Child Custody in Texas: The Complete Legal Guide for Houston-Area Parents

Few legal disputes carry higher stakes than a fight over your children. The decisions made in a Texas child custody case shape a child’s daily life, schooling, relationships, and emotional development for years. They determine how much time each parent has, who makes decisions about medical care and education, and what happens if one parent wants to move. Getting those decisions right requires understanding how Texas law actually works, not how it is often described in simplified summaries.

This guide is written for parents in Houston and the surrounding communities of Sugar Land, Katy, The Woodlands, Cypress, Pearland, and across the greater Houston area who are navigating custody for the first time, facing a modification of an existing order, or dealing with enforcement of rights a former spouse is not respecting. It covers Texas child custody law as it stands in 2025 and 2026, including the significant changes that took effect on September 1, 2025, and Texas Proposition 15, the parental rights constitutional amendment approved by Texas voters in November 2025.

Anunobi Law is a Houston-based family law firm. Lead attorney Chidi D. Anunobi is board certified in family law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, a credential held by fewer than one percent of licensed Texas attorneys. We represent parents in custody disputes across Harris, Fort Bend, Montgomery, Brazoria, and Galveston Counties.

For information about our family law practice and how we serve clients in Greater Houston, visit our Divorce and Family Law Solutions page.

1. Texas Uses the Term ‘Conservatorship,’ Not ‘Custody’

Texas family law uses terminology that differs from most other states and from the way custody is discussed in everyday conversation. Understanding the correct terms matters because they carry precise legal meanings that affect every aspect of a custody case.

In Texas, what most people call ‘custody’ is formally called conservatorship. What most people call ‘visitation’ is called possession and access. These terms are not interchangeable with their everyday counterparts, and using them precisely helps parents understand what courts are actually deciding.

Conservatorship: Who Has Legal Rights and Duties

Conservatorship refers to the bundle of legal rights and duties that parents hold with respect to their child. Texas Family Code Chapter 153 governs conservatorship, and Section 153.002 establishes the foundational rule: the best interest of the child is always the primary consideration.

There are two types of conservatorship in Texas:

Joint Managing Conservatorship (JMC): Both parents share the rights and duties of parenthood. This is the default presumption under Texas law. Joint managing conservatorship does not mean equal physical time with the child. It means both parents have legal rights regarding the child’s upbringing, though some rights may be held exclusively by one parent, some may be exercised independently by either parent, and others may require the agreement of both.
Sole Managing Conservatorship (SMC): One parent holds most or all of the significant rights and duties, including the exclusive right to make most major decisions about the child. The other parent is typically named as possessory conservator and retains the right to possession under a court-ordered schedule, along with limited independent rights such as the right to receive information about the child’s health and education.

Texas Family Code Section 153.003 expressly provides that neither the sex of the parent nor the sex of the child may be considered in making conservatorship determinations. The presumption in Texas is that appointment of both parents as joint managing conservators is in the child’s best interest. That presumption can be overcome by evidence, but it is where every Texas custody case begins.

When Courts Order Sole Managing Conservatorship

Sole managing conservatorship is not ordered simply because one parent is a better parent or earns more money. Texas Family Code Section 153.004 requires the court to consider ordering SMC when there is credible evidence of a history or pattern of family violence by one parent against the other parent or the child, child abuse or neglect, or conduct that presents an ongoing risk. The statute also provides that the court may not appoint joint managing conservators if credible evidence of such a history or pattern exists.

Outside of family violence and abuse, SMC is appropriate when one parent’s conduct, lifestyle, or circumstances make shared decision-making unworkable or contrary to the child’s interests. Drug or alcohol abuse, incarceration, chronic instability, and demonstrated inability to cooperate in parenting are among the circumstances that may support an SMC arrangement.

Rights and Duties of Conservators

Texas Family Code Sections 153.071 through 153.138 set out the specific rights and duties that can be allocated between parents in a conservatorship order. Key rights that orders must address include:

The right to designate the child’s primary residence (subject to geographic restrictions).
The right to consent to medical, dental, and surgical treatment.
The right to consent to psychiatric and psychological treatment.
The right to receive information from schools, medical providers, and other institutions about the child.
The right to make educational decisions.
The right to make decisions about extracurricular activities.
The right to represent the child in legal proceedings.

