December Advocacy Tip

Every month CASA publishes an "Advocacy Tip" to give Advocates the chance to earn 1 Hour of Ongoing Training Credit. Take the quiz at the bottom to earn your credit!

Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship


When approaching final merits on a case where the Permanency Goal is Termination of parental rights, there are 20 different grounds for termination that the court may utilize. The grounds for termination are listed in the Texas Family Code and range from the letter A to the letter T. The court may order termination of the parent-child relationship if the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that one or more of the grounds applies to that particular case.


Most Common Grounds for Termination

Some of the most common grounds for termination used in Bexar County Children’s Court are:

K - This ground is executed before or after the suit is filed an unrevoked or irrevocable affidavit of relinquishment of parental rights

O - The parent(s) failed to comply with the provisions of a court order that specifically established the actions necessary for the parent to obtain the return of the child who has been in the permanent or temporary managing conservatorship of the Department of Family and Protective Services for not less than nine months as a result of the child’s removal from the parent under Chapter 262 for the abuse or neglect of the child

Q - The parent(s) engaged in criminal conduct that has resulted in the parents: 1) confinement of an offense; and 2) confinement or imprisonment and inability to care for the child for not less than two years from the date of filing the petition.


Abuse and Neglect Grounds for Termination

There are three termination grounds in the Texas Family Code that focus solely on abuse and neglect. These grounds are often harder to obtain due to the requirement of presenting clear and convincing evidence to the court.

D - The parent(s) knowingly placed or knowingly allowed the child to remain in conditions or surroundings which endanger the physical and emotional well-being of the child

E - The parent(s) engaged in conduct or knowingly placed the child with persons who engaged in conduct which endangers the physical and emotional well-being of the child

N - The parent(s) constructively abandoned the child who has been in the permanent or temporary managing conservatorship of the Department of Family and Protective Services for not less than six months, and; 1) the department has made reasonable efforts to return the child to the parent 2) the parent has not regularly visited or maintained significant contact with the child and 3) the parent has demonstrated an inability to provide the child with a safe environment.


The court can terminate the parent-child relationship on as many grounds as pertain to the case. The court is also required to consider the best interest of the children when making a ruling on termination grounds. The number of termination grounds, and the definition of each ground, play a part in the appeal process if a parent should decide to appeal the initial ruling. For more information on grounds for termination visit https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/FA/htm/FA.161.htm

Advocacy Tip Quiz

Story of Hope: Alfredo Concha

By bfines • March 21, 2025
 In December 2023, CPS received a Priority One referral regarding a 2-year-old child named Katherine, who had been hospitalized after ingesting narcotics. Her mother, Jessica, admitted to being under the influence of methamphetamines at the time. Katherine later tested positive for amphetamines, prompting the Department to seek removal of both Katherine and her 4-year-old sister, Valerie. Their maternal grandmother expressed willingness to care for them but only if CPS became involved. CASA advocate Alfredo Concha was appointed to the case and immediately took action. He contacted the grandparents and met with the children. During that visit, he learned that while the grandparents were willing to provide temporary care, they could not commit beyond December 2024. They had already adopted the girls' older sibling, which kept them busy, and as elderly caregivers, they felt unable to raise two young children long-term. They made it clear—either Jessica would have to get her life back on track by December, or the girls would need another placement. Understanding the urgency, Alfredo used Collaborative Family Engagement tools to seek additional family members who could offer support. He built a strong working relationship with Jessica, which proved invaluable. Through collaboration with Jessica, the grandparents, CPS, and the children's attorney, Alfredo identified and addressed barriers to reunification. A primary concern was Jessica’s history of substance abuse and the risk of relapse. After completing inpatient drug treatment, Jessica chose to move in with her ex-boyfriend, Robert, and his mother, Marie. Given Robert’s history of substance abuse and their previously volatile relationship, Alfredo recommended that Robert participate in services to strengthen their family dynamic. This included undergoing a substance abuse assessment, engaging in treatment, and completing a domestic violence prevention program. Alfredo also ensured Robert and Marie were included in planning meetings. During one of these meetings, Marie expressed her willingness to take in the children and committed to caring for them regardless of Jessica and Robert’s relationship. With this new support system in place, the girls were able to return to Jessica on December 3, 2024. CPS and Alfredo closely monitored the placement for several weeks to ensure stability. By January 2025, Alfredo recommended case closure, allowing the family to move forward with their lives. During the final hearing, Jessica addressed the court, expressing her gratitude. She stated that without the support of CPS and Alfredo, she would not have been able to succeed.

March Advocate Spotlight

By bfines • March 21, 2025
Larry Rushing
Show More
Share by: