in parental-rights-termination cases because they prohibit review when error is not preserved in the context of “core issues.” See id. at 72-73. The analytical starting point for determining whether our procedures violate the Constitution is our law on error preservation for appellate review. As a general rule, no error may be reviewed on appeal that was not raised before the trial court. Tex.R.App. P. 33.1. Nevertheless, like most other jurisdictions, our civil jurisprudence is well settled that appellate courts may consider unpreserved error that is “fundamental.” See McCauley v. Consol. Underwriters, 157 Tex. 475, 304 S.W.2d 265, 266 (1957); Ramsey v. Dunlop, 146 Tex. 196, 205 S.W.2d 979, 982 (1947); see also 6 MoDoNald & CaRlson, Texas Civil PRactice § 47:4, at 1201-02 (2d ed.1998) (<HOLDING>); W. James Kronzer, Laying the Foundation for
recognizing exceptional cireumstances as an exception to the preservation rule recognizing general rule recognizing exception to preservation rules for fundamental error that is highly prejudicial recognizing fundamental error as an exception to the general rule of preservation recognizing this as the general rule