Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001

A child's love for a parent is an important best-interest consideration, but it may be outweighed by overwhelming evidence of endangerment.

In Re WSM · filed 2003-05-20(2)

Although a child's love of his natural parents is a very important consideration in determining the best interests of the child, it cannot override or outweigh the overwhelming and undisputed evidence showing that the parents placed or allowed the child to remain in conditions, and engaged in conduct or placed the child with persons who engaged in conduct, which endangers the physical and emotional well-being of the child.

A child’s love for a parent is an important best-interest consideration, but it does not outweigh overwhelming evidence that the parent endangered the child.

In the Interest of W.S.M., a Child · filed 2003-05-20(2)

Although a child’s love of his natural parents is a very important consideration in determining the best interests of the child, it cannot override or outweigh the overwhelming and undisputed evidence showing that the parents placed or allowed the child to remain in conditions, and engaged in conduct or placed the child with persons who engaged in conduct, which endangers the physical and emotional well-being of the child.

Section 161.001's best-interest requirement can be satisfied despite a parent's later improvement when the evidence supports a firm conviction that termination serves the children.

In Re MGD · filed 2003-05-29(2)

The totality of the evidence is such that a reasonable factfinder could form a firm conviction or belief that termination of T.D.'s parental rights is in the children's best interest notwithstanding her turnaround and signs of sustained reformation. Thus, under the applicable standard of review, the evidence is factually sufficient to support the jury's best-interest finding.

A parent's testimony disputing whether termination is in the child's best interest can defeat an instructed verdict on the best-interest finding required by Section 161.001.

In Re JC · filed 2003-06-13(2)

In addition to finding by clear and convincing evidence one of the acts enumerated in Section 161.001 of the Family Code, a court order to terminate parental rights must also find that termination is in the best interest of the child. Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 161.001(1), (2) (Vernon 2002). Clark testified extensively at the final hearing and repeatedly denied that termination of his parental rights would be in the best interests of his children. This testimony was sufficient to defeat any motion for an instructed verdict.

Section 161.001 requires a finding that termination is in the child’s best interest, and a parent’s testimony disputing that issue can defeat an instructed verdict.

In the Interest of J.C., G.C., I.C., and T.C., Children · filed 2003-06-13(2)

In addition to finding by clear and convincing evidence one of the acts enumerated in Section 161.001 of the Family Code, a court order to terminate parental rights must also find that termination is in the best interest of the child. Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 161.001(1), (2) (Vernon 2002). Clark testified extensively at the final hearing and repeatedly denied that termination of his parental rights would be in the best interests of his children. This testimony was sufficient to defeat any motion for an instructed verdict.

Section 161.001 permits termination when clear and convincing evidence establishes an endangerment ground and shows that termination is in the children’s best interest.

In the Interest of C.L.C. and C.R.D., Minor Children · filed 2003-08-27

Based upon our review of the record, we conclude that the trial court did not err in finding that Crawford knowingly placed or knowingly allowed his children to remain in conditions or surroundings which endangered their physical or emotional well-being, and engaged in conduct or knowingly placed his children with persons who engaged in conduct which endangered their physical or emotional well-being. Further, the trial court did not err by finding that terminating Crawford’s parental rights is in the best interest of C.LC. and C.R.D.

Section 161.001 requires proof of at least one listed act or omission and that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of B.K.D., G.D.D. and A.C.W., Children · filed 2003-09-11(1)

In proceedings to terminate the parent-child relationship brought under section 161.001, the petitioner must establish one or more of the acts or omissions enumerated under subdivision (1) of the statute and must also prove that termination is in the best interest of the child.

Section 161.001(2) requires proof that termination is in the child's best interest; sustained drug use, an unstable lifestyle, and a criminal record can support that finding.

In Re CAJ · filed 2003-11-20(2)

The State need only present sufficient evidence to support one of the section 161.001(1) factors and show that termination is in the best interest of the child under section 161.001(2). ... In light of the evidence of appellant's continuous and long-term drug use, her unstable lifestyle, and criminal record, we hold that the evidence is factually sufficient to support the trial court's conclusion that termination of the parent-child relationship was in the child's best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires proof that termination is in the child’s best interest; sustained drug use, an unstable lifestyle, and a criminal record can support that finding.

in the Interest of C.A.J., a Child · filed 2003-11-20(2)

The State need only present sufficient evidence to support one of the section 161.001(1) factors and show that termination is in the best interest of the child under section 161.001(2). ... In light of the evidence of appellant’s continuous and long-term drug use, her unstable lifestyle, and criminal record, we hold that the evidence is factually sufficient to support the trial court’s conclusion that termination of the parent-child relationship was in the child’s best interest.

Section 161.001 permits involuntary termination only when a parent has committed a harmful predicate act or omission and termination is in the child's best interest.

in the Interest of C. H. W., a Minor Child · filed 2003-12-04

A court may order involuntary termination only if the court finds that: (1) a parent has committed a predicate act or omission harmful to the child, and (2) termination is in the best interest of the child. ... We conclude these enumerated findings are supported by clear and convincing evidence. ... Viewing all evidence in the light most favorable to the finding, we conclude it is legally sufficient to support the court's finding that termination is in the best interest of the child.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence of both a statutory ground for termination and the child’s best interest.

Williams v. Jackie Williams and K. W. · filed 2004-01-08

A court may terminate parental rights if it finds that: (1) the parent has engaged in any of the specific conduct enumerated in the family code as grounds for termination, and (2) termination is in the best interest of the child. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001; Richardson v. Green, 677 S.W.2d 497, 499 (Tex. 1984). The fact finder must determine that clear and convincing evidence supports both elements; proof of one element does not relieve the burden of proving the other.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child's best interest.

in the Interest of A.B., a Child · filed 2004-02-27(2)

Based upon our review of the record and our application of the appropriate standard of review, we conclude that evidence is sufficiently clear and convincing that a reasonable trier of fact could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Kathryn's parental rights is in A.B.'s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child's best interest.

In Re SAW, Jr. · filed 2004-04-06(2)

Before a parent's right can be involuntarily terminated, the Department must prove by clear and convincing evidence that (1) the parent has committed one of several enumerated acts, and (2) termination is in the child's best interest. See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 161.001, 161.206(a) (Vernon 2002). ... After reviewing the evidence presented, we cannot conclude the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support the trial court's finding that termination of appellant's parental rights was in S.A.W.'s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence of an enumerated parental act and that termination is in the child’s best interest.

