child, defined — failure to provide prenatal care, no cause of action for. — 1. The general assembly of this state finds that:

(1) The life of each human being begins at conception;

(2) Unborn children have protectable interests in life, health, and well-being;

(3) The natural parents of unborn children have protectable interests in the life, health, and well-being of their unborn child.

2. Effective January 1, 1988, the laws of this state shall be interpreted and construed to acknowledge on behalf of the unborn child at every stage of development, all the rights, privileges, and immunities available to other persons, citizens, and residents of this state, subject only to the Constitution of the United States, and decisional interpretations thereof by the United States Supreme Court and specific provisions to the contrary in the statutes and constitution of this state.

3. As used in this section, the term "unborn children" or "unborn child" shall include all unborn child or children or the offspring of human beings from the moment of conception until birth at every stage of biological development.

4. Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as creating a cause of action against a woman for indirectly harming her unborn child by failing to properly care for herself or by failing to follow any particular program of prenatal care.

--------

(L. 1986 H.B. 1596)

CROSS REFERENCE:

Abortion regulations, Chap. 188

(1989) Where section by its terms does not regulate abortions or any other aspect of appellees' medical practice, it can be read simply to express a value judgment. The extent to which the statute might be used to interpret other state statutes or regulations is something that only the courts of Missouri can definitely decide. U. S. Supreme Court declined to rule on the constitutionality of the section unless the meaning of the section is applied to restrict the activities of a claimant in some concrete way. Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, 109 S.Ct. 3040.

(1992) Definition of "person" in this section, which includes unborn children is applicable to other statutes and court concludes that it applies at least to the involuntary manslaughter statute, section 565.024, RSMo. State v. Knapp, 843 S.W.2d 345 (Mo. en banc).

(1995) Statute sets out a canon of interpretation enacted by general assembly directing that time of conception and not viability is the determinative point at which legally protectable rights, privileges and immunities of an unborn child should be deemed to begin. Statute further sets out the intention of the general assembly that courts should read all Missouri statutes in pari materia with this section. Connor v. Monkem Co., Inc., 898 S.W.2d 89 (Mo. en banc).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 23 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1987–2021 · leading case: Jalesia McQueen, Appellant. v. Justin Gadberry, 507 S.W.3d 127 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Jalesia McQueen, Appellant. v. Justin Gadberry, 507 S.W.3d 127 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 190× “Section 1.205 [RSMo 2000].” 10 In other words, McQueen essentially argued the frozen pre-embryos should be classified as children under Missouri’s dissolution statutes (Chapter 452) because they are considered persons under section 1.”

Connor v. Monkem Co., Inc., 898 S.W.2d 89 (Mo. 1995). · cites it 46× “all the rights, privileges, and immunities available to other persons, citizens, and residents of this state.”

State v. Knapp, 843 S.W.2d 345 (Mo. 1992). · cites it 38× “The definition for the term “person” is supplied, according to the State, by reference to § 1.205, RSMo 1986, which provides: 1. The general assembly of this state finds that: (1) The life of each human being begins at conception; (2) Unborn children have protectable interests…”

State v. Rollen, 133 S.W.3d 57 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 49× “1(2) and defining it as such pursuant to Section 1.205 is unconstitutional. The trial court denied the motion.”

State v. O'BRIEN, 784 S.W.2d 187 (Mo. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 22× “The applicability of § 1.205 RSMo 1986 is doubtful since the act clearly provides that effective January 1, 1988, the laws of our State shall be construed in accordance with the legislative findings set forth therein subject to the Constitution of the United States and the…”

State v. Holcomb, 956 S.W.2d 286 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 13× “” In 1986, the Missouri legislature enacted § 1.205, RSMo 1994 1 which states: 1. The general assembly of this state finds that: (1) The life of each human being begins at conception; (2) Unborn children have protectable interests in life, health, and well-being; (3) The natural…”

Mary Doe v. Michael L. Parson, 567 S.W.3d 625 (Mo. 2019). · cites it 11× “2014, which she alleges required her to read certain "tenets" adopted in section 1.205, RSMo 2000, regarding when life begins; to have and pay for an ultrasound; and to wait 72 hours before she could have an abortion.”

May v. Greater Kansas City Dental Soc'y, 863 S.W.2d 941 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 8× “Knapp dealt with the application of § 1.205, RSMo 1986 2 to the criminal involuntary manslaughter statute, § 565.”

Women's Health Ctr. of West Cty. v. Webster, 670 F. Supp. 845 (E.D. Mo. 1987). · cites it 9× “Plaintiffs have brought a class action for declaratory and injunctive relief in which they challenge §§ 1.205, 188.010, 188.080, 188.105, 188.”

State v. Kenney, 973 S.W.2d 536 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 6× “Section 1.205, enacted by the Missouri General Assembly in 1986, provides: 1.”

Wiersma v. Maple Leap Farms, 543 N.W.2d 787 (S.D. 1996). · cites it 2× “See generally Mo. Rev.Stat. § 1.205 (1994). Illinois has also statutorily authorized a wrongful death claim for a nonviable fetus: The state of gestation or development of a human being when an injury is caused, when an injury takes effect, or at death, shall not foreclose…”

State v. Wade, 232 S.W.3d 663 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 4× “*665 The State argues Missouri courts have previously relied on Section 1.205 in determining that an unborn child is a person for purposes of applying criminal and civil liability statutes.”

Show all 23 citing cases →

— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 1.205(2) — 4 cases

Connor v. Monkem Co., Inc., 898 S.W.2d 89 (Mo. 1995). “all the rights, privileges, and immunities available to other persons, citizens, and residents of this state.”

State v. Holcomb, 956 S.W.2d 286 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997). “” In 1986, the Missouri legislature enacted § 1.205, RSMo 1994 1 which states: 1. The general assembly of this state finds that: (1) The life of each human being begins at conception; (2) Unborn children have protectable interests in life, health, and well-being; (3) The natural…”

State v. Kenney, 973 S.W.2d 536 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998). “Section 1.205, enacted by the Missouri General Assembly in 1986, provides: 1.”

State of Missouri v. Gary Dale Lee (Mo. Ct. App. 2021).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.