Texas Bar Journal • September 2025

The Legislative Update

Family Law

Written by Karl Hays

The 89th Texas Legislature concluded its regular session with significant changes to the Texas Family Code (TFC) and related statutes affecting family law practice. This update summarizes the key legislation passed during the 2025 session that will impact family law practitioners and their clients. Unless noted, bills are effective September 1, 2025, though some contain specific applicability provisions for pending cases or the prospective application of the change. Practitioners should review individual bills for specific effective date and applicability provisions, particularly for cases pending at the time of enactment. Standing to File Suits Affecting the Parent-Child Relationship

HB 2350 makes substantial changes to standing requirements in suits affecting the parent-child relationship. The bill modifies TFC Section 102.003 by expanding the degree of consanguinity for relatives who may file suit from the third degree to the fourth degree when a child’s parents are deceased. It also removes the requirement that a person have “actual” care, control, and possession of a child, changing it to “exclusive” care for at least six months.

Additionally, the bill eliminates a previous ground for standing that allowed certain persons who had resided with a child and the child’s guardian or parent to file suit when the guardian or parent was deceased.

The legislation also updates Section 102.004 to expand standing for grandparents and relatives within the fourth degree of consanguinity to request managing conservatorship and creates new intervention rights for relatives and other persons in pending suits with specific requirements and safeguards.

SB 2052 establishes new requirements for nonparents filing or intervening in suits affecting the parent-child relationship where another party is a parent. The bill requires nonparents to execute an affidavit attesting that denying relief would significantly impair the child’s physical health or emotional development. It also creates a rebuttable presumption that parents act in their child’s best interest, which nonparents must overcome by clear and convincing evidence. The legislation includes specific findings requirements for courts granting relief to nonparents. These changes are made applicable to both original suits and modifications. Finally, the bill provides that the parental presumption is not rebutted in a modification suit based upon an agreed judgment.

Child Custody Evaluations and Special Appointments

HB 2340 enhances qualifications and procedures for child custody evaluators. The bill requires evaluators to complete at least three hours of training related to caring for children with intellectual or developmental disabilities during the two-year period preceding an evaluation. It also modifies recordkeeping requirements and prohibits admission of evaluation reports when evaluators lack required training for cases involving children with disabilities.

HB 2530 comprehensively revises the provisions of the TFC regarding the appointment and duties of amicus attorneys in suits affecting the parent-child relationship. The legislation separates the roles of attorney ad litem and amicus attorney, establishing distinct qualifications, duties, and limitations
for each position. The bill creates detailed appointment procedures, minimum qualifications, including continuing education requirements, conflict of interest provisions, and specific powers and limitations for amicus attorneys.

Protective Orders and Family Violence

HB 793 strengthens confidentiality protections for applicants and persons protected by protective orders. The bill changes the court’s discretion to protect addresses and contact information to a mandatory requirement upon request. It also requires courts to inform applicants of their right to exclude personal information from protective orders and establishes procedures for maintaining confidential records.

SB 1559 addresses conflicts between protective orders and other court orders, establishing that protective orders prevail over conflicting orders in divorce or suit affecting the parent-child relationship (SAPCR) cases. The bill also modifies transfer procedures for protective orders by establishing specific notice and hearing requirements, and by making transfers mandatory unless the court finds that transfers will negatively impact a protected person’s safety.

SB 1120 extends the duration of certain protective orders to two years from the date of final decrees in divorce cases, final orders in SAPCR cases, or final dispositions in related criminal cases.

Child Abuse and Neglect

HB 116 removes the failure of a parent 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 as a ground for termination under TFC 161.001.

HB 1106 and HB 1151 both address definitions of child abuse and neglect, specifically excluding refusal to affirm a child’s gender perception or expressed sexual orientation from constituting abuse or neglect. HB 1151 additionally expands the list of circumstances that do not constitute grounds for termination of parental rights or child removal, including refusal to consent to psychotropic medications or choosing alternative health care treatments unless they present substantial risks.