In a JMC order, some of these rights may be granted exclusively to one parent (typically the parent with primary residence for routine decision-making), some may be exercised independently by either parent, and others may require agreement. Courts have broad discretion in how these rights are allocated, and the specific allocation should reflect the child’s actual circumstances and the parents’ demonstrated ability to cooperate.

2. The Best Interest Standard: What Texas Courts Actually Evaluate

Every custody decision in Texas is governed by the best interest of the child standard established in Texas Family Code Section 153.002. This standard is not a checklist that produces a formula-driven outcome. It requires the court to weigh all relevant evidence about a specific child’s specific circumstances.

The Holley Factors

The leading authority on what courts consider in evaluating best interest is Holley v. Adams, 544 S.W.2d 367 (Tex. 1976), in which the Texas Supreme Court identified a non-exclusive list of factors that courts should examine. These factors, now universally referred to as the Holley factors, include:

The desires of the child.
The emotional and physical needs of the child now and in the future.
The emotional and physical danger to the child now and in the future.
The parental abilities of each person seeking custody.
The programs available to assist those individuals in promoting the best interest of the child.
The plans for the child by the individuals or agencies seeking custody.
The stability of the home or proposed placement.
The acts or omissions of the parent that may indicate the existing parent-child relationship is not proper.
Any excuse for the acts or omissions of a parent.

The Holley factors are a starting point, not a complete list. Courts consider any relevant evidence about the child’s situation. Texas case law makes clear that not every factor must be established or weighed in every case, and that evidence on even a few factors can support a best interest finding.

The Child’s Preference

Under Texas Family Code Section 153.009, a child who is 12 years of age or older may be interviewed by the judge in chambers to express their preference regarding conservatorship and possession. Either parent may request this interview. The judge must conduct the interview if a child of qualifying age requests it.

The child’s expressed preference is one factor the judge considers. It is not binding. A judge may decline to follow the child’s stated preference if other evidence establishes that doing so would not serve the child’s best interest. Courts are experienced at recognizing when a child’s expressed preference reflects coaching or alienation by one parent rather than the child’s genuine, independent wishes.

2025 Legislative Changes to Best Interest Analysis

The 89th Texas Legislature, which concluded its regular session with changes effective September 1, 2025, made several significant amendments that affect how best interest is evaluated. These include:

Mandatory protective order review: Judges are now required to access and fully review any existing protective orders or acts of family violence involving parties before making conservatorship and possession decisions. This change strengthens the connection between protective order proceedings under Chapter 85 and custody proceedings under Chapter 153.
New best interest presumptions in parent-vs-nonparent cases: When a nonparent seeks custody against a parent, updated provisions in Section 153.131 create a rebuttable presumption that a parent acts in the child’s best interest and that placement with a parent is in the child’s best interest. A nonparent must now prove by clear and convincing evidence that denial of the requested relief is necessary to protect the child.
Narrowed standing for nonparents: Prior law allowed a person who had care, control, and possession of a child for at least six months to file for conservatorship. The 2025 amendments require exclusive care, control, and possession, narrowing the pool of nonparents with standing to seek custody.
Step-parent standing removed: The 2025 session eliminated the specific standing provision for step-parents under former Section 102.003(a)(11). Step-parents and same-sex partners of a parent no longer have the clear statutory path to conservatorship they previously had.
Expanded relative standing: Relatives within the fourth degree of consanguinity (previously the third degree) may now file for managing conservatorship in certain circumstances.

Texas Proposition 15: Parental Rights in the State Constitution

Texas voters approved Proposition 15 on November 4, 2025, by nearly 70 percent. The amendment added Section 37 to Article 1 of the Texas Constitution, affirming that parents have the fundamental right to exercise care, custody, and control of their children, including the right to make decisions about a child’s upbringing, along with the responsibility to nurture and protect the child.

In the child custody context, Proposition 15 does not overturn or replace the best interest standard, which remains the primary consideration under Texas Family Code Section 153.002. What it does is provide a constitutional basis for parental rights claims that was not previously available under the Texas Constitution. The full practical impact of Proposition 15 on contested custody litigation will develop through case law as courts interpret the amendment’s scope and application.

