Background
The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services removed J.B. and B.B. from their mother’s care after reports of illegal drug use, neglectful supervision, unsafe living conditions, and sexual abuse of B.B. Both children tested positive for illegal drugs. The mother admitted a history of using methamphetamine, heroin, fentanyl, and marijuana, and her drug tests remained positive throughout the case.
The Department implemented a court-ordered service plan, referred the mother for services and drug testing, arranged visitation, assisted with transportation, and investigated relatives and friends as potential placements. The mother completed some treatment but repeatedly relapsed, left treatment programs early, missed or refused drug tests, and had not secured stable housing. Meanwhile, the children bonded with a foster family willing to adopt them and reported feeling safe and happy there.
The trial court terminated the mother’s parental rights after finding statutory endangerment grounds, that termination was in the children’s best interest, and that the Department had made reasonable reunification efforts but a continuing danger prevented the children’s return. The mother did not challenge the endangerment findings on appeal; she challenged the best-interest and reasonable-efforts findings.
The Court’s Holding
The Eleventh Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that legally and factually sufficient evidence supported the finding that termination was in the children’s best interest. The court emphasized the mother’s persistent drug use, repeated relapses, unstable housing, incomplete services, and inability to provide a safe, drug-free home. Her January 2026 hair-follicle test showed methamphetamine at nearly twenty times the level found in November 2025, and the trial court was entitled to reject her explanation that environmental exposure caused the result.
The court also held that clear and convincing evidence supported the finding that the Department made reasonable efforts to return the children. Those efforts included a service plan, service referrals, visitation, drug testing, transportation assistance, and investigation of more than a dozen possible placements. The statute required reasonable efforts, not ideal ones, and the mother’s continued drug use supported the finding that an ongoing danger prevented reunification.
Although the children preferred that their mother’s rights not be terminated, the court concluded that their wishes could not outweigh evidence of danger. Their bond with the foster family, the safety and stability of the placement, and the foster family’s attention to their educational and emotional needs further supported termination.
Key Takeaways
- A parent’s persistent drug use, including continued use during a termination proceeding, can strongly support a finding that termination is in the children’s best interest.
- A court-ordered service plan, referrals, visitation, drug testing, transportation assistance, and investigation of alternative placements can constitute reasonable reunification efforts.
- Children’s desire to preserve a parental relationship is relevant but does not override evidence that returning them to the parent would expose them to continuing danger.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates how Texas courts apply the heightened clear-and-convincing-evidence standard while deferring to a trial court’s credibility determinations in parental-rights cases. Partial completion of services and recent claims of improvement may not overcome a lengthy record of relapse, instability, and endangerment.
It also reinforces that Section 161.001(f) requires reasonable—not perfect—Department efforts before termination. A documented combination of services and practical assistance may satisfy that requirement even when reunification fails because the parent does not participate consistently or eliminate the danger that caused removal.