Potential Custody modification fight coming- [Texas].
Looking for a reality check on Texas custody/possession, enforcement, and whether this is worth pursuing legally.
I am the stepdad. Mom is the custodial parent. Dad and Mom are joint managing conservators. Mom has primary residency rights, but Dad has extended standard possession. Their decree includes language requiring the conservator in possession to transport the children to and from extracurricular activities. It also says that if the conservator in possession cannot transport the child, the other conservator must be notified in advance and may transport the child directly to/from the activity. The decree also includes reasonable communication provisions between the child and the other conservator.
There are three children involved, but the biggest concern right now is the oldest child, who is 14.
Background context:
The 14yo has a significant trauma history and is currently dealing with serious mental-health concerns. There is past self-harm, recent concern that self-harm had resumed, suicidal thoughts, and a therapist recommendation for a higher level of care. The therapist recommended IOP/PHP evaluation. There is also family history of severe mental illness. The 14yo has issues with people-pleasing, fear of rejection, and saying different things in different households, which makes consistent adult communication and accurate treatment information especially important.
Mom has been the parent actively managing mental-health care, appointments, school communication, and support. Dad knows about the mental-health appointments and concerns but has not been consistently involved. He has been invited or made aware of appointments but generally does not attend. Mom and I want him involved because the 14yo needs her dad, but he has mostly remained hands-off unless there is a conflict or control issue.
Recent treatment/intake issue:
At a PHP/IOP intake, Dad’s fiancée attended and attempted to assert herself in the process. She answered or tried to answer questions before Mom could and gave information that Mom believes was inaccurate, including timelines about when behavior issues began and other details relevant to the child’s development and mental health. There was also a later conversation where Dad’s fiancée told Mom a number of negative things the 14yo allegedly said about Mom. The 14yo strongly disputes either saying some of those things or says parts were taken out of context. This is especially concerning because the 14yo has a pattern of saying different things to different adults depending on who she is with and what she thinks will preserve that relationship.
Communication issue:
The 14yo previously had an established phone provided by Mom’s household. This was her normal way to communicate with Mom, siblings, friends, and safe/supportive people while at Dad’s house. Dad recently banned that phone and stated that all communication now has to go through him. In other words, if the 14yo wants to speak to Mom, she has to ask Dad first. If Mom wants to speak with the child, Mom has to ask Dad first.
We understand Dad can set rules in his home and we may not be able to force him to allow a specific device. But this was an established communication method, and the concern is that requiring a 14yo with mental-health issues to request permission through a parent she has a strained relationship with effectively chills communication. She is unlikely to ask him because he tends to question her or make it uncomfortable. This creates more isolation during his possession time.
There was also a recent issue where Dad had previously provided or allowed access to a different phone that was not properly monitored, and the 14yo engaged in risky/inappropriate conversations with peers or strangers on social media. After that was discovered, instead of allowing the already-established safer phone from Mom’s household, Dad moved to filtering all communication through himself.
Firearm/safety issue:
The 14yo told Mom that Dad had a gun safe in his truck and that she knew the key was on his key ring and knew where he kept it. Given the child’s suicidal thoughts/self-harm history, Mom repeatedly asked Dad to move or secure it somewhere the child did not know about. Dad initially said it was fine because the key was on his person. Only after Mom said she would not allow the children to go over there unless the access issue was addressed did Dad give a vague confirmation that it had been moved. We are not saying he cannot own firearms. The concern is that when a suicidal/self-harming minor knew the location/access method, he resisted taking clear safety steps until pressured.
Extracurricular issue:
The younger children have been enrolled in gymnastics. This is an established weekly activity, not a random one-time event. They were on waitlists for months before getting spots. Missing or quitting could affect their progress and could result in losing their spots.
The 14yo also recently requested to start tumbling. She was not forced. She asked to do it. The only boundary given was that if she quit again, we would not immediately re-enroll her later, because of the cost, waitlists, and commitment involved.
Dad has now said he “no longer consents” to the girls going to gymnastics during the summer during his parenting time. He says it interferes with his time and that they can go during Mom’s time only. He claims that because they are joint conservators, if both parents do not agree, then the children either go only during the time of the parent who wants the activity or they do not go at all.
The decree, however, specifically says the conservator in possession is responsible for transportation to and from extracurricular activities, and if unable to transport, the other conservator must be notified in advance and may transport. Our understanding is that this language exists specifically because activities may occur during either parent’s possession time. Dad’s position seems to turn that clause into a veto power, which does not seem consistent with the wording.
There is also a history of Dad resisting Saturday gymnastics already, so this is not a brand-new issue.
Pattern of emotional concerns:
There are also ongoing concerns about how Dad speaks to the 14yo. Reported examples include putting down her activities or effort, criticizing creative work, making negative comments about her appearance, saying a school dance dress would make her look “slutty” even though it complied with school dress code, saying she was a mistake of Dad and bio mom, saying he wished bio mom had received the death penalty instead of a life sentence, and responding to performances with comments like she did okay but could have done better.
There is also documented history involving physical abuse concerns. One younger child has the official police/CPS history on that issue. The 14yo has CPS history related to self-harm. I understand emotional abuse is harder to prove, but the concern is the cumulative impact on a 14yo already in a serious mental-health situation.
Current concern:
We are trying to understand what is realistic in Texas court.
We are not assuming the court would remove Dad’s rights or visitation. We understand that is a high bar. But we are wondering what the realistic options are when there is:
- a 14yo with self-harm/suicidal ideation and higher-level mental-health recommendations;
- Dad minimizing or questioning the need for treatment;
- Dad not consistently attending or participating in appointments;
- Dad’s fiancée giving inaccurate information at intake;
- Dad restricting established communication with Mom and siblings;
- Dad resisting lethal-means safety regarding firearm access;
- Dad trying to stop established weekly extracurriculars despite decree language about transportation;
- a pattern of comments and behavior that appear emotionally harmful or destabilizing.
Questions:
- Based on Texas practice, is this more likely to support enforcement/clarification rather than modification of possession?
- Would the extracurricular language likely prevent Dad from unilaterally stopping established weekly activities during his possession time?
- Would a court likely care that the 14yo’s established communication with Mom has been changed so that all contact must go through Dad?
- Given the mental-health context, could the firearm/key issue support temporary safety orders?
- If the child’s therapist says pursuing a change in possession is a good idea, how much weight would that likely carry?
- Is reducing extended standard possession to regular standard possession realistic, or is that still unlikely without stronger provider/CPS/police documentation?
- At 14, if the child does not want to go to Dad’s or wants the option to decide each visit, how much does that matter in Texas? I understand the child does not get to decide, but would the court interview her or give her preference meaningful weight?
I am trying to get a practical sense of likely outcomes: enforcement, clarification, temporary safety orders, reduced extended possession, supervised visitation, etc. I am not looking to punish Dad. I am trying to understand whether going to court is likely to produce enforceable child-centered structure, especially around mental-health care, communication, safety, and established activities.