Texas Codes

Tex. Fam. Code § 161.206 (2026)

Order Terminating Parental Rights

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 161.206. ORDER TERMINATING PARENTAL RIGHTS. (a) If the court finds by clear and convincing evidence grounds for termination of the parent-child relationship, it shall render an order terminating the parent-child relationship.

(a-1) In a suit filed by the Department of Family and Protective Services seeking termination of the parent-child relationship for more than one parent of the child, the court may order termination of the parent-child relationship for the parent only if the court finds by clear and convincing evidence grounds for the termination of the parent-child relationship for that parent.

(b) Except as provided by Section 161.2061, an order terminating the parent-child relationship divests the parent and the child of all legal rights and duties with respect to each other, except that the child retains the right to inherit from and through the parent unless the court otherwise provides.

(c) Nothing in this chapter precludes or affects the rights of a biological or adoptive maternal or paternal grandparent to reasonable access under Chapter 153.

(d) An order rendered under this section must include a finding that:

(1) a request for identification of a court of continuing, exclusive jurisdiction has been made as required by Section 155.101; and

(2) all parties entitled to notice, including the Title IV-D agency, have been notified.

Added by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 20, Sec. 1, eff. April 20, 1995. Amended by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 709, Sec. 2, eff. Sept. 1, 1995; Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 751, Sec. 72, eff. Sept. 1, 1995; Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 561, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2003.

Amended by:

Acts 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., Ch. 972 (S.B. 228), Sec. 44, eff. September 1, 2007.

Acts 2017, 85th Leg., R.S., Ch. 317 (H.B. 7), Sec. 13, eff. September 1, 2017.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 639 cases (156 in the last 5 years), 1996–2026 · leading case: Little v. Smith, 943 S.W.2d 414 (Tex. 1997).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Little v. Smith, 943 S.W.2d 414 (Tex. 1997). · cites it 6× “The statutes retaining the right of adoptees to inherit by descent and distribution from their biological parents do nothing to disturb the Legislature's imposition of confidentiality or the Legislature's carefully constructed scheme for revelation of information.”

in the Interest of A.B. & H.B., Child., 412 S.W.3d 588 (Tex. App. 2013). · cites it 4× “Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.206 (b) (Vernon 2008); Holick v.”

In re R.J., 579 S.W.3d 97 (Tex. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “See TEX. FAM. CODE § 161.206(b). Once we overrule a parent's challenge to an order terminating her parental rights, the trial court's appointment of the Department as sole managing conservator may be considered a "consequence of the termination.”

Cervantes-Peterson v. Texas Dep't of Fam. & Prot. Servs., 221 S.W.3d 244 (Tex. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 161.206 (Vernon Supp.”

in the Interest of J. D. G AKA J. G., Jr., A. E. G. J. AKA A. G. v. Dep't of Fam. & Prot. Servs., 570 S.W.3d 839 (Tex. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “See TEX. FAM. CODE § 161.206(b). Once we overrule a parent’s challenge to an order terminating her parental rights, the trial court’s appointment of DFPS as sole managing conservator may be considered a “consequence of the termination.”

In Interest of DLN, 958 S.W.2d 934 (Tex. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “See TEX.FAM.CODE ANN. § 161.206(b) (Vernon 1996); Holick, 685 S.”

in the Interest of M.R.J.M., a Child, 280 S.W.3d 494 (Tex. App. 2009). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 161.206(b) (Vernon 2008); Holick v.”

in the Interest of R. J, Jr., a Child v. Dep't of Fam. & Prot. Servs., 568 S.W.3d 734 (Tex. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “See TEX. FAM. CODE § 161.206(b). Once we overrule a parent’s challenge to an order terminating her parental rights, the trial court’s appointment of the Department as sole managing conservator may be considered a “consequence of the termination.”

in the Interest of D.N. & D.N., Child., 405 S.W.3d 863 (Tex. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “2002); see TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 161.206(a) (West 2008).”

Ruiz v. Texas Dep't of Fam. & Prot. Servs., 212 S.W.3d 804 (Tex. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “” Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 161.206(a) (Vernon Supp.”

in the Interest of E.P.C., a Child, 381 S.W.3d 670 (Tex. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.206 (b) (West 2008); Holick v.”

In the Interest of D.M., 58 S.W.3d 801 (Tex. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.206 (b) (Vernon 1996); Holick v.”

Show all 639 citing cases →

— Tex. Fam. Code § 161.206(a) — 127 cases

in the Interest of D.N. & D.N., Child., 405 S.W.3d 863 (Tex. App. 2013). “2002); see TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 161.206(a) (West 2008).”

Ruiz v. Texas Dep't of Fam. & Prot. Servs., 212 S.W.3d 804 (Tex. App. 2007). “” Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 161.206(a) (Vernon Supp.”

Cervantes-Peterson v. Texas Dep't of Fam. & Prot. Servs., 221 S.W.3d 244 (Tex. App. 2006). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 161.206 (Vernon Supp.”

Colbert v. Dep't of Fam. & Prot. Servs., 227 S.W.3d 799 (Tex. App. 2007).

In the Interest of D.T., 34 S.W.3d 625 (Tex. App. 2000).

— Tex. Fam. Code § 161.206(b) — 171 cases

Little v. Smith, 943 S.W.2d 414 (Tex. 1997). “The statutes retaining the right of adoptees to inherit by descent and distribution from their biological parents do nothing to disturb the Legislature's imposition of confidentiality or the Legislature's carefully constructed scheme for revelation of information.”

In re R.J., 579 S.W.3d 97 (Tex. App. 2019). “See TEX. FAM. CODE § 161.206(b). Once we overrule a parent's challenge to an order terminating her parental rights, the trial court's appointment of the Department as sole managing conservator may be considered a "consequence of the termination.”

in the Interest of J. D. G AKA J. G., Jr., A. E. G. J. AKA A. G. v. Dep't of Fam. & Prot. Servs., 570 S.W.3d 839 (Tex. App. 2018). “See TEX. FAM. CODE § 161.206(b). Once we overrule a parent’s challenge to an order terminating her parental rights, the trial court’s appointment of DFPS as sole managing conservator may be considered a “consequence of the termination.”

In Interest of DLN, 958 S.W.2d 934 (Tex. App. 1997). “See TEX.FAM.CODE ANN. § 161.206(b) (Vernon 1996); Holick, 685 S.”

in the Interest of M.R.J.M., a Child, 280 S.W.3d 494 (Tex. App. 2009). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 161.206(b) (Vernon 2008); Holick v.”

— Tex. Fam. Code § 161.206(c) — 2 cases

Bowers v. Matula, 943 S.W.2d 536 (Tex. App. 1997).

in the Interest Of: Z.S., a Child (Tex. App. 2014).

— Tex. Fam. Code § 161.206(d) — 1 case

in the Interest of J.G., M.D.,Jr., C.D., & L.D., Child. (Tex. App. 2020).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.