law-Holley-v-Adams-factors | best interest of the child, children | child custody SACPR litigation | termination of
parental rights appeals | grandparents suit to intervene for custody and/or access to child | SAPCR interventions |
THE BEST INTEREST FACTORS
Courts may use the following nonexhaustive list of factors to determine the children's best
interest: (1) the desires of the children; (2) the emotional and physical needs of the
children now and in the future; (3) the emotional and physical danger to the children now
and in the future; (4) the parental abilities of the individual seeking custody; (5) the
programs available to assist the individual to promote the best interest of the children; (6)
the plans for the children by these individuals or by the agency seeking custody; (7) the
stability of the home or proposed placement; (8) the acts or omissions of the parent, or
potential conservator, that may indicate that the existing relationship is not a proper one;
and (9) any excuse for the acts or omissions of the potential conservator. Holley v.
Adams, 544 S.W.2d 367, 371-72 (Tex. 1976).
In Interest of XCB (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] July 30, 2009)(Subst. op. by Anderson)
(termination of parental rights, intervenor, effect of paternity testing, Holley v. Adams best interest factors),
appointment of DFPS as sole managing conservator)
AFFIRMED: Opinion by Justice Anderson
Before Justices Anderson, Guzman and Boyce
14-08-00851-CV In the Interest of X.C.B., AKA X.C, I.C.B., AKA I.C., S. B.C., and J.W.C AKA J. W. W.
Appeal from 315th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge: MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER
Appellant also contends the evidence is factually insufficient to support the trial court's finding that termination is
in S.J.'s best interest. There is a strong presumption that preserving the parent-child relationship is in the best
interest of a child. See In re J.I.T.P., 99 S.W.3d at 846 (citing Tex. Fam. Code Ann. §§ 153.131(b), 153.191,
153.252 (Vernon 2008)). The Department bears the burden to rebut this presumption. Id. (citing Hall v. Harris
County Child Welfare Unit, 533 S.W.2d 121, 122- 23 (Tex. Civ. App.- Houston [14th Dist.] 1976, no writ)).
In re SJ, No. 14-07-00785-CV (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Feb. 24, 2009)(Seymore)
(termination of parental rights)
The Texas Supreme Court has compiled non-exclusive factors to consider when determining the best interest of a
child including (1) the child's desires, (2) the child's emotional and physical needs now and in the future, (3) the
emotional and physical danger to the child now and in the future, (4) the parental abilities of the individuals
seeking custody, (5) the programs available to assist these individuals to promote the best interest of the child,
(6) the plans for the child by these individuals or by the agency seeking custody, (7) the stability of the home or
proposed placement, (8) the acts or omissions of the parent which may indicate that the existing parent-child
relationship is not proper, and (9) any excuse for the acts or omissions of the parent. Holley v. Adams, 544
S.W.2d 367, 371-72 (Tex. 1976); see In re J.I.T.P., 99 S.W.3d at 846. In this case, the record contains evidence
pertinent to all factors except the first because S.J. was too young to express her desires. We will discuss
together the evidence pertaining to these factors, rather than divide our discussion according to each factor,
because the evidence is overlapping relative to the various factors.
CAUSES OF ACTION ELEMENTS | HOUSTON CASE LAW | TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS
HOUSTON OPINIONS HOME PAGE