In the Interest of S.A.W. · filed 2004-04-06

Before a parent’s right can be involuntarily terminated, the Department must prove by clear and convincing evidence that (1) the parent has committed one of several enumerated acts, and (2) termination is in the child’s best interest. ... After reviewing the evidence presented, we cannot conclude the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of appellant’s parental rights was in S.A.W.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child's best interest; disputed evidence does not defeat the finding if a reasonable fact finder could form a firm belief in it.

in the Interest of H.M, J.C.S. & I.R.S. · filed 2004-04-14(2)

Based upon our review of the record as a whole, we conclude that, although there is some disputed evidence, this evidence is not so significant that a reasonable trier of fact could not have reconciled this evidence in favor of its finding and formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Tamara's parental rights is in the best interest of H.M., J.C.S., and I.R.S.

Section 161.001 requires a finding that termination is in the child's best interest, proved by clear and convincing evidence.

In Re CJB · filed 2004-05-12

Termination of parental rights requires an affirmative finding on each prong of a two prong test. One prong is that termination is in the best interest of the child, and each prong must be proved by the petitioner by clear and convincing evidence. In the Interest of J.M.T., 39 S.W.3d 234, 237 (Tex.App.-Waco 1999, no pet.); see also TEX. FAM.CODE ANN. § 161.001 (Vernon 2002).

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

In the Interest of C.J.B. · filed 2004-05-12(2)

Termination of parental rights requires an affirmative finding on each prong of a two prong test. One prong is that termination is in the best interest of the child, and each prong must be proved by the petitioner by clear and convincing evidence. ... After reviewing all the evidence in the light most favorable to the affirmative finding of best interest, we hold that a reasonable trier of fact could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination was in the best interest of C.J.B.

Section 161.001 requires proof of statutory grounds and the child’s best interest, but does not require proof that termination is the only placement option.

Martinez v. Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services · filed 2004-05-20

Although there is a general preference for keeping a parent-child relationship intact, see Holick v. Smith, 685 S.W.2d 18, 20 (Tex. 1985), and placing children with family members, see Horvatich, 78 S.W.3d at 603, the legislature has not required that the Department, in addition to proving that termination is warranted by the parent’s conduct and the child’s best interest, also prove that termination is the only option available for the child’s placement.

Section 161.001 requires proof that termination is in the child's best interest; a parent's lengthy incarceration, lack of contact, and the stability of a prospective adoptive home can support that finding.

in the Interest of M.A.C., Jr., a Child · filed 2004-08-24(2)

After a review of the entire record, we hold that the evidence is factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of appellant’s rights were in the best interest of M.A.C., Jr.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child's best interest; a child's love for a parent does not alone defeat that finding.

Berthiaume v. Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services · filed 2004-08-31(2)

In spite of the fact that the children love their father, based on this record, we cannot hold that the evidence is legally or factually insufficient to support the jury's finding that termination was in the children's best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

Taylor v. Brazoria County Children's Protection Service Unit · filed 2004-09-29(2)

Additionally, CPS had the burden to prove by clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... The jury could also have reasonably formed a firm belief or conviction that termination is in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001 requires separate proof that termination is in the child’s best interest, although evidence supporting a statutory ground may also support the best-interest finding.

Valancia Roxanne Comer v. Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services · filed 2004-12-02(2)

Although proof of grounds from section 161.001(1) does not relieve the Department from proving termination is in the best interest of the child, the same evidence may be probative of both issues.

Section 161.001(2) requires that termination of parental rights be in the children’s best interest, and the court may uphold that finding when the evidence is factually sufficient.

in the Interest of I.O., and R.O., Children · filed 2004-12-09(2)

Accordingly, applying the appropriate standard of review, (footnote: 4) we hold that the evidence is factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of appellant’s parental rights is in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires proof of a statutory ground for termination and that termination is in the child's best interest.

in the Interest of S.L.S., a Child · filed 2005-02-03(2)

Therefore, we conclude that the jury could reasonably form a firm conviction or belief that termination of appellant’s parental rights was in the best interest of S.L.S.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest, which may include evidence of the parent’s inability to provide safe care and the prospect of a stable adoptive home.

Ward v. Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services · filed 2005-02-10(2)

The evidence is factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that it was in A.D.P.’s best interest to terminate Ward’s parental rights.

Section 161.001(2) requires termination of parental rights to be in the child’s best interest; persistent drug use, unstable housing, and failure to complete services can support that finding.

Ross v. Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services · filed 2005-02-17(2)

Section 161.001 of the Texas Family Code permits a court to order termination of parental rights if two elements are established. ... Second, termination of the relationship must be in the best interest of the child. Id. § 161.001(2). ... We conclude that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the district court’s finding that terminating the parent-child relationship is in T.S.R.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the children's best interest.

In Re JM · filed 2005-02-28(2)

The finding that termination was in the children's best interest must be supported by clear and convincing evidence. Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 161.001(2) (Vernon 2002).

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the children’s best interest.

In the Interest of J.M. · filed 2005-02-28(2)

The finding that termination was in the children’s best interest must be supported by clear and convincing evidence. Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 161.001(2) (Vernon 2002).

Section 161.001(2) requires proof that termination is in the child's best interest, even when a statutory ground for termination has been proved; the same evidence may support both findings.

Smith v. Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services · filed 2005-03-10(2)

Although proving grounds for termination under section 161.001(1) does not relieve the Department of proving termination is in the best interest of the child under section 161.001(2), the same evidence may be probative of both issues. ... The evidence in this case was legally and factually sufficient to support the court's conclusion that termination of Smith's parental rights was in the best interest of the child, K.N.S.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

Lewis v. Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2005-04-07(2)

We hold that the trial court reasonably could have formed a firm conviction or belief that termination is in C.L.’s best interest, and that factually sufficient evidence supports the trial court’s decision.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination of parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of C.G.E., L.C.S., and M.W.S., Children · filed 2005-04-07(2)

Having thoroughly reviewed all the evidence and applying the appropriate standard of review, 8 we conclude the evidence was such that the trial court, as finder of fact, could reasonably form a firm belief or conviction by clear and convincing evidence that termination of Appellant’s parental rights would be in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001(2) requires proof that terminating the parent-child relationship is in the child's best interest.

in the Interest of M. A. and B. A., Children · filed 2005-04-11(2)

Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude that there is legally and factually sufficient evidence to support the trial court's finding that termination of Allen's parental rights under section 161.001(2) is in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001 requires a finding that termination is in the child’s best interest, supported by evidence from which a factfinder could form a firm belief or conviction.

in the Interest of C.P. and S.P., Children · filed 2005-05-19(2)

Having reviewed the entire record, we hold that the evidence is such that a factfinder could reasonably form a firm belief or conviction that termination was in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

In the Interest D.M.C. · filed 2005-07-13(2)

A court may terminate a parent’s parental rights if the State proves by clear and convincing evidence that the parent has engaged in one or more of the acts described in the Texas Family Code, Section 161.001, and further proves that termination is in the best interests of the child. ... We find clear and convincing evidence that termination is in D.M.C.’s best interest, and we overrule Coleman’s first issue.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest, separate from proof of a statutory ground for termination.

in the Interest of P. J. C., II, a Child · filed 2005-07-29(2)

Additionally, both elements must be established by clear and convincing evidence, and proof of one element does not alleviate the petitioner’s burden of proving the other.

