Texas Child Custody Agreement
In Texas an agreed parenting plan carries no weight of its own, and a judge has to find it is in the child's best interest before it becomes an order.
Find out where you stand in Texas
Where are you with the custody arrangement?
DocDraft provides document preparation, not legal advice.
Introduction
In Texas the words in a generic custody form do not appear in the statute. Family Code Chapter 153 is titled Conservatorship, Possession, and Access, and a Texas court appoints a sole or joint managing conservator, usually appoints the other parent a possessory conservator, and awards possession of and access to the child rather than custody and visitation. Parents can put their arrangement in a written agreed parenting plan under Section 153.007(a), covering conservatorship, possession and access, and modification, including terms that vary from the presumptive Standard Possession Order. What that document does not do is bind anyone. Section 153.007(b) says the court renders an order in accordance with the plan only if it finds the plan is in the child's best interest, so the judge has to make an affirmative finding in the parents' favor first, and Section 153.007(c) adds that the agreed terms are not enforceable as a contract. Agreeing therefore earns a Texas parent no deference, and the only legal force the arrangement ever has comes from the order the court signs. The exception is mediation, where a settlement agreement meeting Section 153.0071(d) is binding on the parties in a way an ordinary agreed plan never is.
Key Things to Know
- 1
Agreeing gets Texas parents no deference. Section 153.007(b) lets the court render an order matching an agreed parenting plan only if it finds the plan is in the child's best interest, which is a finding the judge must make in your favor before the plan can be adopted, not a finding needed to reject it. If the court finds the plan is not in the child's best interest, Section 153.007(d) lets it ask for a revised plan and, if no satisfactory plan is submitted, render its own after notice and hearing.
- 2
An unrendered Texas custody agreement is worth nothing on its own. Section 153.007(c) provides that agreed parenting plan terms placed in the order or incorporated by reference may be enforced by all remedies available for enforcement of a judgment, including contempt, but are not enforceable as a contract. There is no fallback breach of contract claim in Texas if the paper was never turned into an order, so filing is not a formality.
- 3
Texas vocabulary is different all the way down. Instead of custody and visitation, Chapter 153 uses managing conservator, possessory conservator, and possession of and access to the child, and one parent typically holds the exclusive right to designate the child's primary residence. Decision making is not a single legal custody label either: the rights and duties over the child are itemized and allocated to each parent independently, jointly, or exclusively, which Section 153.133(a)(4) requires an agreed joint managing conservatorship plan to spell out.
- 4
The parenting plan is part of the order, not a separate filing. Section 153.601(4) defines a parenting plan as the provisions of a final court order that set out each parent's rights and duties, provide periods of possession and access, provide for child support, and optimize the child's relationship with each parent, and Section 153.603(a) requires a final order in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship to include one, with narrow exceptions in 153.603(b). Texas also runs the opposite way on temporary plans: Section 153.602 says a court may not require the submission of a temporary parenting plan in any case or by local rule or practice.
- 5
An agreed plan seeking joint managing conservatorship has six required contents under Section 153.133(a). Two of them are unusual and worth reading twice: the plan must state that it is voluntarily and knowingly made by each parent and not repudiated by either at the time the order is rendered, and it must state that the plan is in the child's best interest. Because of the non-repudiation requirement, a Texas parent can withdraw consent right up to the moment the judge renders the order.
- 6
Texas has no relocation statute. There is no mileage trigger and no notice-and-object procedure for a move; instead Section 153.133(a)(1) makes the agreed plan either fix a geographic area within which the conservator with the exclusive right to designate the primary residence must keep that residence, or state expressly that the residence may be designated without regard to geographic location. What your family's move-away rule is depends entirely on which of those two the plan chooses, and changing it later means going back to court to modify the order.