3. Possession and Access: The Parenting Time Schedule

Conservatorship determines who has legal rights and duties. Possession and access determines when each parent physically has the child. These are separate questions, and a parent can be a joint managing conservator while spending significantly less time with the child than the other parent.

The Standard Possession Order

Texas Family Code Section 153.252 creates a presumption that the Standard Possession Order (SPO) provides reasonable minimum possession times that are in the best interest of a child who is three years of age or older. When parents cannot agree on a possession schedule, Texas courts apply the SPO unless evidence establishes that it is not in the child’s best interest.

The SPO is set out in Texas Family Code Sections 153.3101 through 153.317. Its specific provisions depend on the distance between the parents’ residences.

When Parents Live 100 Miles or Fewer Apart

For the non-primary parent (possessory conservator) when parents live 100 miles or fewer apart, the SPO provides:

Weekend possession on the first, third, and fifth weekends of each month, from 6:00 p.m. Friday to 6:00 p.m. Sunday (or from school release to school resumption under the expanded provisions).
Thursday evening possession during the regular school year, from 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.
Alternating Thanksgiving holiday on an annual basis (the non-primary parent has Thanksgiving in odd-numbered years under the standard schedule).
Christmas holiday divided between the parents on an alternating schedule, with each parent receiving a portion of the winter school break in alternating years.
Spring break in alternating years.
Extended summer possession of up to 30 days, with the non-primary parent providing written notice of elected summer dates by April 1 each year. If no notice is given, the default period is July 1 through July 31.
The child’s birthday and Father’s Day or Mother’s Day, per the specific provisions of the order.

Holiday possession takes precedence over regular weekend possession. When a holiday assigned to one parent falls on what would otherwise be the other parent’s regular weekend, the holiday schedule controls.

The Expanded Standard Possession Order

For cases filed on or after September 1, 2021, when parents live within 50 miles of each other, the non-primary parent may elect the Expanded Standard Possession Order. This provides significantly more parenting time:

Weekend possession from the time school releases on Friday (or from 6:00 p.m. Friday if school is not in session) through Monday morning when school resumes (or 6:00 a.m. Monday if school is not in session).
Thursday overnight possession during the regular school year, from the time school releases on Thursday through Friday morning school resumption.
Extended summer possession as under the standard schedule.

The expanded SPO increases non-primary parent possession to approximately 47 percent of the year, approaching but not reaching a true equal-time arrangement. This election must be made in the initial order or through a modification proceeding.

When Parents Live More Than 100 Miles Apart

When the parents live more than 100 miles apart, the SPO adjusts:

Weekend possession reduces to one weekend per month of the non-primary parent’s choice, with 14 days’ advance written notice to the primary parent, or the non-primary parent may elect the same first, third, and fifth weekend schedule as the under-100-miles schedule.
The Thursday evening possession is eliminated.
Summer possession extends to 42 days.
A spring break period is added.

The election between one weekend per month and the first/third/fifth schedule must be made in writing to the primary parent within 90 days after the parties begin living more than 100 miles apart.

Children Under Three Years Old

The presumption that the SPO is in the child’s best interest does not apply to children under the age of three. Texas Family Code Section 153.251(d) specifies this exception. For young children, courts make possession orders based on relevant factors identified in Section 153.254, which include the child’s developmental stage, the frequency of contact needed to maintain the parent-child relationship, and the child’s need for stability and consistency.

Parents of very young children who cannot agree on a schedule often need judicial guidance or mediation assistance. Courts and practitioners recognize that as the child grows, the possession schedule will typically need to be revisited. Many orders for young children include built-in age-based transitions toward the standard schedule.

Deviating from the Standard Possession Order

The SPO is a presumptive baseline, not a mandatory outcome. Parents may agree to any schedule that serves their child’s needs, including equal week-on/week-off arrangements, school-schedule-based splits, or other configurations tailored to their work schedules, the child’s extracurricular activities, and the family’s geographic situation. If the court determines the standard possession order is inappropriate for a particular child, it may deviate from it, but must make written findings explaining the deviation if either party requests them.