Section 161.001 permits termination when clear and convincing evidence establishes one statutory ground and that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of A.L., a Child · filed 2005-08-11

Section 161.001 allowed the jury to terminate appellant’s parental rights based on any one of the three grounds, together with a finding that termination was in the best interest of the child.

Section 161.001 requires proof that termination is in the child's best interest, which may be supported by evidence of a parent's drug use, unstable home, and failure to complete treatment.

In Re DS · filed 2005-10-06(2)

In proceedings to terminate the parent-child relationship brought under section 161.001 of the family code, the petitioner must establish one or more of the acts or omissions enumerated under subdivision (1) of the statute and must also prove that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... We hold that the evidence is factually sufficient to support the trial court's finding that termination is in D.S.'s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires proof of an enumerated parental act or omission and that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of D.S., Jr., a Child · filed 2005-10-06(2)

In proceedings to terminate the parent-child relationship brought under section 161.001 of the family code, the petitioner must establish one or more of the acts or omissions enumerated under subdivision (1) of the statute and must also prove that termination is in the best interest of the child.

Section 161.001(2) requires a finding that termination is in the child's best interest, supported by evidence from which a reasonable factfinder could form a firm belief or conviction.

In Re Jcb · filed 2005-12-01(2)

Under these circumstances, the factual sufficiency of the evidence supporting the best interest finding, particularly under a clear and convincing evidence standard, is very close; but, depending on his or her assessment of the weight and credibility of the respective items of evidence, a reasonable factfinder could form a firm belief or conviction that termination was in J.C.B.'s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires a finding that termination is in the child’s best interest, supported by evidence from which a reasonable factfinder could form a firm belief or conviction.

In the Interest of J.C.B. · filed 2005-12-01(2)

Under these circumstances, the factual sufficiency of the evidence supporting the best interest finding, particularly under a clear and convincing evidence standard, is very close; but, depending on his or her assessment of the weight and credibility of the respective items of evidence, a reasonable factfinder could form a firm belief or conviction that termination was in J.C.B.’s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child's best interest.

in the Interest of J. E. C., a Child · filed 2005-12-23(2)

She only challenges the court's judgment that termination is in the best interest of the child. There is ample evidence in the record to support the trial court's decision. ... We hold that the evidence is factually sufficient to support the trial court's decision to terminate Carpenter's parental rights.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence of both a statutory ground for termination and that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of A.M.W. and A.H.W., Children · filed 2006-02-22(2)

In a proceeding to terminate the parent-child relationship brought under section 161.001 of the Texas Family Code, the movant must establish by clear and convincing evidence two elements: (1) one or more acts or omissions enumerated under subsection (1) of section 161.001; and (2) that termination is in the best interest of the child.

Section 161.001(2) requires proof that terminating the parent-child relationship is in the child's best interest.

In Re SL · filed 2006-03-27(2)

We conclude that the evidence was factually sufficient to support the jury's finding that termination of Lindgren's and Brown's parental rights was in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001(2) requires termination of the parent-child relationship to be in the child’s best interest.

In the Interest of S.L. · filed 2006-03-27(2)

We conclude that the evidence was factually sufficient to support the jury’s finding that termination of Lindgren’s and Brown’s parental rights was in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001 requires a best-interest finding to terminate parental rights; legally sufficient evidence must allow the jury to form a firm belief or conviction supporting that finding.

in the Interest of J.T.W., a Child · filed 2006-03-28(2)

Therefore, we consider the Whites' contention that "[n]ot one scintilla of evidence has been adduced in any testimony, document or court record that [J.T.W.] was ever harmed, injured, abused, threatened, endangered or neglected in any way" as presenting a challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury's finding that termination of their parental rights was in J.T.W.'s best interest. ... Viewing the evidence summarized above in the light most favorable to the jury's finding to determine whether it could have formed a firm belief or conviction that its finding was true, see In re J.F.C. , 96 S.W.3d at 266, we conclude the trial court's termination order is supported by legally sufficient evidence.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child's best interest; on factual sufficiency review, the question is whether the entire record permits a reasonable factfinder to form a firm conviction of that finding.

In Re JLC · filed 2006-05-18(2)

Our inquiry here is whether, on the entire record, a factfinder could reasonably form a firm conviction or belief that the parent violated one of the conduct provisions of section 161.001(1) and that the termination of the parent's parental rights would be in the best interest of the child. ... Based on the foregoing, we hold that a rational factfinder could reasonably form a firm conviction or belief that the termination of Teresa C.'s parental rights would be in the best interest of the child.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of J.L.C., a Child · filed 2006-05-18(2)

Based on the foregoing, we hold that a rational factfinder could reasonably form a firm conviction or belief that the termination of Teresa C.’s parental rights would be in the best interest of the child.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of V.R.J., R.L.H., and H.J., Children · filed 2006-07-26(2)

Given this evidence, the jury could reasonably have formed a firm belief or conviction that the Department’s allegation that termination of the parent-child relationship was in the children’s best interest was true.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

Castillo v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2006-07-28(2)

Having reviewed the entire record, including Castillo’s protracted history with the Department and the services she has been offered, the children’s medical difficulties, and the children’s current placements with concerned and able caretakers, we hold that the evidence is factually sufficient to allow the jury to have reached a firm conclusion that termination was in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child's best interest.

Preece v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2006-08-30

Based on this record, and considering A.L.M.'s medical condition, the stability and bonding of her foster placement, Preece's mental instability and substance abuse problem, the Department's concerns about a placement with Rizos and her family, and Preece's refusal to undergo further drug testing at the expense of her visitation with A.L.M., we hold that the evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support a finding that termination is in A.L.M.'s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence of a statutory ground for termination and that termination is in the child’s best interest.

