AI-assisted research summary: The court may appoint an amicus attorney, attorney ad litem, or guardian ad litem in certain child-interest suits, and must do so in a parent-child termination suit unless the child’s interests are already adequately represented.
Sec. 107.021. DISCRETIONARY APPOINTMENTS. (a) In a suit in which the best interests of a child are at issue, other than a suit filed by a governmental entity requesting termination of the parent-child relationship or appointment of the entity as conservator of the child, the court may appoint one of the following: (1) an amicus attorney; (2) an attorney ad litem; or (3) a guardian ad litem. (a-1) In a suit requesting termination of the parent-child relationship that is not filed by a governmental entity, the court shall, unless the court finds that the interests of the child will be represented adequately by a party to the suit whose interests are not in conflict with the child's interests, appoint one of the following: (1) an amicus attorney; or (2) an attorney ad litem. (b) In determining whether to make an appointment under this section, the court: (1) shall: (A) give due consideration to the ability of the parties to pay reasonable fees to the appointee; and (B) balance the child's interests against the cost to the parties that would result from an appointment by taking into consideration the cost of available alternatives for resolving issues without making an appointment; (2) may make an appointment only if the court finds that the appointment is necessary to ensure the determination of the best interests of the child, unless the appointment is otherwise required by this code; and (3) may not require a person appointed under this section to serve without reasonable compensation for the services rendered by the person. Added by Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 262, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2003. Amended by: Acts 2005, 79th Leg., Ch. 172 (H.B. 307), Sec. 8, eff. September 1, 2005.