in the Interest of A.D.M and D.D.M. Jr., Children, 01-16-00550-CV

Background

Parents (C.V.M. mother; D.D.M. father) had two young children removed after concerns about the mother’s mental-health crises (postpartum depression, suicidal/homicidal ideation) and alleged physical abuse of the older child; children placed with foster family and sibling.
A Department safety plan required drug/psych testing and supervised contact; parents signed but did not comply (father failed testing; mother had unsupervised contact despite prohibition), prompting removal and foster placement.
Court-ordered family service plan required parenting classes, psychological and substance assessments, random drug testing, stable housing/employment, and other services; the father failed to complete many requirements and continued drug use; the mother completed services but intermittently refused prescribed medication and had diagnostic history (borderline, bipolar) with past child-abandonment issues.
Trial court terminated both parents’ rights, appointing the Department sole managing conservator; both parents appealed, challenging (a) statutory predicate findings (father: failure to comply with court order and endangerment; mother: endangerment) and (b) that termination was in the children’s best interest.
The appellate court reviewed legal and factual sufficiency under clear-and-convincing evidence standards and affirmed the termination decree.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Department)	Defendant's Argument (Parent)	Held
Whether father failed to comply with court-ordered family service plan (Tex. Fam. Code §161.001(b)(1)(O))	Father did not complete required services (parenting classes, assessments, visits, proof of income/lease) and thus failed to comply.	Father claimed substantial compliance because he worked to stabilize job and housing.	Held: Evidence legally and factually sufficient that father failed to comply; substantial compliance insufficient.
Whether father’s conduct/endangerment and other factors support best-interest finding	Father’s drug use, instability, failure to protect child from mother's abuse, and incomplete services endangered children and made termination in their best interest.	Father argued he was stabilizing employment/housing and disputed some allegations.	Held: Evidence legally and factually sufficient that termination was in children’s best interest.
Whether mother’s conduct (endangerment under §161.001(b)(1)(E)) supported termination	Mother’s history of mental illness with suicidal/homicidal ideation, inconsistent medication compliance, prior child-abandonment, admissions/statements and evidence of physical abuse amounted to a course of conduct endangering children.	Mother disputed characterization (said some statements were dreams), argued isolated incidents and contested witness credibility.	Held: Evidence legally and factually sufficient to find mother engaged in conduct endangering children.
Whether termination of mother’s parental rights was in children’s best interest	Mother’s prior relinquishment/abandonment, history of abuse, medication noncompliance and instability supported best-interest finding.	Mother completed many services, had employment and housing plans, and had improved parenting at times.	Held: Evidence legally and factually sufficient that termination was in children’s best interest.

Key Cases Cited

In re A.V., 113 S.W.3d 355 (Tex. 2003) (one predicate finding plus best-interest suffices for termination)
In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d 256 (Tex. 2002) (clear-and-convincing sufficiency standards for termination review)
Holick v. Smith, 685 S.W.2d 18 (Tex. 1985) (heightened scrutiny in termination proceedings)
Tex. Dep’t of Human Servs. v. Boyd, 727 S.W.2d 531 (Tex. 1987) (termination requires predicate act plus best interest)
Holley v. Adams, 544 S.W.2d 367 (Tex. 1976) (factors for best-interest analysis)
In re C.H., 89 S.W.3d 17 (Tex. 2002) (factual-sufficiency review balancing supporting and contradicting evidence)
City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. 2005) (factfinder credibility determinations and appellate review)
In re G.M., 596 S.W.2d 846 (Tex. 1980) (presumption favoring parent-child relationship)
Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (U.S. 1982) (due process and clear-and-convincing standard for termination)
Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (U.S. 2000) (parental liberty interest in custody decisions)