In Re MNV · filed 2006-09-13(2)

In order to terminate the parental rights of Vasquez the trial court needed to find by clear and convincing evidence one of the acts enumerated in Section 161.001 of the Family Code and that termination is in the best interest of the child.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of M.N v., Children · filed 2006-09-13(2)

In order to terminate the parental rights of Vasquez the trial court needed to find by clear and convincing evidence one of the acts enumerated in Section 161.001 of the Family Code and that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... Nonetheless, we conclude that Vasquez has an arguable basis that material issues of fact exist as to the best interest determination of the children.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest in addition to proof of a predicate ground.

In the Interest of C.E.K. · filed 2006-11-14(2)

In addition to a predicate violation, to terminate a party’s parental rights, CPS must establish by clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the best interest of the children. Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 161.001 (Vernon Supp.2006). ... After reviewing all the evidence presented and mindful of the fact that we may not reweigh that evidence or reassess the credibility of the witnesses, we conclude the evidence is legally insufficient to support the best-interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) permits termination of parental rights only if termination is in the children’s best interest.

In the Interest of R.R. & S.J.S. · filed 2006-12-01(2)

In regard to Rodgers’s claim of having set up a meritorious defense, we note that parental rights may be terminated only if termination is in the best interest of the children. Tex. Fam.Code § 161.001(2). ... Based on all these considerations as well as Rodgers’s factual assertions, we conclude that Rodgers set up a meritorious defense to CPS’s claim that termination would be in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001(2) requires termination to be in the child's best interest before parental rights may be terminated.

In Re RR · filed 2006-12-01(2)

In regard to Rodgers's claim of having set up a meritorious defense, we note that parental rights may be terminated only if termination is in the best interest of the children. TEX. FAM.CODE § 161.001(2). ... Based on all these considerations as well as Rodgers's factual assertions, we conclude that Rodgers set up a meritorious defense to CPS's claim that termination would be in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest, even when an endangerment ground is established.

In Re CEK · filed 2007-02-28(2)

After reviewing all the evidence presented and mindful of the fact that we may not reweigh that evidence or reassess the credibility of the witnesses, we conclude the evidence is legally insufficient to support the best-interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires proof that termination is in the child’s best interest; a parent’s drug use and failure to complete services can support that finding.

in the Interest of T.J.R., a Child · filed 2007-03-01(2)

In proceedings to terminate the parent-child relationship brought under section 161.001 of the family code, the petitioner must establish one ground listed under subdivision (1) of the statute and must also prove that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... Appellant failed to fully complete her service plan and stopped her visits and NA and CATS meetings when Mack informed her that the Department planned to seek termination based on the positive results of the June 2006 drug test. ... Accordingly, we hold that the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires proof that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of J.E.D., a Child · filed 2007-03-08(2)

In proceedings to terminate the parent-child relationship brought under section 161.001 of the family code, the petitioner must establish one or more of the acts or omissions enumerated under subdivision (1) of the statute and must also prove that termination is in the best interest of the child under subdivision (2). ... Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court’s judgment, we hold that a fact-finder could reasonably form a firm belief or conviction that termination of A.D.’s parental rights was in J.E.D.’s best interest; thus, the evidence was legally sufficient.

Section 161.001(2) requires termination to be in the child's best interest, and evidence supporting an endangerment finding may also support that finding.

In Re KC · filed 2007-04-19(2)

Evidence supporting the jury's TEX.FAM.CODE § 161.001(1)(D),(E) endangerment finding, which Mother does not challenge, can be probative of the TEX.FAM. CODE § 161.001(2) "best interest" finding.

Evidence supporting an endangerment finding under subsection (1) can also support the child’s best interest finding under subsection (2).

In the Interest of K.C. · filed 2007-04-19(2)

Evidence supporting the jury’s Tex.Fam.Code § 161.001(1)(D),(E) endangerment finding, which Mother does not challenge, can be probative of the Tex.Fam. Code § 161.001(2) “best interest” finding.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence of a statutory ground for termination and that termination is in the child’s best interest.

Anderson v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2007-05-09

To terminate an individual’s parental rights, Texas law requires a district court to find by clear and convincing evidence that (1) the parent has engaged in one of the statutory grounds for termination, and (2) the termination is in the child’s best interest.

Section 161.001 permits a parent’s affidavit of relinquishment to provide sufficient evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

Bunton v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2007-05-16(2)

An affidavit of relinquishment, in and of itself, can provide sufficient evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest. ... Thus, the record contains sufficient evidence upon which a fact-finder could reasonably form a firm belief or conviction that termination is in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001(2) requires a separate inquiry into the child's best interest even when a ground for termination exists.

Harris v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2007-06-15(2)

The dissent's approach would mean that once a parent commits an act permitting termination, there is no need to conduct further inquiry into best interest, something section 161.001(2) specifically requires.

Section 161.001 requires proof of a listed ground for termination and proof that termination is in the child's best interest; scant evidence cannot support a best-interest finding.

In Re JRS · filed 2007-07-19(2)

In proceedings to terminate the parent-child relationship brought under section 161.001 of the family code, the petitioner must establish one ground listed under subdivision (1) of the statute and must also prove that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... Based on the entire record before us, we hold that while there is slight evidence relevant to the eighth Holley factor, a factfinder could not reasonably form a firm conviction or belief that the termination of J.S.'s parental rights would be in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of J.R.S. and H.L.M.S., Children · filed 2007-07-19(2)

Therefore, the evidence is factually insufficient under the clear and convincing standard to support the trial court’s best-interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of J.D.B. and G.N.B., Children · filed 2007-08-02(2)

Having carefully considered the evidence in light of the Holley factors and applying the appropriate standard of review, (footnote: 17) we hold that the trial court could have reasonably formed a firm belief or conviction that termination was in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child's best interest.

in the Interest of E. A. · filed 2007-08-31(2)

Thus, we conclude that the Department presented enough evidence from which the trial court could reasonably have formed a firm conviction or belief that each child's best interest warranted termination.

Section 161.001 requires a separate finding, supported by clear and convincing evidence, that termination is in the child's best interest even when a statutory ground for termination is established.

In Re SRL · filed 2007-11-08(2)

The factfinder must find both a statutory violation and that termination is in the children's best interest. The trial judge may have believed DFPS conclusively established a statutory ground for termination under subsection Q, but the best interest determination is a separate inquiry. ... Because the trial judge did not actually form a firm conviction or belief that severing appellant's relationship with his children was in their best interest, we conclude the evidence is legally insufficient.

