The children
come first.

What “best interest of
the child” actually means.

Every conservatorship decision in Texas runs through one statutory test: the best interest of the child (Texas Family Code § 153.002). It is the primary consideration, and it is not a tiebreaker. It is the entire frame. What it does not mean: which parent loves the child more, which parent has more money, or which parent files first. The Texas Supreme Court mapped out what courts actually weigh in Holley v. Adams, 544 S.W.2d 367 (Tex. 1976), and those factors still govern.

The Holley factors are the child’s physical and emotional needs now and in the future, the parental abilities of each parent, the stability of the home each parent proposes, the plans each parent has for the child, the programs available to assist each parent, the acts or omissions that may indicate the existing parent-child relationship is not proper, and any excuse for those acts or omissions.

That last one matters. A parent who fell apart for six months during the separation and put the pieces back together by the time of trial is treated differently than one who is still falling apart. Courts watch the trajectory.

Conservatorship:
the language
Texas uses.

Texas does not say “custody.” The statute uses “conservatorship,” and there are two flavors. Joint Managing Conservator (JMC) means both parents share legal decision-making about education, medical care, and the child’s residence. Sole Managing Conservator (SMC) means one parent holds those decision rights alone and the other becomes a Possessory Conservator with possession time but limited authority.

Joint managing conservator is the default. Texas Family Code § 153.131 establishes a rebuttable presumption that JMC is in the child’s best interest, and rebutting it takes more than disagreement — it takes evidence of family violence, substance abuse, neglect, or conduct that makes shared decision-making genuinely unsafe. Most cases stay in JMC. What gets fought over inside JMC is who has the exclusive right to designate the child’s primary residence, and within what geographic restriction. That is the actual battleground in most modern Texas custody cases — not the conservatorship label itself.

The Standard Possession
Order, decoded.

The Standard Possession Order (SPO) is the default schedule the legislature wrote so courts and parents would not have to invent one from scratch. Texas Family Code § 153.252 makes it a rebuttable presumption: the assumed schedule unless the parents agree to something else or evidence shows it does not fit the child.

The SPO gives the non-primary parent the 1st, 3rd, and 5th weekends of the month, Thursday evenings during the school year, alternating major holidays, every Spring Break in even or odd years (alternating with the other parent), and 30 days during summer. Under § 153.317, the non-primary parent can elect “expanded” possession, which extends weekends from Friday after school to Monday morning and stretches Thursdays into overnights. Most non-primary parents elect expanded. It nearly doubles their actual time.

Parents who can cooperate often build something better than the SPO: week-on/week-off, 2-2-3, or custom rotations that match the child’s school and activity schedule.

Child support:
the math.

Texas child support is formulaic, which is the good news. The bad news is the formula has a few traps. Texas Family Code § 154.125 sets the guidelines as percentages of the obligor’s net monthly resources: 20% for one child, 25% for two, 30% for three, 35% for four, 40% for five, and not less than 40% for six or more. “Net resources” is gross income minus federal income tax (calculated on the single rate), Social Security, state income tax (none in Texas), union dues, and the cost of the children’s health and dental insurance.

Section 154.130 caps guideline support at the first $11,150 in net monthly resources. Above that cap, support is set based on the proven needs of the child, not a percentage. A high-earner does not automatically pay 20% of a million-dollar income. The obligor pays guideline on the first $11,150 of net, and any additional support has to be justified by what the child actually needs.

When a child
has special needs.

Special needs change the structure of the case in three ways, and we want parents to know all three at the outset rather than discover them in deposition. First, the standard $11,150 net resource cap on child support can be exceeded based on the proven needs of the child: therapies, specialized schooling, equipment, medication, and the cost of a parent staying home or working reduced hours.

Second, child support does not automatically end at 18 when a child is disabled. Texas Family Code § 154.302 allows indefinite support for an adult child with a substantial disability that existed before the child turned 18. The parents (or the court) can order support to continue for life. That changes everything about long-term planning, including the timing and structure of any property settlement.

Third, the Standard Possession Order is rarely the right schedule for a child with significant medical, sensory, or behavioral needs. Custom schedules, longer transitions, and provisions for therapy continuity tend to work better.

What kids do and
do not need to know.

Children need to know they are loved by both parents and that the divorce is not their fault. They need to know where they will sleep tonight and tomorrow, when they will see each parent, and that the routines they depend on (school, friends, activities) are not disappearing.

They do not need to know who filed, what the financial settlement looks like, what one parent thinks of the other, or which lawyer said what. They are not appropriate confidants for adult grief, and using them as one (even gently, even by accident) leaves a mark we see in court ten years later in modification cases. The most consistent finding across child-development research is that conflict between parents, not divorce itself, is what damages kids. Two honest parents who disagree respectfully and follow the order do not damage their children. Two parents who fight through the kids do, and the divorce is not what caused it. Tell them only what they need to function. Save the rest for adults.

Modifying the order:
what counts as
”material and substantial.”

Orders are not permanent. A parent who needs to change conservatorship, possession, or support can file a modification under Texas Family Code § 156.101, but the threshold is real: a material and substantial change in circumstances of the child, a parent, or another party affected by the order, since the original decree was signed.

What clears that bar: a job relocation, a remarriage that changes the household, a serious change in a child’s medical or educational needs, a parent’s deterioration through addiction or mental illness, or a child turning twelve and expressing a residence preference (§ 156.101(a)(2)). What usually does not clear it: ordinary parenting disagreements, mild dissatisfaction with the schedule, or the obligor’s voluntary income reduction.

Modifications are won on documentation. The parent who has the calendar, the texts, the school records, and the medical visit history walks into a modification with leverage the other parent does not have. We tell every client to document the parenting reality from day one of the original decree. Not because we expect to be back. The parents who document never have to scramble if they are.