4. Geographic Restrictions: Where the Child Can Live

One of the most practically consequential provisions in any Texas custody order is the geographic restriction, which limits where the parent with the right to designate the child’s primary residence may establish that residence. Understanding geographic restrictions is essential for any parent who may move, or whose co-parent may move, after a custody order is entered.

How Geographic Restrictions Work

Most Texas custody orders specify that the child’s primary residence must be maintained within a defined geographic area, typically the county where the child currently resides and any contiguous (adjoining) counties. In the Houston area, a typical geographic restriction for a Sugar Land family might limit primary residence to Fort Bend County and its contiguous counties. For a Katy family whose case is in Harris County, the restriction might cover Harris County and contiguous counties.

The restriction binds only the parent with the right to designate the child’s primary residence. The other parent is free to move anywhere without court approval, though a move affecting the logistics of the possession schedule may give grounds to modify the order.

Moving Outside the Geographic Restriction

A parent who wants to relocate beyond the geographic restriction in the existing order must do one of two things: obtain the other parent’s written agreement to the move, or file a modification petition and obtain a court order lifting or modifying the restriction before moving.

Moving a child outside the geographic restriction without written consent or a court order violates the existing custody order. This can result in a contempt finding, which carries potential fines and incarceration, and it almost certainly damages the moving parent’s credibility in any subsequent modification proceeding.

Relocation Litigation

When a parent seeks to relocate with the child and the other parent objects, the court evaluates the request as a modification of the existing order. The requesting parent must show a material and substantial change in circumstances since the last order (the relocation itself can satisfy this element in appropriate cases), and that the proposed modification is in the child’s best interest.

Courts evaluating relocation requests consider what Texas case law has identified as the Lenz factors, drawn from Lenz v. Lenz, 79 S.W.3d 10 (Tex. 2002): the reasons for the relocation, the impact on the child’s relationship with the non-primary parent and others, the comparative quality of life the child would have in each location, whether the relocating parent is acting in good faith, and whether a modified possession schedule could adequately preserve the non-primary parent’s relationship with the child.

Relocation cases are among the most fact-intensive and litigation-intensive custody disputes in Texas family law. The outcome turns heavily on the specific evidence about the child’s relationships, the plausibility of the justification for the move, and the quality of the proposed modified possession schedule. Courts do not view relocation as automatically permissible or automatically prohibited. They examine each case on its specific facts.

5. Temporary Orders: What Happens While the Case Is Pending

A contested custody case in Texas can take months or even longer to resolve through trial. Children cannot live in uncertainty for that period. Texas courts can enter temporary orders early in the case that establish the possession schedule, conservatorship rights, and other arrangements during the pendency of the proceeding.

Temporary Restraining Orders and Temporary Orders Hearings

When a custody case is filed, either parent can request a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to prevent the other parent from taking disruptive action while the case is being set for a temporary orders hearing. A TRO can be entered ex parte (without the other parent present) and typically lasts about 14 days before a hearing must be held.

A temporary orders hearing is the first contested proceeding in most custody cases. Both parents present evidence, typically through testimony and documents, and the judge enters temporary orders that govern the case until final trial or settlement. These hearings move quickly, evidence rules are applied somewhat more liberally than at final trial, and the outcome can significantly influence how the case develops.

Why Temporary Orders Matter

Temporary orders are not just interim measures. They establish a status quo that courts are often reluctant to disturb at final trial absent good reason. A parent who obtains favorable temporary orders, demonstrates stability during the pendency of the case, and uses the temporary period to build a documented record of consistent, responsible parenting is in a far stronger position at final trial.

This is one of the most important strategic realities in Texas custody litigation. The temporary orders hearing, which often receives less preparation time than it deserves, shapes the trajectory of the entire case. Having experienced counsel before that first hearing is critical.

6. Custody Modification: Changing an Existing Order

A final custody order in Texas does not remain in place forever unchanged. As children grow and family circumstances evolve, the arrangements that made sense at the time the order was entered may no longer serve the child’s best interest. Texas law provides a path to modify custody orders when circumstances justify it.

The Standard: Material and Substantial Change

To modify conservatorship or possession, the requesting parent must establish under Texas Family Code Section 156.101 two separate elements: (1) a material and substantial change in the circumstances of the child or a person affected by the order has occurred since the last order was signed, and (2) the modification would be in the child’s best interest.