Section 161.001 requires a best interest finding separate from a statutory ground for termination; imprisonment alone does not establish that termination is in a child’s best interest.

In the Interest of S.R.L. and L.L. · filed 2007-11-08(2)

But he did have a choice. The factfinder must find both a statutory violation and that termination is in the children’s best interest. The trial judge may have believed DFPS conclusively established a statutory ground for termination under subsection Q, but the best interest determination is a separate inquiry.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; evidence of non-support, incarceration, and limited visitation did not establish that requirement as a matter of law.

Dowell v. Dowell · filed 2008-02-07(2)

But here, the summary judgment evidence of William’s non-support, incarceration, and limited visitation with the children is inadequate to establish as a matter of law that termination is in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child's best interest.

in the Interest of A. W., a Minor Child · filed 2008-02-12(2)

We also conclude the evidence is factually sufficient, that, based on proof of the factors set out above, the evidence is sufficient to produce in the mind of a rational fact-finder a firm belief or conviction that the best interest of A.W. lay in the termination of Wardsworth's parental rights.

Section 161.001(2) requires proof that termination is in the child’s best interest in addition to a statutory ground for termination.

in the Interest of J.J.M., a Child · filed 2008-02-21(2)

Additionally, giving due consideration to evidence that the fact-finder could have found to be clear and convincing, and based on our review of the entire record, we hold that a reasonable trier of fact could have formed a firm belief or conviction that the termination of Christina’s parental rights would be in J.J.M.’s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child's best interest.

in the Interest of S. H. L. P., a Child · filed 2008-02-21(2)

Having carefully considered the evidence in light of the Holley factors and applying the appropriate standards of review, (27) we hold that the trial court could have reasonably formed a firm belief or conviction that termination was in the best interest of E.P. and S.P.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest, assessed under the totality of the circumstances.

in the Interest of B.F., M.F., and Z.F. · filed 2008-04-03(2)

Therefore, we hold that the totality of the circumstances in light of the Holley factors is factually sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that termination was in B.F.’s, M.F.’s, and Z.F.’s best interest.

Under section 161.001(2), inadequate housing, incomplete services, and sporadic visits can support a finding that termination is in a child’s best interest.

in the Interest of S.R., J.R., and B.R, Children · filed 2008-06-05(2)

Viewing all the evidence in the light most favorable to the judgment, we hold that the evidence is legally sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of appellant’s parental rights was in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires evidence supporting grounds for termination and a finding that termination is in the child's best interest.

In Re JB · filed 2008-07-17

Therefore, the evidence described at the motion for new trial hearing supports the grounds for termination as to both Williams and Brooks. See TEX. FAM.CODE ANN. § 161.001(N), (O), (Q) (Vernon Supp.2007). In addition, said evidence supports the trial court's determination that termination of both parents' parental rights was in the best interest of J.B. See TEX. FAM.CODE ANN. § 161.001(2) (Vernon Supp.2007).

Section 161.001(2) requires evidence that termination of parental rights is in the child's best interest.

in the Interest of J.B. · filed 2008-07-17(2)

In addition, said evidence supports the trial court's determination that termination of both parents' parental rights was in the best interest of J.B. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001(2) (Vernon Supp. 2007).

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child's best interest.

in the Interest of A. T. S. and M. D. S., Minor Children · filed 2008-07-31(2)

The evidence relating to the pertinent Holley factors, together with the parents' history of drug use and relatively short amount of time being drug free, is some evidence on which the trial court could have based a firm belief or conviction that termination would be in the children's best interest. Thus, the evidence is legally sufficient to support the trial court's determination that termination is in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child's best interest.

In Re AB · filed 2008-10-09(2)

The evidence offered by the Department was factually sufficient to support the trial court's finding that termination of A.M.B.'s parent-child relationship was in the best interest of A.B.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of S.W. and S.W., Children · filed 2008-10-09(2)

We hold that these facts, applied cumulatively to the Holley factors, enabled the trial court to reasonably form a firm conviction or belief that termination of appellants’s parental rights was in the twins’ best interests.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child's best interest; a parent's lack of contact, refusal of services, and inability to provide care can support that finding.

in the Interest of A. B., Minor Child · filed 2008-10-09(2)

The evidence offered by the Department was factually sufficient to support the trial court's finding that termination of A.M.B.'s parent-child relationship was in the best interest of A.B.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of A.S., T.S., and C.S., Children · filed 2008-11-06(2)

Applying the appropriate standard of review and considering the Holley factors and the statutory factors for evaluating Appellant’s willingness and ability to provide his children with a safe environment,17 we hold that the evidence is factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of Appellant’s parental rights is in the children’s best interests.

Section 161.001(2) requires proof that termination is in the child’s best interest, supported by evidence from which the fact-finder could reasonably form a firm conviction or belief.

in the Interest of C.M.R., D.C.R., A.N.R., and D.R.R., II, Children · filed 2008-11-20(2)

Based on this record, the trial court could have reasonably formed a firm conviction or belief that termination of Danny’s parental rights would be in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires a finding that termination is in the child’s best interest, supported by evidence from which a reasonable factfinder could form a firm belief or conviction.

in the Interest of W.O., a Child · filed 2008-12-23(2)

After looking at the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court's finding that termination of M.H.’s parental rights was in the best interest of W.O., we hold that a reasonable trier of fact could have formed a firm belief or conviction that the finding was true.

Section 161.001 requires proof that termination is in the child's best interest in addition to proof of a statutory ground.

In Re RR, Jr. · filed 2009-03-19(2)

In proceedings to terminate the parent-child relationship brought under section 161.001 of the family code, the petitioner must establish one ground listed under subdivision (1) of the statute and must also prove that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... Accordingly, we hold that the evidence is factually sufficient to support the trial court's best-interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; evidence of domestic violence and unsafe, unstable housing can support that finding.

in the Interest of R.R., Jr. and V.R., Children · filed 2009-03-19(2)

Giving due consideration to evidence that the factfinder could have reasonably found to be clear and convincing, and based on our review of the entire record, we hold that a reasonable trier of fact could have formed a firm belief or conviction that the termination of Father’s parental rights would be in the children’s best interest.