- 7
Family violence produces a hard limit, not a factor. Section 153.004(b) says the court may not appoint joint managing conservators on credible evidence of a history or pattern of past or present child neglect or physical or sexual abuse by one parent directed against the other parent, a spouse, or a child, and it adds a rebuttable presumption against naming that parent sole managing conservator or the conservator who designates the primary residence. On a preponderance showing of family violence in the two years before filing or during the suit, Section 153.004(d) bars access altogether unless the court makes the express safety findings in 153.004(d-1). If any of this is present in your situation, talk to a lawyer rather than work from a form.
Key decisions before you file
Before you file a Child Custody Agreement in Texas, a few decisions shape the document: which option to choose and what each one means. The Child Custody Agreement guide walks through them.
Open the Child Custody Agreement guideCustomize your Child Custody Agreement Template with DocDraft
Texas Requirements for Child Custody Agreement
Texas parents may enter a written agreed parenting plan covering conservatorship, possession and access, and modification, including terms that vary from the Standard Possession Order. The agreement should be drafted as that instrument rather than as a private contract.
The court renders an order in accordance with an agreed parenting plan only if it finds the plan is in the child's best interest. If it finds otherwise, it may request a revised plan and, if no satisfactory plan is submitted, render its own after notice and hearing.
Agreed parenting plan terms placed in the order or incorporated by reference are enforceable by all remedies available for enforcement of a judgment, including contempt, but are not enforceable as a contract. The document has no independent force before rendition.
An agreed plan seeking joint managing conservatorship must designate who has the exclusive right to designate the child's primary residence, address geographic area, allocate rights and duties, minimize disruption to the child, and state that it is voluntarily and knowingly made, not repudiated at rendition, and in the child's best interest.
The plan must either fix a geographic area within which the child's primary residence is maintained until modified by further order, or state expressly that the residence may be designated without regard to geographic location. Texas has no separate relocation statute, so this clause is the move-away rule.
Chapter 153 is titled Conservatorship, Possession, and Access. The document should name managing and possessory conservators and describe possession of and access to the child, rather than using custody and visitation language.
The Standard Possession Order is presumed to be in the child's best interest, and an agreed plan may adopt it or set out agreed amendments to it. A schedule that departs from it should be identified as such in the document.
A final order in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship must include a parenting plan, subject to narrow exceptions, and the plan is defined as provisions of the final order rather than a standalone filing. Section 153.602 separately bars any court or local rule from requiring a temporary parenting plan.
A mediated settlement agreement is binding if it carries a prominently displayed non-revocation statement in boldfaced type, capital letters, or underlined, and is signed by each party and by each party's attorney present at the signing, and it entitles a party to judgment notwithstanding other rules of law, subject only to the narrow family violence and abuse exception.
Credible evidence of a history or pattern of neglect or physical or sexual abuse bars appointment of joint managing conservators and raises presumptions against sole managing conservatorship and unsupervised visitation, and a preponderance showing of family violence bars access absent express safety findings and a protective possession order.
Frequently Asked Questions
No. Texas gives an agreed parenting plan no special weight. Under Family Code Section 153.007(b) the court renders an order in accordance with the plan only if it finds the plan is in the child's best interest, so the finding has to be made in the parents' favor before the plan can be adopted. If the court finds the plan is not in the child's best interest, Section 153.007(d) allows it to request a revised plan and, if the parents do not submit one satisfactory to the court, to render its own plan after notice and a hearing. Where the agreed plan asks for joint managing conservatorship it also has to meet each requirement of Section 153.133(a).
Yes. Parents cannot settle conservatorship and possession privately and leave the court out of it. The agreement has no force until the judge reviews it and renders an order, and Section 153.603(a) requires a final order in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship to include a parenting plan. Once the order exists, the terms are enforceable by the remedies available for a judgment, including contempt.
No, and this is the sharpest point in Texas law for parents who want to keep an arrangement out of court. Section 153.007(c) states that agreed parenting plan terms in the order or incorporated by reference may be enforced by all remedies available for enforcement of a judgment, including contempt, but are not enforceable as a contract. There is no breach of contract claim to fall back on, so the document does its work only after rendition.
