in the Interest of A.J.E., a Child
2012 Tex. App. LEXIS 3705
| Tex. App. | 2012Background
- This appeal concerns whether a child should be immunized against vaccine-preventable diseases when parents disagree on immunization.
- Appellant (the mother) sought sole authority to decide immunization, challenging the trial court’s joint conservatorship arrangement.
- The trial court, after appointing a physician for a second opinion, ordered immunization in accordance with the father’s wishes.
- The physician advised immunization per CDC and AAP recommendations, and stated no medical contraindication.
- Texas Health and Safety Code § 161.004 generally requires immunization but provides exemptions for conscience-based refusals or medical contraindications.
- The appellate court reviews for a broad discretion standard in child conservatorship and whether the trial court acted within that discretion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion by ordering immunization. | Mother argues immunization infringes her right to medical decision-making for the child. | Father contends immunization is in the child’s best interests and supported by medical opinion. | No abuse; immunization affirmed as in child’s best interests and supported by evidence. |
Key Cases Cited
- Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000) (plurality about parental decision making)
- Miller v. HCA, Inc., 118 S.W.3d 758 (Tex. 2003) (parental mutual decisions regarding medical care)
- In re A.L.E., 279 S.W.3d 424 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2009) (broad discretion standard in modifying conservatorship)
- Gillespie v. Gillespie, 644 S.W.2d 449 (Tex. 1982) (abuse of discretion standard framework)
- In re D.S., 76 S.W.3d 512 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2002) (analysis of discretion and best interests)
- In re R.T.K., 324 S.W.3d 896 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2010) (sufficiency of evidence in abuse of discretion)
- In re T.D.C., 91 S.W.3d 865 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2002) (procedure for evaluating discretionary decisions)
- In re C.A.M.M., 243 S.W.3d 211 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2007) (record must support discretionary decision with substantial evidence)