In a case similar to In The Interest Of M.M., A Child, the Supreme Court of Texas again addressed this situation in In The Interest of K.S.L., A Child.

In this case, both parents were involved.  And there was already an open case involving an older daughter when the Department of Family Protective Services filed suit on behalf of K.S.L., an infant.  The Department named several incidents including possessing, using, and selling illegal drugs and a high-speed police chase with the children in the car.  Both parents were represented by counsel and  signed affidavits of voluntary relinquishment of parental rights.  The caseworker testified that termination was in the best interest of the child and that arrangements were made for the uncle to adopt the child.  The trial court found that termination was in the best interest of the child and that both parents had signed irrevocable affidavits relinquishing parental rights.  Final judgment was entered terminating parental rights. 

Days later, both parents changed their minds.  They appealed arguing the evidence was insufficient to prove child's best interest.  Read more to find out what happened.

The Supreme Court of Texas addressed a situation like this on December 22 issuing it's opinion for In the Interest of M.M., a Child.  

​In the trial court, it was revealed that the mother had a history of drug use, had been incarcerated for heroin use, was recently seen using heroin, and that a cigarette burn was found on the 2 year old child's arm.  The Department of Family Protective Services filed a petition with respect to the child and expressed doubts regarding the mother's mental stability.   The mother voluntarily signed an affidavit of relinquishment of parental rights under section 161.103 of the Family Code and testified that she believed doing so was in the best interest of her child.  The caseworker also testified that relinquishment was in the best interest of the child who was in a safe and secure home with the grandmother.  The trial court rendered final judgment terminating parental rights.

The mother changed her mind and appealed.  Read more to see what happened.

Our last update was late September and can be found here.  

H.R. 3139, a House version of The Hearing Protection Act of 2017, now has 20 cosponsors, but is still in the Ways and Means and Judiciary Committees being referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations where it has been since July.  

S. 1505, the Senate version of The SHUSH Act, is up to 9 cosponsors, but remains in the Finance Committee where it has been since June.

Unless there is a significant event such as a bill being referred out of committee, we will no longer be providing updates related to the various versions of the HPA and SHUSH Act.