Evidence about a parent's treatment of another child may be relevant to whether termination is in the children's best interests under subsection (2).

in the Interest of J. A. P., A. K. A. C., D. J. P., and C. C. P., Children · filed 2009-04-01(2)

Regardless of whether the evidence concerning M.R. would have any probative value concerning grounds for termination as listed in Section 161.001(1), the evidence would be probative of whether termination is in the children's best interests.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that terminating parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of A.C., Jr., a Child · filed 2009-06-25(2)

Termination decisions, including the best interest finding, must be supported by clear and convincing evidence. ... Based on the above evidence, and applying the best-interest factors, we conclude and hold that the trial court could reasonably have formed a firm conviction or belief that termination of the parent-child relationship would be in Abraham’s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires proof of a statutory termination ground and that termination is in the child's best interest.

in the Interest of C.H., T.H. and S.H., Children · filed 2009-07-20(2)

In a proceeding to terminate the parent-child relationship brought under section 161.001 of the Family Code, the petitioner must establish one ground listed under subdivision (1) of the statute and must also prove that termination is in the best interest of the child.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing proof that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of K.P., a Child · filed 2009-08-13(2)

In proceedings to terminate the parent-child relationship brought under section 161.001 of the family code, the petitioner must prove that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... We hold that these facts, considered under the Holley factors and viewed in the light most favorable to the trial court’s judgment, enabled the trial court to reasonably form a firm conviction or belief that termination of Father’s parental rights was in K.P.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires a finding that terminating parental rights is in the child's best interest.

in the Interest of T. J. H., a Child · filed 2009-08-26(2)

Accordingly, we hold that the evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court's finding that termination of Mary's parental rights was in the best interest of T.J.H.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; the best-interest finding must be legally and factually sufficient.

in the Interest of E.G., a Child · filed 2009-10-15(2)

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the finding and judgment, we conclude that the county court could have reasonably formed a firm belief or conviction that the best interest ground was proven such that the evidence is legally sufficient to support that finding.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination of parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of A.R.B., C.J.T, and A.J. · filed 2009-10-27(2)

Giving due consideration to the evidence the jury reasonably could have found to be clear and convincing, we conclude that the evidence is such that the jury reasonably could form a firm belief or conviction that termination of appellant’s parental rights is in the best interests of the children.

Section 161.001(2) requires factually sufficient, clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child's best interest, even when a statutory ground for termination is established.

In Re JN · filed 2009-11-23(2)

Consequently, we conclude that the evidence is factually insufficient to support the trial court's determination that termination of Bradford's parental rights is in the best interest of the child.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of J.N., a Child · filed 2009-11-23(2)

Consequently, we conclude that the evidence is factually insufficient to support the trial court’s determination that termination of Bradford’s parental rights is in the best interest of the child.

Section 161.001 requires a finding that termination is in the child's best interest; a lengthy criminal history and repeated violence against the child's mother can support that finding even without evidence on the remaining Holley factors.

Hines v. Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2009-12-03(2)

Under these circumstances, and despite TDFPS's failure to present any evidence of the remaining Holly factors, we hold that the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination was in the best interest of N.J.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing proof of a statutory ground for termination and that termination is in the children’s best interest.

Loehr v. Texas Department of Family & Protective Services · filed 2009-12-17

Under the jury charge, in order to terminate Loehr’s parental rights, the Department was required to prove by clear and convincing evidence (1) at least one of the five submitted statutory termination grounds; and (2) that it was in the children’s best interest to terminate the parent-child relationship.

A finding that termination is in the child’s best interest is factually sufficient when the entire record allows a reasonable factfinder to form a firm conviction or belief in that finding.

in the Interest of T.A.M. and B.G.W. A/K/A Z.W., Children · filed 2010-01-21(2)

Based on our review, we hold that the evidence is factually sufficient to support the best interest finding.

Evidence supporting an endangerment finding under subsection (1) may also support a best interest finding under subsection (2).

in the Interest of M v. Jr., a Child · filed 2010-02-18(2)

We first note that evidence supporting endangerment findings under family code section 161.001(1), which Mother does not challenge, can be probative of the section 161.001(2) best interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that terminating parental rights is in the child's best interest.

in the Interest of R.S., R.S., Jr., C.S., B.S., and A.S., Children · filed 2010-03-11(2)

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the findings, we conclude that a reasonable fact finder could have formed a firm belief that termination of Jane's parental rights was in the childrens' best interest.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; the evidence was sufficient where the mother struggled to meet the child’s needs and the foster family offered a stable home.

In Re Jhg · filed 2010-05-25(2)

After reviewing the evidence under the Holley factors and applying the appropriate standards of review, we conclude the jury could find by clear and convincing evidence that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in the best interest of JHG. Thus, the evidence is legally and factually sufficient.

Section 161.001 requires proof of a listed ground for termination and that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of K.S., a Child · filed 2010-06-17(2)

In proceedings to terminate the parent-child relationship brought under section 161.001 of the family code, the petitioner must establish one ground listed under subsection (1) of the statute and must also prove that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... We hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best interest finding, and we overrule Mother’s two issues.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child's best interest; evidence of inadequate supervision, incomplete services, an abusive home, and a stable prospective placement can support that finding.

In Re Tmj · filed 2010-06-24(2)

On this record, applying the appropriate standards of review, including the Holley factors, we hold that the evidence was legally and factually sufficient for a reasonable factfinder to form a firm belief or conviction that it was in the best interest of the children for C.L.H.'s parental rights to be terminated.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

In the Interest of T.M.J. · filed 2010-06-24(2)

On this record, applying the appropriate standards of review, including the Holley factors, we hold that the evidence was legally and factually sufficient for a reasonable factfinder to form a firm belief or conviction that it was in the best interest of the children for C.L.H.’s parental rights to be terminated.

Section 161.001(2)’s best interest requirement can be satisfied by evidence of instability, violence, substance abuse, and incomplete treatment despite recent improvement.

in the Interest of J.H., a Child · filed 2010-09-16(2)

For all of these reasons, although we recognize that some evidence shows a recent improvement in Mother’s lifestyle, we hold that, in giving due deference to the jury’s determination and not supplanting its decision with our own, the totality of the evidence detailed above allowed the jury to reasonably form a firm conviction or belief that termination of Mother’s parental rights is in J.H.’s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence of a statutory ground for termination and that termination is in the child's best interest.

Amy Guedea and Luis Guedea Veloz v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2010-09-22(2)

A court may terminate parental rights if it finds by clear and convincing evidence that a parent has committed any of the several statutory bases for termination and that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... We therefore conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding the appeals frivolous insofar as they relied on this contention.

Section 161.001(2) requires proof that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of N.A., L.M.A., and J.A., Children · filed 2010-09-30(2)

In proceedings to terminate the parent-child relationship brought under section 161.001 of the family code, the petitioner must establish that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... However, viewing the evidence in a neutral light, we hold that it is factually insufficient to support the trial court’s best interest finding.

