in the Interest of J.S., G.S., and I.F., Children
07-21-00110-CV
| Tex. App. | Sep 17, 2021Background
- Children (J.S., 14; G.S., 11; I.F., 10) removed after reports parents used methamphetamine in the home, left drug paraphernalia accessible, domestic violence, and untreated lice; prior 2009 removal after infant G.S. suffered broken ribs and skull fracture.
- Department filed for protection/conservatorship and termination in Dec. 2019; final hearing Jan. 28–29, 2021; children placed with fictive kin (potential adoptive placement).
- Trial court terminated mother S.F.’s parental rights under Tex. Fam. Code § 161.001(b)(1)(D), (O), and (P) and found termination was in the children’s best interests.
- S.F. had multiple positive methamphetamine screens during the case, missed/failed to complete several court-ordered services (parenting, domestic-violence, outpatient drug treatment), and had inconsistent contact with caseworkers; children discontinued visits and expressed fear of returning.
- Appellant raised four issues on appeal: (1) ICWA notice deficiency (Zuni Tribe), and legal/factual insufficiency of termination under subsections (D), (O), and (P). The court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. ICWA notice (tribal notice) | Failure to notify Zuni Tribe; notice to Apache insufficient — remand/ reversal required | Father’s testimony did not give the court reason to believe Zuni affiliation; father later clarified Apache heritage and had not registered children; notice to Mescalero Apache given and Tribe declined intervention | Overruled — no reason to know Zuni affiliation, no ICWA notice error |
| 2. Sufficiency of evidence for §161.001(b)(1)(D) (endangerment) | Evidence legally and factually insufficient to show she knowingly placed/allowed children to remain in dangerous conditions | Drug use in presence of children, paraphernalia in home, domestic violence, prior unexplained infant injury, unstable housing, untreated lice, failure to complete services/supports a causal link to endangerment | Affirmed — clear and convincing evidence supports termination under (D) |
| 3. Sufficiency for §161.001(b)(1)(O) (failure to comply with court order) | Insufficient evidence mother failed to comply with specific court-ordered actions | Mother failed to complete required services and had inconsistent participation; evidence supports noncompliance | Pretermitted on appeal (trial court found (O) proven) |
| 4. Sufficiency for §161.001(b)(1)(P) (controlled-substance use) | Insufficient evidence that parental drug use endangered children | Multiple positive meth tests, relapse, treatment noncompletion, drug use while children present support (P) | Pretermitted on appeal (trial court found (P) proven) |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Z.N., 602 S.W.3d 541 (Tex. 2020) (heightened appellate review under clear-and-convincing standard)
- In re A.C., 560 S.W.3d 624 (Tex. 2018) (distinguishing legal and factual sufficiency in termination appeals)
- In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d 256 (Tex. 2002) (standard for legal sufficiency in parental-termination cases)
- In re N.G., 577 S.W.3d 230 (Tex. 2019) (only one statutory ground necessary to support termination)
- In re M.C., 917 S.W.2d 268 (Tex. 1996) (definition of "endanger" in child-termination context)
- Texas Dep’t of Human Servs. v. Boyd, 727 S.W.2d 531 (Tex. 1987) (endangerment analysis authority)
- Holley v. Adams, 544 S.W.2d 367 (Tex. 1976) (Holley factors for best-interest analysis)
- In re C.H., 89 S.W.3d 17 (Tex. 2002) (statutory grounds may support best-interest finding)
- Miss. Band of Choctaw Indians v. Holyfield, 490 U.S. 30 (1989) (ICWA purpose and federal policy favoring placement within Indian community)