in the Interest of Q. W., III, a Child
12-16-00281-CV
| Tex. App. | Mar 31, 2017Background
- Mother L.G. appealed termination of her parental rights to her infant son Q.W., III; the Department had been appointed temporary managing conservator.
- The Department filed for termination after L.G. tested positive for cocaine two weeks after a drug-negative hospital birth and the child was removed to foster care.
- L.G. had a lengthy Department history: three older children were removed (she relinquished rights), past positive drug tests, and one older child severely injured at birth; she also has an extensive criminal record.
- During the case L.G. missed multiple requested drug tests, skipped many scheduled visitations with Q.W., III, and failed to complete recommended services (counseling, NA, parenting classes).
- At trial the court found by clear and convincing evidence L.G. violated Texas Family Code §161.001(b)(1)(E) (endangering conduct) and that termination was in the child’s best interest, and terminated her parental rights.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (L.G.) | Defendant's Argument (Department) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Legal & factual sufficiency to terminate under §161.001(b)(1)(E) (endangerment) | Evidence insufficient: recent negative tests and claimed work/transportation excuses; no enduring endangerment | L.G.’s positive cocaine test after birth, missed drug tests, prior drug history, criminal associations, poor visitation, and prior removals show a course of endangering conduct | Affirmed: evidence legally and factually sufficient to support termination under (E) |
| Legal & factual sufficiency that termination is in child’s best interest (§161.001(b)(2)) | L.G. argued her recent stability, negative tests, employment prospects, and distancing from ‘‘questionable’’ associates show best interest favors reunification | Child was bonded to foster family, L.G. failed services, lacked stable employment/support, had ongoing substance/criminal history and inconsistent visitation | Affirmed: evidence legally and factually sufficient that termination is in the child’s best interest |
Key Cases Cited
- Wiley v. Spratlan, 543 S.W.2d 349 (Tex. 1976) (termination permanently severs parent–child bond; strict scrutiny of proceedings)
- Holley v. Adams, 544 S.W.2d 367 (Tex. 1976) (factors for determining child’s best interest)
- Tex. Dep’t of Human Svcs. v. Boyd, 727 S.W.2d 531 (Tex. 1987) (definition of endanger; conduct need not be directed at child)
- In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d 256 (Tex. 2002) (standard for legal sufficiency review in parental-termination cases)
- In re C.H., 89 S.W.3d 17 (Tex. 2002) (standard for factual sufficiency review in termination cases)
- In re J.O.A., 283 S.W.3d 336 (Tex. 2009) (parental narcotics use may constitute endangering course of conduct)