The phrase ‘material and substantial change’ is not precisely defined in the Family Code. Texas courts have developed case law identifying what qualifies. Changes that courts have recognized as material and substantial include:

A parent’s relocation, particularly where it disrupts the existing possession schedule or requires a child to change schools.
Remarriage of either parent, particularly combined with relocation or significant changes in the child’s living environment.
Evidence of family violence, abuse, neglect, or substance abuse by a parent that was not present or known at the time of the last order.
Significant changes in either parent’s work schedule, income, or living situation that affect their ability to care for the child.
The child’s own changing needs, including educational, therapeutic, or medical needs that are not being met under the current arrangement.
A parent’s interference with the other parent’s court-ordered possession rights (parental alienation).
Voluntary relinquishment of possession by the primary parent for an extended period.

Minor disagreements between co-parents, temporary difficulties, and dissatisfaction with how the other parent handles routine parenting decisions generally do not meet the material and substantial change threshold. Courts are protective of the stability that existing orders provide and do not reopen custody cases based on the normal friction of co-parenting after separation.

The Two-Year Waiting Period and Exceptions

Texas Family Code Section 156.101 provides that a court generally may not modify a conservatorship order within one year of the date the order was signed based solely on circumstances that existed at the time the order was entered. For modifications to the primary conservatorship designation (which parent has the right to designate the child’s primary residence), an additional limitation applies: a party seeking modification within one year of the order must provide an affidavit alleging specific grounds, including a belief that the child’s present environment may endanger physical health or significantly impair emotional development, or that the primary conservator has voluntarily relinquished primary care of the child for at least six months.

In practice, the most significant modifications sought within the first one to two years of an order are those involving safety concerns, relocation, or voluntary changes in living arrangements. Courts retain full authority to act promptly when a child’s safety is at issue regardless of how recently the order was entered.

Emergency Modifications

When a child faces immediate danger, Texas Family Code Section 156.006 allows a court to issue a temporary order without notice to the other parent (ex parte) if the evidence establishes that the child’s physical health or safety is immediately at risk. Emergency orders are temporary and must be followed by a full hearing within 14 days.

7. Enforcement: When a Co-Parent Is Not Following the Order

A custody order is a court order. Willful violation of it is contempt of court, carrying potential fines and incarceration. Texas courts take enforcement seriously, and parents who consistently violate custody orders face significant legal consequences.

Interference with Possession

The most common enforcement issue is one parent interfering with the other parent’s court-ordered possession time. This includes refusing to release the child for scheduled possession, returning the child late, taking the child during the other parent’s possession without consent, and attempting to relocate the child outside the geographic restriction without court authorization.

A parent experiencing possession interference should document every incident carefully, with dates, times, and any available evidence (text messages, emails, witness accounts). A pattern of documented interference supports a motion for enforcement and strengthens a subsequent modification petition based on parental alienation.

The Enforcement Process

To enforce a custody order, the aggrieved parent files a Motion for Enforcement of Possession or Access in the court that entered the order. The court may hold a hearing and, if it finds the other parent in contempt, may impose fines, require make-up possession time, and in serious cases order incarceration. Repeated contempt findings can support a modification petition changing the primary conservatorship designation.

Make-Up Possession

Texas Family Code Section 157.168 allows a court enforcing a possession order to order additional possession time to compensate for possession that was wrongfully denied. Make-up possession must be of the same type and duration as the possession that was denied, and must occur within six months of the enforcement order.

8. High-Conflict Custody Issues in Houston

Some custody disputes involve issues that go beyond the standard framework of conservatorship and possession. The following are issues that arise frequently in Houston-area custody cases and that require experienced legal handling.

Parental Alienation

Parental alienation is a pattern of conduct by one parent that damages or attempts to damage the child’s relationship with the other parent. It can range from subtle undermining, speaking negatively about the other parent in the child’s presence, to overt interference: missing exchanges, coaching the child to make false allegations, refusing to communicate about the child’s needs, or cutting off contact entirely.

