2025 · Regular session · Senate bill
SB1141
SB1141 requires a court to check that an alleged perpetrator received specified investigation-rights notices before the full adversary hearing in a Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) child-protection case.
Official caption: Relating to confirming the provision of certain notices before the full adversary hearing in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship filed by the Department of Family and Protective Services.
Official report lists Senate author(s): Miles. This does not identify sponsors or amendment drafters.
Bill explanation published · Version and amendment review scope is stated below · Individual amendment records may not be separately annotated.
Bill highlights
Selected points from the published explanation. Follow each point to its source-linked context; conditions and limits may matter.
- SB1141 requires a court to check that an alleged perpetrator received specified investigation-rights notices before the full adversary hearing in a Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) child-protection case.
- The court must confirm that, before interviewing the person, DFPS explained the right to make an audio or video recording and the right to request administrative review of DFPS’s findings.
- The referenced first-contact information includes a written explanation of the investigation, known allegations and legal rights, verbal rights notices, an informational manual and, if removal may be warranted, a proposed child-placement-resources form.
- Signed June 20, 2025, the act took effect September 1, 2025.
What does it do?
SB1141 requires a court to check that an alleged perpetrator received specified investigation-rights notices before the full adversary hearing in a Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) child-protection case. The court must confirm this both in writing and in open court, with the alleged perpetrator—not merely rely on an unstated assumption that notice was given. Final law, new section 262.2011.
The court must confirm that, before interviewing the person, DFPS explained the right to make an audio or video recording and the right to request administrative review of DFPS’s findings. It must also confirm that, at the first contact after initiating the specified investigation, DFPS supplied the information required by section 261.307. These notice duties already existed; the new requirement is the court’s confirmation before the hearing. Administrative review of findings is not the same thing as an appeal of a court judgment. Final law; Family Code 261.3027; Family Code 261.3091; Family Code 261.307.
The referenced first-contact information includes a written explanation of the investigation, known allegations and legal rights, verbal rights notices, an informational manual and, if removal may be warranted, a proposed child-placement-resources form. The detailed notice requirements and their conditions remain in the referenced statutes. For example, the recording notice does not authorize posting an interview online in a way that could identify a participant. Family Code 261.307; Family Code 261.3027.
Signed June 20, 2025, the act took effect September 1, 2025. It applies to suits filed on or after that date; earlier-filed suits remain governed by former law. The filing date—not simply the date a later hearing occurs—controls this transition. Official history; Final law, sections 2–3.
What changed along the way?
The introduced bill would also have barred the court from considering evidence gathered from or provided by the alleged perpetrator during the investigation or interview when the specified notices were not fully given. It proposed an exception where the court had good cause to believe a child faced imminent danger of specified aggravated circumstances, with reasons stated in writing or on the record. The Senate committee substitute removed both that proposed exclusion and its exception. Neither became law in SB1141. The substitute, engrossed, House committee and enrolled operative provisions match, and no floor amendments are indexed. Introduced bill; Senate substitute; All versions; Amendment index; Final law.
That deletion does not mean every notice failure leaves evidence admissible. Existing section 261.307(e), which SB1141 does not amend, excludes information obtained from a person who did not receive the required verbal notification and written summary, and other information that would not have been discovered without it, from use against that person in a civil proceeding. The new act adds the confirmation step; it does not itself add automatic dismissal, return of a child or a new blanket evidence remedy. Family Code 261.307, subsection (e); Final law.
For the full amendment record, open the official amendment index.
Official bill versions
Compare the published text versions in the official text index. A change is not attributed to a specific amendment here without a verified record.
Who could benefit—and who could bear the costs?
The confirmation gives the person accused an opportunity for missing notice to be identified before the full adversary hearing, and requires courts to make that check in open court and in writing. DFPS and courts must be prepared to address whether the required information was supplied. The law does not promise a particular custody decision or eliminate the other rules governing evidence and child protection. Final law; Family Code 261.307.
The April 20 introduced and April 25 substitute fiscal notes anticipate no significant state or local fiscal implication and assume implementation costs can be absorbed using existing resources. They provide no dollar estimate of a family’s legal expenses, agency savings or hearing delays. Introduced fiscal note; Substitute fiscal note.
Official sources
- Bill history and latest recorded action
- Bill versions, analyses and fiscal notes
- Action history and votes
- Amendment index
Catalog report retrieved 2026-10-25. Check the official record for corrections or later changes.
