Background
The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services obtained temporary managing conservatorship of P.G. after the child and her mother tested positive for methamphetamine when P.G. was born in March 2025. The trial court later found statutory grounds for termination based on endangering conditions and conduct and the child’s prenatal exposure to a controlled substance. The mother challenged only the best-interest finding and the finding concerning the Department’s reunification efforts and continuing danger.
During the case, the mother completed several required services and generally tested negative for drugs until a urinalysis and hair-follicle test were positive for methamphetamine in January 2026. She attended eight of twenty-eight scheduled visits, lived in several states, lacked a permanent residence, and offered an uncertain childcare and employment plan. P.G., meanwhile, remained with an adoptive foster family, was healthy and developmentally on track, and had bonded with the family.
The Court’s Holding
The Eleventh Court of Appeals held that legally and factually sufficient evidence supported the finding that termination was in P.G.’s best interest. The trial court could consider the mother’s methamphetamine use during pregnancy, positive drug tests shortly before trial, sporadic visitation, unstable housing and employment, and ill-defined plans for the child. It could also weigh P.G.’s bond with her foster family and the stability and permanence offered by the proposed adoption.
The court also upheld the finding under Texas Family Code Section 161.001(f) that the Department made reasonable efforts to return P.G. to her mother but a continuing danger prevented reunification. The Department implemented a service plan, facilitated services and visitation, and maintained communication. The record did not show that the mother requested transportation as required by the plan, and the proposed placement with an adult paternal sibling did not proceed because the sibling ultimately declined placement. The trial court was entitled to credit the January 2026 positive drug tests and disbelieve the mother’s denial of further drug use. The appellate court therefore affirmed the termination order.
Key Takeaways
- A parent’s substantial completion of a service plan does not require reunification when safety concerns, instability, and other evidence supporting termination remain.
- Implementing and facilitating a family service plan generally constitutes reasonable reunification efforts, even if the Department’s efforts were not ideal.
- Recent positive methamphetamine tests, prenatal drug exposure, sporadic visitation, and unstable living arrangements may collectively support both a best-interest finding and a finding of continuing danger.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates how Texas appellate courts evaluate the 2023 requirement that the Department make reasonable efforts to return a child before parental rights may be terminated. It confirms that the inquiry focuses on reasonable—not perfect—efforts and that a service plan, facilitated services, visitation arrangements, and ongoing communication can satisfy the statute.
The opinion also emphasizes that service-plan compliance is only one part of the best-interest analysis. Courts may give substantial weight to continuing drug concerns, parental instability, limited contact with the child, and the comparative permanence of an adoptive placement.