ST. LOUIS -- A state House member wants a judge in Laclede County impeached over a custody ruling in the divorce of a former state senator's daughter.

At issue was Laclede County Associate Circuit Judge Christine Hutson's decision to give custody of three of Claire Noland's six children to their father.

Noland, the daughter of former state senator James Noland, alleged she had been in an abusive relationship, but Hutson did not see credible evidence of abuse. Instead, she found that Noland and the children made excuses to avoid complying with five orders for visitation with their father, Brent Vance, who saw his children for only about 30 minutes in two years, according to trial testimony.

Rep. Jim Lembke, R-St. Louis, took up the case after James Noland and his wife, Janice, approached him at a Missouri Bar conference last fall, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported Sunday.

However, he's waiting for House Speaker Rod Jetton, R-Marble Hill, to sign off on the idea before moving forward with an impeachment resolution. The speaker is reviewing the request, said Jetton's spokesman, Barry Bennett.

Hutson's defenders, including the legislator from her town, Rep. Darrell Pollock, R-Lebanon, say she is a respected judge who weighed the evidence and followed the recommendation of the children's court-appointed attorney.

Hutson, who was appointed by former Democratic governor Bob Holden in 2005, told the Post-Dispatch that she could not discuss a pending case.

Lembke argues that the case is a glaring example of a "one-sided" ruling.

"A very capable, loving mother of six children had her three younger children ripped from her side and has not seen her children because of this decision for six months," he said. "This family has been decimated because of this decision."

Chris Allen, a Lebanon attorney appointed to represent the children, said the judge "did what was necessary to protect the children." He called the case "the worst case of parent alienation I'd ever seen in 19 years of practice."

State law requires judges to take into account which parent is more likely to allow the child frequent contact with the other parent when deciding custody.

Hutson decided the three youngest children -- ages 14, 12 and 9 -- had a better chance of having a relationship with both parents if they were in their father's custody. The others -- ages 19, 18 and 16 -- will see their father only if they want to, the judge said. She declared the eldest emancipated and left the other two with their mother.

"What was done was the result of an incredible amount of judicial process, in terms of giving Mrs. Noland every chance in the world," Vance's attorney, Ed Clausen, said.

Claire Noland married Brent Vance in 1986 and the coupled lived in Blue Springs before Noland filed for divorce in 2005.

Noland said Hutson was biased against her and should have recused herself from the case. She noted that the judge once campaigned for Democratic Rep. Ike Skelton when her father, James Noland, ran against him.

James Noland, of Osage Beach, served 16 years in the legislature, ending in 1976 and has run unsuccessfully for Congress several times.

She said splitting up her children shut down her family's life.

"I had six children in nine years. I home-schooled for 16 years, and every breath I ever took was about my children," she said.

The state constitution says an official can be impeached and removed from office "for crimes, misconduct, habitual drunkenness, willful neglect of duty, corruption in office, incompetency or any offense involving moral turpitude or oppression in office." The House has invoked the process only three times since adoption of the 1945 constitution.

Lembke contends that Hutson's handling of the Noland case represents willful neglect of duty, oppression from the bench and moral turpitude.

"If it reaches the point of moral turpitude, which is moral wickedness, then they have reached the standard of impeachment," he said.

The impeachment resolution would trigger the appointment of a bipartisan House committee to investigate Hutson. The committee could pass the case to the full House, which would vote on whether to push it to the Supreme Court. The court would then hold a trial.