Mitzpah Be the watchtower.
TexasHB2216indirectPassed House

Relating to procedures and grounds related to the removal and placement of children, including for terminating the parent-child relationship, for taking possession of a child, and for certain hearings in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship filed by a governmental entity.

  1. Introduced
  2. Passed House
  3. Passed Senate
  4. To Governor
  5. Became Law

Overview

This bill modifies Texas procedures for child removal, placement, and termination of parental rights in cases involving governmental entities (primarily child protective services).

Why it matters: Homeschooling families may be subject to CPS investigations and proceedings; changes to removal standards, hearings, and grounds for terminating parental rights could affect how CPS cases involving homeschoolers are handled.

Topic: cps_child_welfare · classifier confidence 72%

What this changes

Amends existing law

Law today: Texas law allows courts to terminate parental rights under Family Code Section 161.001 based on grounds such as abandonment, failure to support, endangerment of the child, and criminal conduct, with courts previously applying a 'clear and convincing evidence' standard of proof in some contexts.

If passed: The bill raises the standard of proof required to terminate parental rights from 'clear and convincing evidence' to 'beyond a reasonable doubt' (a higher threshold), and explicitly protects parents from termination based solely on: homeschooling their child, economic disadvantage, certain minor nonviolent crimes, providing prescribed low-THC cannabis, declining immunization for religious reasons, seeking multiple medical opinions, or allowing age-appropriate independent activities. The bill also modifies the requirement for the Department of Family and Protective Services to make 'active efforts' versus 'reasonable efforts' to reunify families before terminating rights.

AI-generated from the bill text — verify against the official text.

Likely supporters & opponents

Likely support

  • Parental rights advocates — Raising the burden of proof and protecting homeschooling explicitly prevents government overreach and ensures parents cannot lose custody simply for choosing home education or being poor.
  • Homeschool organizations — The explicit protection for homeschooled children removes a major fear that unconventional education choices could be used as grounds to remove children from their families.

Likely opposition

  • Child welfare advocates and social workers — Requiring 'beyond a reasonable doubt' instead of 'clear and convincing evidence' makes it significantly harder to remove children from genuinely unsafe homes and could endanger vulnerable children.
  • Public health advocates — Protecting parents who decline immunization or seek multiple medical opinions may compromise child health outcomes in cases where children need preventive care.

AI-inferred typical positions based on the bill’s substance — general stakeholder categories, not confirmed endorsements.

Should I support this?

Likely helpful for Christian families

For homeschooling families, this bill is clearly beneficial because it explicitly protects homeschooling from being used as evidence of abuse or neglect, removes a significant regulatory threat, and raises the legal bar that must be met before the state can separate children from parents—all of which strengthen parental choice and educational freedom in homeschooling.

An AI assessment from a Christian-family perspective — religious freedom, parental rights, and freedom in education — not legal or voting advice.

💬 Chat about this bill ↗Official bill text ↗View on LegiScan ↗

Official summary

Relating to procedures and grounds related to the removal and placement of children, including for terminating the parent-child relationship, for taking possession of a child, and for certain hearings in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship filed by a governmental entity.

Sponsors

  • Lacey Hull (R)
  • Toni Rose (D)
  • Harold Dutton (D)
  • Keresa Richardson (R)
  • Gary Gates (R)
  • Helen Kerwin (R)
  • Kevin Sparks (R)

Status timeline

  1. 2025-05-07Left pending in committeeS
  2. 2025-05-07Testimony taken in committeeS
  3. 2025-05-07Considered in public hearingS
  4. 2025-05-07Scheduled for public hearing on . . .S
  5. 2025-04-28Referred to Health & Human ServicesS
  6. 2025-04-28Read first timeS
  7. 2025-04-24Received from the HouseS
  8. 2025-04-24Reported engrossedH
  9. 2025-04-24Statement(s) of vote recorded in JournalH
  10. 2025-04-24Record vote RV#473H
  11. 2025-04-24PassedH
  12. 2025-04-24Read 3rd timeH
  13. 2025-04-23Statement(s) of vote recorded in JournalH
  14. 2025-04-23Record vote RV#429H
  15. 2025-04-23Passed to engrossment as amendedH
  16. 2025-04-23Statement(s) of vote recorded in JournalH
  17. 2025-04-23Record vote RV#428H
  18. 2025-04-23Amended 1-HullH
  19. 2025-04-23Read 2nd timeH
  20. 2025-04-23Placed on General State CalendarH
  21. 2025-04-17Considered in CalendarsH
  22. 2025-04-15Committee report sent to CalendarsH
  23. 2025-04-14Committee report distributedH
  24. 2025-04-14Comte report filed with Committee CoordinatorH
  25. 2025-04-08Reported favorably as substitutedH
  26. 2025-04-08Committee substitute considered in committeeH
  27. 2025-04-08Considered in public hearingH
  28. 2025-03-25Left pending in committeeH
  29. 2025-03-25Testimony taken/registration(s) recorded in committeeH
  30. 2025-03-25Committee substitute considered in committeeH
  31. 2025-03-25Considered in public hearingH
  32. 2025-03-25Scheduled for public hearing on . . .H
  33. 2025-03-14Referred to Human ServicesH
  34. 2025-03-14Read first timeH
  35. 2025-01-29FiledH

H = House · S = Senate · A = Assembly