Id. Our inquiry here is whether, on the entire record, a fact finder could reasonably form a firm conviction or belief that the parent endangered the children and that the termination of the parent’s parental rights would be in the best interest of the children. Id. 89 at 29. B. Sufficiency of Evidence — Kristin Kristin alleges that the evidence is legally insufficient to show that (1) she knowingly placed or knowingly allowed the child to remain in conditions or surroundings that endangered the physical or emotional well-being of K.M.B.; (2) she engaged in conduct or knowingly placed the child with persons who engaged in conduct which endangered the physical or emotional well-being of the child; or (3) she constructively abandoned K.M.B. Duri pp.—Beaumont 1998, pet. denied) (<HOLDING>). TDPRS also alleged that Kristin had
recognizing policy and ruling that person who failed to file counterclaim when childs paternity was being determined in earlier litigation should not be allowed to bring later suit to establish that he was childs natural father as this would not be in the childs best interests holding that the defendant mother could not be charged with endangering the welfare of a child based upon prenatal acts endangering an unborn child 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 defendants presence in neighborhood frequented by drug users was not in and of itself a basis for concluding he was engaged in criminal conduct holding that endangering conduct need not be engaged in in the childs presence