Texas courts treat documented alienation as a significant factor in both modification and enforcement proceedings. A parent who establishes a consistent pattern of alienating conduct may obtain a change in primary conservatorship in appropriate cases. Evidence of alienation must be documented carefully, and the distinction between genuine alienation and a child’s organic reluctance based on legitimate experiences with the other parent is one that courts evaluate with care.

Family Violence and Protective Orders

When family violence is present, Texas family law provides multiple intersecting protections. Texas Family Code Section 153.004 requires courts to consider a history or pattern of family violence when making conservatorship and possession decisions. Courts may not appoint joint managing conservators if there is credible evidence of a history or pattern of family violence. Courts may limit, restrict, or deny possession to a parent whose conduct poses a danger to the child.

Protective orders under Texas Family Code Chapter 85 can run concurrently with custody orders and can restrict an abusive parent’s contact with the child and the other parent. The 2025 legislative amendments requiring courts to access and review existing protective orders before making custody decisions strengthen this connection.

Substance Abuse

A parent’s substance abuse problem that affects their ability to safely care for the child is among the most common grounds for seeking modification to sole managing conservatorship or restricted possession. Courts have broad discretion in structuring appropriate orders, including requiring supervised possession, random drug testing as a condition of possession, and treatment participation.

Documented evidence of substance abuse, including law enforcement records, treatment records, and the testimony of witnesses who have observed impaired parenting, carries significant weight. Courts prioritize the child’s safety and can enter emergency orders when a child is at immediate risk.

International and Interstate Custody Issues

Houston’s diverse and globally connected population means that international and interstate custody issues arise with some frequency. Texas courts apply the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), codified in Texas Family Code Chapter 152, to determine which state has jurisdiction over custody disputes when parents live in different states.

International custody disputes, including cases involving the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, require specialized handling. The Hague Convention provides a framework for the return of children wrongfully removed from their country of habitual residence. These cases move on an expedited basis and require counsel with specific experience in international family law matters.

Child Custody Evaluations

In contested cases where parenting fitness is disputed, courts may order a social study or psychological evaluation under Texas Family Code Section 107.0501. A licensed mental health professional or social worker evaluates the parents and the child, interviews teachers, family members, and others involved in the child’s life, and submits a report with recommendations to the court.

A custody evaluation report carries significant weight. Courts are not bound by the evaluator’s recommendations, but they consider them seriously. Preparing for a custody evaluation, including understanding what evaluators assess and how to present your strengths as a parent accurately and effectively, is a critical part of case preparation.

9. Child Support in Texas: The Basics

Child support is typically determined alongside custody and possession in a SAPCR (Suit Affecting the Parent-Child Relationship). While a full treatment of Texas child support law exceeds this guide’s scope, parents need to understand the fundamental framework.

The Guideline Formula

Texas Family Code Chapter 154 establishes guideline child support based on the obligor’s net monthly resources. Net monthly resources include wages, salary, commissions, overtime, tips, self-employment income, and certain other income after specified deductions (federal income tax, Social Security, Medicare, state income tax if applicable, and health insurance premiums for the child).

The guideline percentages applied to net monthly resources are: 20 percent for one child; 25 percent for two children; 30 percent for three children; 35 percent for four children; 40 percent for five children; and not less than the five-child amount for six or more children.

Effective September 1, 2025, the 89th Texas Legislature increased the cap on net monthly resources for guideline child support from $9,200 to $11,700 per month. This means the maximum guideline support for one child increased from $1,840 per month to $2,340 per month. Courts retain authority to order above-guideline support in cases where the child’s proven needs exceed the guideline amount.

Modifications to Child Support

Child support can be modified if there has been a material and substantial change in circumstances or if it has been three years since the last order was signed and the monthly amount would differ by either 20 percent or $100 from the amount that would be awarded under current guidelines. The increase in the guideline cap effective September 1, 2025 created modification opportunities for many families whose existing orders were calculated under the prior cap.

10. Frequently Asked Questions About Texas Child Custody

Q: Does Texas favor mothers over fathers in child custody decisions?A: No. Texas Family Code Section 153.003 expressly prohibits courts from considering the sex of the parent or child when making conservatorship and possession decisions. Courts apply the best interest standard to both parents equally. What matters is the evidence about each parent’s relationship with the child, parenting abilities, and the child’s specific needs, not gender.

