If a couple is not married in the state of Missouri and the father has a restraining order against the mother, but does not state anything about the minor child in the restraining order does she have the right to see her child

Who has the child?

There is not one. And the child is 61/2 mnths old

Ok, lets try this again,

First don't use that silly comment feature to add more info, please "answer" the question yourself, to add more info.

So you have a man, a women and a child, who is the child living with ? Is the man on the birth certiicate.

I am guessing at what you are talking about ?
There is or is not a court order for custody in place ?

Is here a court order for support?

And the exact wording of the order will be important.

There is no custody agreement, the father has him now only because he wouldn't let the mother have him than he filed a restraining order against the mother to protect himself (supposedly from her) but the restraining order does not state anything about the infant child. Just she is to stay away from the father.. father let the mother see the child in the am and than 15-20 minutes later she was served with the restraining order.. what can she do from there

Hmmm... the restraining order can be designed to fit someone's safety needs and still allow for visitation. For example, if you want the children to visit the other parent or have contact with the other parent, you can ask the judge handling the restraining order case to order that the "no contact" part of the restraining order apply to you but not to the children.
When a court handling a restraining order case designs the order so that the abusive parent can have contact with the children, this is NOT the same thing as giving the abusive parent visitation rights.
Visitation rights can only be established in a Probate & Family Court.
So, go to the Family court and ask for visitation order.

What was the reason for the restraining order? Why aren't you doing what GV said and going to court to establish custody and visitation?

I'm assuming the parents are not married and not living together. That the mother let the father have the child for a visit and now the father is refusing to return the child.

Since there was no order for custody, then the parents have equal custody and the father can decide to hold onto the child, assuming he is the legal father.

If the restraining order doesn't mention the child, then the mother could visit with the child as long as some 3rd party brings them together. Since the mother can't come near the father, the order effectively covers the child unless the father allows someone else to bring the child to the mother.

I suspect, though, there is a LOT more to this story. Why did the father decide to hold onto the child? Why get a restraining order instead of an emergency custody order? Many other questions come to mind. If you want our help you need to give the full story.