Tex. Codes » Family Code · TITLE 5. THE PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP AND THE SUIT AFFECTING THE PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP · SUBTITLE B. SUITS AFFECTING THE PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP · CHAPTER 161. TERMINATION OF THE PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP
Texas Codes

Tex. Fam. Code § 161.206 (2026)

Order Terminating Parental Rights

✓ laws through the 89th Legislature (2025)
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.—Fort Worth 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.—Houston [1st Dist.] 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.—Houston [1st Dist.] 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.—Houston [1st Dist.] 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.—Waco 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.—Fort Worth 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.—Houston [1st Dist.] 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.—Amarillo 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.—Houston [1st Dist.] 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.—Fort Worth 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.—Fort Worth 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.—Amarillo 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.—Houston [1st Dist.] 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.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 161.206 (Vernon Supp.”
Colbert v. Dep't of Fam. & Prot. Servs., 227 S.W.3d 799 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2007).
In the Interest of D.T., 34 S.W.3d 625 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 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.—Houston [1st Dist.] 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.—Houston [1st Dist.] 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.—Waco 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.—Fort Worth 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.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1997).
in the Interest Of: Z.S., a Child, No. 05-13-01614-CV (Tex. App.—Dallas Mar. 17, 2014).
Tex. Fam. Code § 161.206(d): 1 case
in the Interest of J.G., M.D.,Jr., C.D., & L.D., Child., No. 02-19-00322-CV (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Jan. 9, 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.