Attorneys’ Fees and Court Costs

HB 2524 comprehensively revises provisions regarding attorneys’ fees, court costs, and expenses throughout the Family Code. The bill standardizes language across multiple chapters to include “reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees, court costs, and expenses” and establishes procedures for direct payment to attorneys with enforcement mechanisms. The bill affects numerous sections covering divorce, child support, enforcement proceedings, and protective orders.

Marriage and Divorce

HB 2240 modifies provisions regarding void marriages, extending time limits for putative spouses to file suits declaring marriages void and providing special provisions for military members and foreign service officers. The bill also creates a new subchapter allowing suits to declare divorce or annulment decrees void when courts lacked jurisdiction. This bill became effective June 20, 2025.

HB 1193 enhances confidentiality for declarations of informal marriage by allowing parties to request that personally identifying information be kept confidential. County clerks and the vital statistics unit are prohibited from releasing such information to anyone other than the parties or their legal representatives.

HB 1916 clarifies continuing jurisdiction for courts in suits to divide property not awarded in divorce or annulment decrees, ensuring the original court retains exclusive jurisdiction for such proceedings.

Parental Rights and School Enrollment

HB 2495 expands parental and conservator rights to include the specific right to designate the school a child will attend and to enroll the child, subject to eligibility requirements. This is significant in light of the passage of SB 2 regarding school vouchers.

Child Support and Enforcement

HB 3181 strengthens enforcement mechanisms for possession and access orders. The bill establishes that multiple contempt findings for denial of possession constitute grounds for modifying conservatorship arrangements, limits courts’ discretion to place repeat violators on community supervision, and requires additional compensatory possession periods. These changes significantly enhance the ability of parties to address repeated violations of possession and access orders.

Court Procedures and Electronic Filing

HB 1734 modernizes court file transfer procedures by requiring use of electronic filing systems for transferring SAPCR cases between courts with continuing jurisdiction, reducing the documents that must be transferred and allowing parties to request specific documents.

HB 1973 requires petitioners in SAPCR cases to submit certified copies of children’s birth certificates when available, with provisions for alternative proof when certificates are unavailable or incomplete. The requirement includes sealing procedures to maintain confidentiality.

SB 1404 establishes requirements for parties to provide email addresses for electronic service in orders prohibiting disclosure of information, with safety exceptions. The bill also requires separate judgments for attorneys’ fees distinct from arrearage confirmations.

HB 3180 corrects a drafting error in discovery rules for Family Code cases, clarifying that parties may request disclosure of witness statements rather than settlement agreements.

Administrative and Technical Changes

HB 4795 requires the vital statistics unit of the Department of State Health Services to establish electronic processes for Department of Family and Protective Services information requests and modifies signature requirements for search result certificates.

HB 3783 regulates court-ordered counseling in SAPCR cases, prohibiting joint counseling between family violence victims and perpetrators and establishing specific limitations on counseling that could harm children or violate their rights. This bill became effective June 20, 2025.

SB 2306 requires licensed child-placing agencies to post itemized adoption cost information on their websites to promote transparency in adoption proceedings.

Practice Implications

These legislative changes require family law practitioners to update their practices in several key areas: standing requirements for SAPCR cases, protective order procedures, attorneys’ fee provisions, and various procedural requirements. The expanded definitions excluding certain parental decisions from abuse and neglect may significantly impact CPS cases and termination proceedings. The enhanced protective order provisions and victim rights expansions reflect the Legislature’s continued focus on domestic violence prevention and victim protection.

Practitioners should particularly note the standardized attorneys’ fee language throughout the Family Code, new requirements for electronic communications in certain orders, and the strengthened enforcement mechanisms for possession and access violations. The changes to standing requirements and nonparent litigation standards will significantly impact custody disputes involving third parties.

As always, family law practitioners should carefully review the full text of each bill and consider how these changes affect their specific practice areas and pending cases.

KARL E. HAYS is an associate district court judge presiding over the Family Court of Hays County and the incoming co-chair of the Legislative Committee of the Texas Family Law Foundation. A dedicated advocate for the rights of both children and parents, as well as victims of family violence, Judge Hays champions improvements to Texas family law through legislative advocacy.