Q: What is the difference between joint managing conservatorship and sole managing conservatorship?A: Joint managing conservatorship (JMC) is the presumed outcome in Texas. It means both parents share legal rights and duties, though not necessarily equal physical time. Sole managing conservatorship (SMC) concentrates most decision-making rights in one parent and is appropriate when the other parent has a history of family violence, neglect, substance abuse, or other disqualifying conduct under Section 153.004.

Q: What is the Standard Possession Order in Texas?A: The Standard Possession Order (SPO) is the possession schedule set out in Texas Family Code Sections 153.3101 through 153.317. For parents living 100 miles or fewer apart, it gives the non-primary parent possession on the first, third, and fifth weekends of each month, Thursday evenings during the school year (6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.), alternating holidays, and up to 30 days in the summer. The court presumes this schedule is in the best interest of children age three and older.

Q: What is the Expanded Standard Possession Order?A: For cases filed on or after September 1, 2021, when both parents live within 50 miles of each other, the non-primary parent may elect the Expanded SPO. This extends weekend possession from the time school releases on Friday through Monday morning school drop-off, adds Thursday overnight possession during the school year, and increases overall parenting time to approximately 47 percent.

Q: Can I move out of Texas with my child after a custody order is entered?A: Almost certainly not without the other parent’s written agreement or a new court order. Most Texas custody orders include a geographic restriction limiting the child’s primary residence to a specific county or group of contiguous counties. Relocating beyond that restriction without consent or a court order modifying it violates the existing order and can result in contempt proceedings. Relocation modifications require showing a material and substantial change in circumstances and that the move serves the child’s best interest.

Q: How do I modify a custody order in Texas?A: To modify conservatorship or possession, you must file a petition in the court that entered the original order and prove two things: (1) a material and substantial change in circumstances has occurred since the last order was signed, and (2) the requested modification is in the child’s best interest. Common qualifying changes include a parent’s relocation, evidence of family violence or abuse, significant changes in either parent’s living situation, and the child’s own changing needs. Temporary circumstances and minor disagreements generally do not meet the threshold.

Q: At what age can a child choose which parent to live with in Texas?A: There is no age at which a child in Texas can unilaterally choose their custodial parent. However, under Texas Family Code Section 153.009, a child who is 12 years of age or older may be interviewed by the judge in chambers to express their wishes regarding conservatorship and possession. The judge has discretion to consider the child’s preference but is not bound by it. The best interest standard always controls the outcome.

Q: How is child support calculated in Texas?A: Texas uses an income-based guidelines formula under Chapter 154 of the Family Code. The percentage of the obligor’s net monthly resources applied to child support is: one child, 20 percent; two children, 25 percent; three children, 30 percent; four children, 35 percent; five children, 40 percent; and six or more children, not less than the amount for five children. Effective September 1, 2025, the statutory cap on net monthly resources for guideline child support increased from $9,200 to $11,700 per month. Courts can order above-guideline support in appropriate cases.

Q: What happens to custody when a parent is deployed in the military?A: Texas Family Code Chapter 153, Subchapter L addresses military deployment. A parent’s military service alone does not constitute a material and substantial change in circumstances justifying a permanent custody modification. Courts can enter temporary orders for the deployment period. A military parent may also designate a family member to exercise possession during deployment in specified circumstances.

Q: What is parental alienation and how do Texas courts treat it?A: Parental alienation refers to one parent’s conduct that damages or attempts to damage the child’s relationship with the other parent, including interference with court-ordered possession, making false accusations, or turning the child against the other parent. Texas courts treat documented alienation seriously. It can support a modification petition, a contempt finding, and in severe cases a change in primary conservatorship. Courts look for a pattern of conduct rather than isolated incidents.

11. How Anunobi Law Approaches Child Custody Cases in Houston

Child custody litigation at the high-conflict or high-stakes level requires more than knowledge of the law. It requires strategic thinking from the first consultation, the ability to anticipate how a case will develop through temporary orders, discovery, and trial, and the experienced judgment to know when to fight and when to find a workable resolution.

Anunobi Law brings specific capabilities to custody cases in Harris, Fort Bend, Montgomery, Brazoria, and Galveston Counties:

Board certification in family law: Attorney Chidi D. Anunobi is board certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, a credential held by fewer than one percent of Texas attorneys and requiring demonstrated excellence through examination and peer evaluation. In custody litigation, experience with Texas courts matters enormously.
Trial readiness: Settlements happen because both parties believe trial is possible and that the other side can actually deliver on their threats. We prepare every case as if it is going to trial. That posture produces better temporary orders, better discovery responses, and better settlements. And when trial is necessary, we are ready.
Financial and business sophistication: In high-net-worth custody cases, the custody dispute and the property division are often intertwined. A parent’s income affects child support. Business interests affect what each parent can financially provide. Our background in business law and financial analysis allows us to handle both dimensions of complex family law cases.
Court familiarity across multiple counties: Katy cases may be in Harris or Fort Bend County courts depending on where the client lives. Woodlands cases are in Montgomery County. Sugar Land cases are in Fort Bend County. We know the courts, the judges, and the local procedural norms across the counties where our clients live. Local knowledge shapes strategy from day one.
Negotiation skill: Our practice includes a specialist in negotiation and mediation. Many custody disputes can be resolved through mediation at lower cost, lower emotional toll, and with more durable agreements than trial outcomes produce. We pursue resolution when it genuinely serves our client’s interests, and litigation when it does not.

We serve clients in Houston, Sugar Land, Katy, The Woodlands, Cypress, Pearland, and throughout the Greater Houston area. Our offices are located at 1415 North Loop West, Suite 1140, Houston, TX 77008.

For more information about our custody and family law representation, visit our Divorce and Family Law Solutions page.

Child Custody Representation Across Greater Houston

Custody disputes do not follow county lines. Anunobi Law represents clients across the Houston metropolitan area, with particular experience in the courts that serve the following communities:

Sugar Land (Fort Bend County): Custody cases for Sugar Land residents are heard in the Fort Bend County District Courts at the Fort Bend County Justice Center, 1422 Eugene Heimann Circle, Richmond, TX 77469. Fort Bend County’s eight district courts handle a large volume of family law matters, and familiarity with local judicial practices in high-net-worth custody disputes is essential. Learn more about our Sugar Land representation.

Katy (Harris and Fort Bend Counties): Katy’s position across Harris and Fort Bend County lines means a Katy custody case may be filed in either county depending on where exactly the client lives. Harris County matters are heard at the Harris County Civil Courthouse, 201 Caroline Street, Houston, TX 77002, in one of the Harris County Family District Courts. Fort Bend County matters are heard in Richmond. Knowing which courthouse a case belongs in, and how each court operates, matters from the first filing. Learn more about our Katy representation.

The Woodlands (Montgomery County): Custody cases for most Woodlands residents are filed in the Montgomery County District Courts at the Montgomery County Courthouse, 301 North Main Street, Conroe, TX 77301. The Woodlands’ concentration of energy executives and corporate professionals means custody disputes in this market often involve high income for child support purposes, complex equity compensation, and significant assets. Learn more about our Woodlands representation.

Cypress (Harris County): Cypress residents file in Harris County, which has multiple family district courts. Harris County’s volume and procedural sophistication require counsel who regularly appears in those courts. Learn more about our Cypress representation.

Pearland (Brazoria County): Pearland custody cases are heard in the Brazoria County District Courts in Angleton, TX. Brazoria County’s family law docket has its own character, and local court familiarity matters. Learn more about our Pearland representation.

Speak With a Houston Child Custody Attorney

If you are facing a custody dispute, a modification of an existing order, a relocation issue, or an enforcement problem, the time to consult with an experienced family law attorney is now, before decisions are made that limit your options.

Anunobi Law offers confidential consultations for prospective clients. We discuss your specific situation, your goals, and what a realistic path forward looks like given the facts and the applicable law. We do not offer guarantees, but we offer candid assessment and skilled representation.

Phone: 832-538-0833

Email: contact@businessandfamilylawyers.com

Office: 1415 North Loop West, Suite 1140, Houston, TX 77008

Legal Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is created by reading this article. Laws change and individual circumstances vary. Do not rely on this information as a substitute for professional legal counsel tailored to your specific situation. For advice about your custody matter, please contact Anunobi Law directly.