It is the one route where the court's best interest review is displaced. Under Section 153.0071(d) a settlement agreement reached in mediation is binding on the parties if it contains a prominently displayed statement, in boldfaced type, capital letters, or underlined, that it is not subject to revocation, it is signed by each party, and it is signed by the attorney of each party who is present at the signing. If it meets those requirements, Section 153.0071(e) entitles a party to judgment on it notwithstanding Rule 11 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure or another rule of law. A court may decline only under the narrow exception in Section 153.0071(e-1), which covers family violence that impaired a party's decision making, or an agreement that would let a person required to register as a sex offender or with a history of physical or sexual abuse live with or have unsupervised access to the child, where the agreement is also not in the child's best interest.
Because that is what the statute awards. Family Code Chapter 153 is titled Conservatorship, Possession, and Access, and Section 153.002(a) frames the question as the best interest of the child in determining conservatorship and possession of and access to the child. Courts appoint a sole or joint managing conservator and, usually, a possessory conservator, and they award possession and access on a schedule rather than visitation. An agreement written in generic custody language is not void, but it does not use a single term a Texas court will put in the order.
For an agreed plan asking for joint managing conservatorship, Section 153.133(a) requires six things: designation of the conservator with the exclusive right to designate the child's primary residence, together with either a geographic area for that residence or an express statement that it may be designated without regard to geographic location; the rights and duties of each parent as to the child's physical care, support, and education; provisions to minimize disruption of the child's education, daily routine, and association with friends; an allocation of all remaining parental rights and duties independently, jointly, or exclusively; a statement that the plan is voluntarily and knowingly made and not repudiated at the time the order is rendered; and a statement that the plan is in the child's best interest. Section 153.133(b) also allows the plan to require an alternative dispute resolution procedure before enforcement or modification is litigated, except in an emergency.
Texas does not set out a general list. Section 153.002(a) says only that the best interest of the child shall always be the primary consideration in determining conservatorship and possession and access. The lists that do exist are narrow, and one of them turns off when parents agree: the seven factors in Section 153.134(a) apply where the court is ordering joint managing conservatorship and a written agreed parenting plan has not been filed, so filing an agreed plan takes them out of the picture. Section 153.254(a) has a separate thirteen-factor list for a child under three, and Section 153.256 lists three considerations for a possession order that varies from the Standard Possession Order.
That depends on what your own order says, because Texas has no relocation statute, no mileage trigger, and no notice-and-object move-away procedure. The control is set up front: Section 153.133(a)(1) requires an agreed joint managing conservatorship plan either to fix a geographic area within which the conservator with the exclusive right to designate the child's primary residence must keep that residence, or to state that the residence may be designated without regard to geographic location. Moving outside a fixed area means returning to court to modify the order. Separately, a Texas order directs each party to give notice of a change of residence address and other listed information on or before the sixtieth day before the change, by registered or certified mail, under Sections 105.006(b) and 105.007(b), but that is a general change of information duty that binds both parents and does not give either one a right to object to a move.
Texas imposes limits rather than leaving it to weighing. Section 153.004(b) provides that the court may not appoint joint managing conservators on credible evidence of a history or pattern of past or present child neglect or physical or sexual abuse by one parent directed against the other parent, a spouse, or a child, and creates a rebuttable presumption that appointing that parent sole managing conservator, or the conservator with the exclusive right to determine primary residence, is not in the child's best interest. Section 153.131(b) says a finding of a history of family violence involving the parents removes the presumption that joint managing conservatorship is in the child's best interest. Section 153.004(d) bars access on a preponderance showing of family violence in the two years before filing or during the suit, or specified Penal Code offenses, unless the court makes the express safety findings and enters the protective possession order described in Section 153.004(d-1). Section 153.004(e) adds a rebuttable presumption against unsupervised visitation on credible evidence of neglect, abuse, or family violence. This is a situation for a lawyer.
Only in the sense that the order has to address it. The Section 153.601(4) definition of a parenting plan includes a provision for child support, so the topic appears in the final order alongside conservatorship and possession. The amount is a separate calculation under separate rules and is not something a parenting schedule settles, so treat support as its own question rather than assuming this document resolves it.