Summary
The Sixth Court of Appeals of Texas at Texarkana affirmed a judgment terminating the parental rights of Mother and Father to three children. The court held that legally and factually sufficient evidence supported termination under Texas Family Code sections 161.001(b)(1)(D) and (E), and that termination of Mother's parental rights was in the children's best interests.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether legally and factually sufficient evidence supported termination under Texas Family Code section 161.001(b)(1)(D), based on knowingly placing or allowing the children to remain in endangering conditions or surroundings.
- Whether legally and factually sufficient evidence supported termination under Texas Family Code section 161.001(b)(1)(E), based on the parents’ endangering conduct or placement of the children with persons engaged in endangering conduct.
- Whether legally and factually sufficient evidence supported the finding that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in the children’s best interests.
Holdings
- Legally and factually sufficient evidence supported the finding that Mother and Father knowingly placed or knowingly allowed the children to remain in conditions or surroundings that endangered their physical or emotional well-being.
- Legally and factually sufficient evidence supported the finding that Mother and Father engaged in a voluntary, deliberate, and conscious course of conduct that endangered the children’s physical or emotional well-being.
- Legally and factually sufficient evidence supported the finding that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in the children’s best interests.
Key quotations
“Involuntary severance of parental rights thus requires ‘clear and convincing evidence’ that termination is warranted and in the child[ren]’s best interest[s].” (at 2)
“It is not necessary that the conduct be directed at the child or that the child actually suffer injury.” (at 9)
“termination under [ground] (E) must be based on more than a single act or omission. Instead, a ‘voluntary, deliberate, and conscious course of conduct by the parent is required.’” (at 11)
“After viewing all of the evidence in the light most favorable to the best-interest findings, we conclude that it was sufficiently clear and convincing such that a reasonable fact-finder could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of the parent-child relationship between Mother and her children was in the children’s best interests.” (at 16)
Factual background
Mother had a lengthy history with CPS, drug-related criminal conduct, positive tests for methamphetamine and amphetamine, missed or refused drug tests, and failed to complete required substance-abuse, psychosocial, and parenting services. Father also refused multiple drug tests, tested positive for methamphetamine and amphetamine, and failed to comply with his family-service-plan requirements. The children were removed from the parents’ care and placed with their maternal aunt, where they were safe, doing well, and bonded to the aunt. At trial, the children’s case professionals recommended termination because the parents had not demonstrated long-term sobriety or the ability to provide a safe and stable home.
Procedural history
The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services petitioned the County Court at Law of Lamar County to terminate Mother’s and Father’s parental rights. Following a February 2026 trial, the trial court found several statutory predicate grounds and that termination was in the children’s best interests. Mother and Father challenged the sufficiency of the evidence supporting grounds D and E, and Mother separately challenged the best-interest findings.