if the parent has “engaged in conduct or knowingly placed the child with persons who engaged in conduct which endangers the physical or emotional well-being of the child.” Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 161 .2d 531, 533 (Tex.1987) (stating that although endangerment requires more than threat of metaphysical injury or possible ill effects of less-than-ideal family environment, it is not necessary that parent’s conduct be directed at child or that child actually suffers injury); Robinson v. Tex. Dep’t of Protective & Regulatory Servs., 89 S.W.3d 679, 686 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2002, no pet.) (stating that “to endanger” means to expose child to loss or injury or to jeopardize child’s emotional or physical health); In re M.N.G., 147 S.W.3d 521, 536 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2004, pet. denied) (<HOLDING>). “Conduct that subjects a child to [a] life of
holding that courts may look to parental conduct both before and after childs birth to determine whether termination is appropriate that parents conduct need not be directed at child and that danger to childs wellbeing may be inferred from parental misconduct standing alone holding that foster parents have standing to intervene to seek termination of parental rights recognizing that termination of parental rights can be accomplished only by resort to chapters 63 adoption and 39 termination of parental rights and any attempt by a parent to contract away the childs right to support is void and unenforceable as contrary to public policy holding that evidence of continued drug use after pregnancy may be conduct which endangers a childs wellbeing under section 1610011e holding that courts must look to state law to determine childs legal status for inheritance before evaluating the childs renewal rights under the copyright act