
Home/Practice Areas/Family Law/Custody agreements/Termination of parental rights
The most serious order a family court can sign. Texas treats it that way, and so should anyone considering asking for one.
Family Law · Custody
A termination order severs the legal parent-child relationship: decision-making, possession, inheritance rights and the duty to support all end. Because of that, Texas requires proof by clear and convincing evidence — a standard higher than the usual civil one — of both a statutory ground and that termination is in the child's best interest. Wanting a parent out of a child's life is not a ground.
The statutory grounds are specific. In private suits they most often involve failing to visit or communicate with the child for a defined period, failing to support the child when able to, disappearing for an extended time, or conduct that endangers the child's physical or emotional wellbeing. In cases brought by the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, the grounds usually follow a removal and a service plan that was not completed.
Two questions, in order: whether a statutory ground is proved to the heightened standard, and whether termination is in the child's best interest. Courts also look hard at whether something short of termination would work — supervised visitation, a change of conservatorship, or a possession order with conditions. Where a child has been placed in foster care, the alternatives and the permanency plan are examined together.
These cases run on a statutory clock, generally requiring the case to be tried or dismissed within about a year of the child's removal, with a limited extension. That deadline means a service plan handed to you in the first weeks is effectively the trial plan. Doing what it requires — and documenting it — is not optional, and it is far easier with a lawyer reading the plan alongside you from the beginning.
The State or the petitioning party must prove a specific ground, not a general impression of unfitness. Poverty, a difficult housing situation, an old conviction and even a period of absence are not grounds by themselves. Where a parent has been prevented from seeing the child, or was never told where the child was, that history matters — and it is worth putting in front of the court properly.
It permanently ends the legal parent-child relationship in both directions: rights, possession, inheritance and the duty to support.
No. Courts will not terminate merely to end a support obligation, and termination is almost always paired with an adoption.
Proof by a heightened standard of both a statutory ground and that termination is in the child's best interest. Wanting a parent gone is not a ground.
That can support a ground, particularly alongside a stepparent adoption. How long, why, and what support or contact was provided all matter.
They can sign a relinquishment affidavit, which is largely irrevocable. Nobody should sign one without independent advice.
These cases run on a statutory clock, and the service plan handed to you early is effectively the trial plan. Get a lawyer reading it with you from the beginning.
No. Poverty, difficult housing and an old conviction are not grounds by themselves. The State must prove a specific statutory ground.
That history matters and it should be put before the court properly, because it goes directly to the grounds being alleged against you.
Rarely, and only in narrow circumstances. That is why it is treated as the most serious order a family court can sign.
The child's best interest governs, an attorney may be appointed for them, and an older child's views can be heard.
Free Consultation
Available 24/7 · Office hours Monday to Friday, 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM