Right to counsel

Texas , Legislation , Abuse/Neglect/Dependency - Children

In state-initiated abuse and termination of parental rights matters in Texas, children have the right to both an attorney ad litem, Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 107.012, and a guardian ad litem, Tex. Fam. Code § 107.011. But a dual role is permitted. In other words, the attorney ad litem (responsible for advocating for the child’s wishes) may also serve as guardian ad litem (GAL) (responsible for best interest representation). See e.g., Texas Family Code § 107.011(b) (“The guardian ad litem appointed for a child under this section may be … an attorney appointed in the dual role.”).

The representation also extends to matters related to services participation. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 264.203, as amended in 2021, states that where the department files suit requesting a temporary order for a member of the child’s household (including their parent, managing conservator, or guardian) to participate in services and to permit the child and any siblings to receive services, “the court shall appoint an attorney ad litem to represent the interests of the child immediately after the filing but before the hearing to ensure adequate representation of the child. The attorney ad litem for the child shall have the powers and duties of an attorney ad litem for a child under Chapter 107.” § 264.203(g).

The attorney ad litem is tasked with “represent[ing] the child’s expressed objectives of representation and follow[ing] the child’s expressed objectives of representation … if the attorney ad litem determines that the child is competent to understand the nature of an attorney-client relationship and has formed that relationship with the attorney ad litem…” Tex. Fam. Code § 1007.004(a) (emphasis added). There are a variety of circumstances in which the attorney ad litem may substitute their own judgment for that of the child’s. See Tex. Fam. Code § 1007.008. Accordingly, we have classified the right to counsel as “qualified.”

Appointment of Counsel: Yes
Qualified: Yes
? If "yes", the established right to counsel or discretionary appointment of counsel is limited in some way, including any of: the only authority is a lower/intermediate court decision or a city council, not a high court or state legislature; there has been a subsequent case that has cast doubt; a statute is ambiguous; or the right or discretionary appointment is not for all types of individuals or proceedings within that category.