Section 161.001 requires one statutory ground for termination and a finding that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of M.F.T. and S.A.T., Children · filed 2010-12-02(1)

Because the jury’s finding on three of the four grounds of termination and its best-interest finding are unchallenged and, therefore, binding and because only one statutory ground and a best-interest determination is required to support a termination order, the evidence is sufficient to support the termination of Tate’s parental rights.

A parent’s continuing illegal drug use can support a finding under section 161.001(2) that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of B.A., a Child · filed 2010-12-16(2)

Accordingly, the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s section 161.001(2) best interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; the parent’s history and ability to provide care may support that finding.

in the Interest of C.C., a Child · filed 2010-12-23(2)

Finally, from her inability to explain how she would take care of herself, let alone a very young child, once released from jail, the trial court could have reasonably formed a firm conviction or belief that termination of the parent-child relationship would be in C.C.’s best interest.

Section 161.001 does not require definite plans for a child's placement before parental rights may be terminated in the child's best interest.

Spencer v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2010-12-31(2)

However, there is no requirement that the Department's plans for a child be definite prior to termination.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of M.W. and J.B., Children · filed 2011-01-06(2)

Because Father does not challenge any of the family code section 161.001(1) grounds upon which the trial court based its termination order, we review only the trial court’s best interest finding under section 161.001(2). ... Therefore, we hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires a finding, supported by clear and convincing evidence, that termination is in the child’s best interest.

Smith v. Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2011-02-10(2)

We conclude that DFPS presented legally and factually sufficient evidence that termination of the mother’s parental rights to the children was in their best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires proof that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of L.T. and K.B., Children · filed 2011-02-17(2)

Based on all the facts described above, we conclude that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to show that termination of each parent’s rights is in the children’s best interests.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of N.R., S.A.-R., and A.A.-R., Children · filed 2011-05-12(2)

Giving due consideration to evidence that the trial court could have found to be clear and convincing, and based on our review of the entire record, we hold that a reasonable trier of fact could have formed a firm belief or conviction that the termination of Mother’s parental rights would be in the children’s best interests.

Section 161.001(2)'s best-interest requirement may be satisfied by evidence of a parent's drug abuse, physical abuse, and inability to keep the children safe.

in the Interest of L v. J.M., A.M., Minor Children · filed 2011-06-02(2)

The evidence was legally and factually sufficient to show that termination was in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001(2) requires a factually sufficient finding that termination is in the child's best interest.

J. H. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2011-06-09(2)

We conclude that the evidence was factually sufficient to support the best interest finding and overrule appellant's second issue.

Section 161.001(2) permits a best-interest finding based on evidence of a parent's past conduct and the children's needs and wishes.

William Joseph Rader and Michelle Lea Klotz v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2011-06-15(2)

Excluding Hecht's therapy notes and considering only the remaining evidence, we hold that the trial court could have reasonably concluded that terminating Klotz's parental rights was in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001(2) requires a finding that termination is in the children’s best interest, which may be supported by evidence of a parent’s past conduct and the children’s circumstances.

Barry Michael Smith, Jr. v. State · filed 2011-06-15(2)

Excluding Hecht’s therapy notes and considering only the remaining evidence, we hold that the trial court could have reasonably concluded that terminating Klotz’s parental rights was in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child's best interest.

in the Interest of K. O., a Child · filed 2011-06-22(2)

Considering all the evidence in relation to the best interest factors in the light most favorable to the court's finding, we conclude a reasonable trier of fact could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination was in the best interest of the child.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; repeated domestic violence and an inability to provide a safe home can support that finding.

in the Interest of L.D.E. and C.E., Children · filed 2011-07-20(2)

Accordingly, we hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to establish that the termination of Robert’s parental rights is in the best interests of L.D.E. and C.E.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence of a listed ground for termination and that termination is in the child’s best interest.

Rhonda Pratt and Bryan Pratt v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2011-07-21(2)

To terminate parental rights, the proponent must prove by clear and convincing evidence that a parent committed one or more of the acts or omissions set forth in Section 161.001(1) of the family code and that termination is in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence of a statutory ground for termination and that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of J.T., a Child · filed 2011-08-31(2)

To terminate parental rights, it must be shown by clear and convincing evidence that the parent has committed one of the acts listed in Section 161.001(1)(A)-(T) and that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... Thus, the evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the finding that termination of appellant’s parental rights is in the best interest of J.T.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child's best interest; evidence of emotional danger and inadequate parenting can support that finding.

Janet Elder and Blaine Elder v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2011-09-20(2)

Applying the appropriate standards of review, we conclude that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support a finding that termination was in the best interests of J.S.R. and B.W.E.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination serves the child’s best interest.

E. F. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2011-12-30(2)

We conclude that, taken as a whole, the record supports the jury’s determination that clear and convincing evidence showed that termination of E.F.’s parental rights served the children’s best interests. Coupled with E.F.’s Affidavit of Relinquishment of Parental Rights by Mother for each child, that evidence and finding support the trial court’s termination of E.F.’s parental rights.

Section 161.001 requires the petitioner to prove that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of P.R.R., the Child · filed 2012-01-26

In proceedings to terminate the parent-child relationship brought under section 161.001 of the family code, the petitioner must prove that termination is in the best interest of the child.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child's best interest.

Davis v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2012-02-15(2)

In light of the entire record, and giving due consideration to the evidence that the jury could reasonably have found to be clear and convincing, we cannot conclude that the disputed evidence is so significant that the jury could not have reasonably formed a firm belief or conviction that termination was in the child's best interest. Accordingly, the evidence is factually sufficient to support the best-interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires factually sufficient evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest, even when the evidence is legally sufficient to support that finding.

in the Interest of J.P., T.J., and D.F., Children · filed 2012-02-23(2)

Viewing all of the evidence, however, no reasonable factfinder could form a firm belief or conviction that the termination of Father’s parental rights to J.P. was in J.P.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires a finding that termination is in the child's best interest before parental rights may be terminated.

J. B. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2012-02-24(2)

This record contains factually and legally sufficient evidence to support the court's conclusion that termination of appellant's parental rights was in B.W.L.B.'s best interest.

