You keep repeating that but you don't cite where it is. You're making the allegation, support it.
again .. inside the document YOU posted .. did you bother to read it before posting?
https://www.dfps.state.tx.us/documen...ermination.pdf
You keep repeating that but you don't cite where it is. You're making the allegation, support it.
again .. inside the document YOU posted .. did you bother to read it before posting?
https://www.dfps.state.tx.us/documen...ermination.pdf
And again you don't bother with a citation. Why is this?
that's total horse manure .. gave an exact document ,, go read it
I have read it. This is why I believe your statements to be false. I'm not going to go tit-for-tat here. You're free to keep linking to it indirectly as a copout rather than citing its content in the discussion.
Bye Felicia.
Parents smoking pot alone doesn't constitute enough for removal according to the link, which section did you infer that from?
Read your link, but no citations. A pity. Though it did stoop to saying that adoptive parents are seeking job security by adoption.
ok more horse manure .. if you actually read it? why would you state it's not possible to take terminate parental rights for pot use, when document plainly states use of any illegal drugs can be used as basis for taking away a child from biological parents.
when you make a mistake .. it's usually better to admit it and get it over with ... so get over it!
In law, we don't cite to a book, we cite to a page (or, better yet, a paragraph, in some systems) or specific statute and subpart. Help us out here.
page 1 of the document originally link by lightningcrash states 25 reasons are grounds for termination of parental rights (only one is needed). then proceeds to list all 25 reasons along with sub categories.
Enter your email address to join: