Unfit to Parent: A Texas Perspective
To determine the fitness of a parent, courts should look at many factors, as established by the Texas Supreme Court in Holley v. Adams, say Elisa Reiter, a family and child welfare law attorney, and Daniel Pollack, an attorney and professor at Yeshiva University's School of Social Work in New York City.
March 18, 2021 at 04:57 PM
6 minute read
When is a parent considered unfit to parent their own children? Allegations of being "unfit" must be shown by offering supporting documentation such as police reports, medical files or other authoritative documentation. Courts should look at many factors, as established by the Texas Supreme Court in Holley v. Adams. These include:
|- Failure to support a child in accordance with the parent's ability during a period of one year ending within six months of the date of filing a petition to terminate parental rights.
- Endangering the emotional well-being of the child.
- Evidence of significant criminal history.
- Commitment(s) to mental health facilities.
- Acts or omissions of the parent that may indicate that the existing parent-child relationship is not a proper one, and termination of parental rights is in the best interest of the child.
- Any excuse for the foregoing acts or omissions.
- Failure to support the child within the two year period preceding the filing of the case commensurate with the party's financial ability.
- The desires of the child.
- The emotional and physical needs of the child now and in the future.
- The emotional and physical danger to the child now and in the future.
- The parental abilities of the individuals seeking custody.
- The programs available to assist these individuals to promote the best interest of the child.
- The plans for the child by these individuals or by the agency seeking custody.
- The stability of the home or proposed placement.
- The acts or omissions of the parent which may indicate that the existing parent-child relationship is not a proper one.
- Any credible excuse for the acts or omissions of the parent.
In a more recent case, In re S.V.H. v. TDFPS, the mother had a long drug history, a series of referrals to CPS for neglectful supervision and drug use, and there was testimony by a CASA volunteer that, not only did the mother and child not seem very bonded, but that the child seemed to display a series of adverse reactions to visits with or by mother for days following visits. This was particularly evident because the mother and grandfather engaged in conversations about things like where the child would be living in the future, and with whom, and whether the child could go on a trip to the beach with the mother. The standard of review was established as:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllUber Not Responsible for Turning Over Information on 'Dangerous Riders' to Competitor, Judge Finds
5 minute readInfant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
4 minute read'Something Really Bad Happened': J&J's Talc Bankruptcy Vote Under Attack
7 minute readMass. Judge Declares Mistrial in Talc Trial: 'Court Can't Accommodate This Case'
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250