Evidence of a parent’s drug abuse, unstable housing and income, and limited parenting ability can support a finding that termination is in the child’s best interest under section 161.001(2).

in the Interest of M.C.H. AKA B.G.H. · filed 2012-05-17(2)

However, her history of drug abuse and prostitution, as well as her relapse during the pendency of this suit, coupled with her lack of stable housing, income, and anything beyond aspirations for where she and M.C.H. could reside and what employment she could undertake, support the trial court’s finding that termination is in M.C.H.’s best interests.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of K.R.G., a Child · filed 2012-05-17(2)

Thus, although the evidence presents a close case, we conclude that the trial court could have reasonably formed a firm conviction or belief that termination of Mother’s parental rights is in Kevin’s best interest, and we therefore hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s judgment of termination.

Section 161.001(2) requires proof that termination is in the child’s best interest in addition to a statutory ground for termination.

in the Interest of J.H. and M.H., Children · filed 2012-06-07(2)

Accordingly, the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the finding that termination of S.H.’s parental rights is in the best interest of J.H. and M.H.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that terminating parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of A v. a Child · filed 2012-06-07(2)

Giving due deference to the factfinder’s findings, without supplanting the judgment with our own, and after reviewing the entire record, we hold that a factfinder could reasonably form a firm conviction or belief that termination of the parent-child relationship between Mother and A.V. is in A.V.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of A.J.J.M., a Child · filed 2012-04-12(2)

Thus, the evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the finding that termination of appellant’s parental rights is in the best interest of A.J.J.M.

Section 161.001(2) requires proof that termination is in the child’s best interest, supported by clear and convincing evidence.

in the Interest of J.D.S., Jr., K.L.S., and D.A.S. · filed 2012-06-14(2)

We therefore hold that factually sufficient evidence supports the trial court’s determination that termination of the parent-child relationship between Mother and the children is in the children’s best interests.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of C.D.S., Jr., a Child · filed 2012-06-14(2)

In proceedings to terminate the parent-child relationship brought under section 161.001 of the family code, the petitioner must prove by clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the best interest of the child.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest, in addition to a statutory ground for termination.

in the Interest of B.S. and B.F., Children · filed 2012-07-12(2)

To terminate parental rights, it must be shown by clear and convincing evidence that the parent has committed one of the acts listed in Section 161.001(1)(A)–(T) and that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... The evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the best interest finding.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; a termination finding cannot stand if the evidence on that issue is factually insufficient.

Wendell Gibbs and Richard Proctor v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2012-07-19(2)

Under the elevated clear-and-convincing standard of review, when we consider the balance of the evidence, we can only conclude that the evidence is factually insufficient to support the jury's best-interest determination as to Gibbs.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; persistent drug use and limited contact with the children can support that finding.

in the Interest of A.D.B., A.B.B., and A.L.B., Children · filed 2012-07-19(2)

To terminate parental rights, the factfinder must find by clear and convincing evidence that the parent has committed an act prohibited by Section 161.001(1) of the Family Code and that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... We find that the evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of the parental rights of both Jessica and Clayton to their three children is in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires proof that termination is in the child’s best interest, in addition to proof of a listed ground for termination.

in the Interest C.L.D. and C.R.D., Children · filed 2012-07-26(2)

In proceedings to terminate the parent-child relationship brought under section 161.001 of the family code, the petitioner must establish one ground listed under subsection (1) of the statute and must also prove that termination is in the best interest of the child.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

In the Interest of A.M. · filed 2012-08-09(2)

We hold that the jury could have reasonably formed a firm belief or conviction that termination was in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; failure to consider a relative for placement does not defeat a best interest finding supported by the evidence.

in the Interest of A.J.T. and R.A.C., Children · filed 2012-08-16(2)

Viewing the record in the light most favorable to the finding and the judgment, we conclude that the trial court could have reasonably formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of A.T.’s parental rights was in A.J.T.’s best interest despite A.T.’s mother not being considered for placement.

Section 161.001(2) requires a best-interest finding to terminate parental rights; continued drug use and domestic violence can support that finding.

in the Interest of C.N.C. and I.C.C., Minor Children · filed 2012-08-27(2)

We conclude that the evidence is also factually sufficient to support the best-interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of B.J.R., Child · filed 2012-08-30(2)

Accordingly, the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of E.E.R.’s parental rights is in B.J.R.’s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest, along with at least one statutory ground for termination.

in the Interest of M.J., a Child · filed 2012-09-13(2)

To terminate parental rights under Section 161.001, it must be shown by clear and convincing evidence that the parent has committed one of the acts or omissions listed in Section 161.001(1)(A)–(T) and that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... The evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the best interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child's best interest.

in the Interest of A.H and H.H, Children · filed 2012-09-14(2)

Accordingly, the jury's determination that terminating appellant's parental rights is in the best interest of A.H. and H.H. is supported by legally and factually sufficient evidence.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; a parent’s violence, drug use, and inability to provide stable care may support that finding.

in the Interest of C.A.C., S.Y.C., K.G.C. and M.E.C., Children · filed 2012-09-27(2)

Parental rights can be terminated only upon proof by clear and convincing evidence that (1) the parent has committed an act prohibited by Section 161.001(1) of the Family Code; and (2) termination is in the best interest of the child. ... We conclude that the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Father’s rights to C.A.C., S.Y.C., K.G.C., and M.E.C. was in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of O.M., a Child · filed 2012-09-27(2)

Considering the above evidence as it relates to the statutory and Holley factors––especially Mother’s lack of progress in accepting services and dealing with her drug addiction, and the lack of a safe and stable home environment for O.M. if he were returned to Mother––we conclude and hold that the trial court’s finding that termination of Mother’s parental rights is in O.M.’s best interest is supported by both legally and factually sufficient evidence.

Section 161.001 requires a finding that termination is in the child's best interests; a parent's failure to establish a relationship with the child can support that finding.

in the Interest of B.R.C., a Child · filed 2012-10-11(2)

Having viewed the foregoing in both the light most favorable to the trial court's finding and as an entire record, we conclude that a reasonable fact finder could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of R.L.'s parental rights was in B.R.C.'s best interests.

Section 161.001 permits termination when clear and convincing evidence supports at least one statutory ground and shows that termination is in the child's best interest.

in the Interest of D.B., a Child · filed 2012-10-16

The Family Code permits a court to order termination of parental rights if the petitioner establishes one or more acts or omissions enumerated under section 161.001(1) and also proves that termination of the parent-child relationship is in the best interest of the child. ... Based upon this record, we conclude that a reasonable fact-finder could have formed a firm belief or conviction that one or more grounds for termination existed and that termination of Appellant's parental rights was in the child's best interest.