Background
V.C.’s father and stepmother petitioned to terminate the biological mother’s parental rights so the stepmother could adopt the child. The mother had been incarcerated for four years and was released in March 2024, approximately two months before the petition was filed. Following a March 2026 bench trial, the trial court terminated her rights under Texas Family Code § 161.001(b)(1)(C) and (F), based respectively on leaving the child with another without adequate support and failing to support the child according to her ability during the statutory period.
The father testified that the mother left V.C. with him when the child was approximately six months old, never paid court-ordered child support, and sought contact after leaving prison. The mother disputed abandoning the child, testified that she attempted to communicate during and after her incarceration, and said the father and stepmother prevented contact. Text messages showed repeated requests for information, photographs, and contact with V.C.; the stepmother also acknowledged preserving letters and drawings the mother had sent.
The Court’s Holding
The court held that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish either asserted statutory ground by clear and convincing evidence. Subsection C was not satisfied because both parents testified that V.C. was adequately supported while in the father and stepmother’s care. A parent may arrange for another caregiver to provide adequate support, and the evidence that the mother left V.C. with caregivers who supported him did not establish the statutory ground.
Subsection F also was not satisfied because the petitioners presented no evidence that the mother had the ability to support V.C. during the relevant statutory period. Because the petition was filed on May 14, 2024, the required consecutive twelve-month period had to fall between December 14, 2022, and May 14, 2024. The undisputed evidence showed that the mother was incarcerated until March 2024 and then lived in a halfway house; evidence that she had employment, a vehicle, and housing at the 2026 trial did not establish her ability to pay during the earlier period.
Because neither statutory ground was proven, the court did not address whether termination was in V.C.’s best interest. It reversed the trial court’s judgment and rendered judgment denying the petition to terminate the mother’s parental rights.
Key Takeaways
- Leaving a child with caregivers who provide adequate support does not establish termination under § 161.001(b)(1)(C) merely because the parent did not personally provide that support.
- A petitioner relying on § 161.001(b)(1)(F) must prove that the parent had the ability to support the child during the applicable twelve-month statutory period, not merely at the time of trial.
- When no statutory termination ground is supported by clear and convincing evidence, an appellate court may reverse and render judgment denying termination without reaching the child’s best interest.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores the demanding proof required to terminate the constitutionally protected parent-child relationship. Evidence that a child thrived with other caregivers, or that a parent failed to pay support while incarcerated, does not by itself satisfy the specific statutory grounds for termination.
For private termination and stepparent-adoption proceedings, petitioners must present evidence directed to every element and the precise statutory timeframe. Later financial stability cannot establish an earlier ability to pay, and adequate care supplied through the child’s placement may defeat a claim that the parent left the child without adequate support.