Texas Family Code Section 153.132 lists eleven exclusive rights that belong to a parent appointed as sole managing conservator of a child. Those rights cover where the child lives, who consents to medical and psychiatric care, who makes educational decisions, who receives child support, who represents the child legally, who consents to marriage or military enlistment, and who controls the child’s passport. The other parent, usually named possessory conservator, keeps a separate set of information and emergency rights under Section 153.073, so sole conservatorship concentrates decision-making without cutting the other parent out entirely.
The Eleven Exclusive Rights Under Section 153.132
The statute assigns each right to the sole managing conservator by subsection. Read together, they hand one parent the authority to run the child’s day-to-day life and make the decisions that carry legal weight.1State of Texas. Texas Family Code Section 153.132 – Rights and Duties of Parent Appointed Sole Managing Conservator
Designating the Child’s Primary Residence
Subsection (1) gives the sole managing conservator the exclusive right to decide where the child lives. Many Texas orders attach a geographic restriction limiting the child’s residence to a specific county or group of contiguous counties. If the order contains that restriction, the sole managing conservator cannot move the child outside the designated area without going back to court. Without a restriction, the parent can relocate, though the order will usually require notice of any address change to the other parent.
Violating a residence provision or a possession order can be enforced through contempt. Under the general contempt statute, a Texas court can impose a fine of up to $500 or confinement in the county jail for up to six months, or both.2State of Texas. Texas Government Code GOVT 21.002 – Contempt of Court Family law orders in Texas are required to carry a prominent warning of those penalties.3State of Texas. Texas Family Code FAM 105.006 – Contents of Final Order
Consent to Medical, Dental, Surgical, Psychiatric, and Psychological Treatment
Subsections (2) and (3) split healthcare authority into two categories that the sole managing conservator holds together: consent to medical, dental, and surgical treatment involving invasive procedures, and consent to psychiatric and psychological treatment. One parent can authorize surgery, ongoing therapy, psychiatric medication, or inpatient treatment without the other parent’s signature. The point is to keep a child’s care from stalling because two parents cannot agree.
Receiving and Disbursing Child Support
Subsection (4) gives the sole managing conservator the exclusive right to receive and disburse child support payments for the child’s benefit. Those funds must be spent on the child rather than on the parent’s personal expenses. If the child receives Social Security benefits and the parent acts as representative payee, the Social Security Administration requires the parent to keep records showing how the money is spent or saved and to produce them on request.4Social Security Administration. Representative Payee Program Natural or adoptive parents who live with the child are exempt from filing the annual Representative Payee Report, but the record-keeping obligation still applies.
Representing the Child Legally
Subsection (5) gives the sole managing conservator the exclusive right to represent the child in legal proceedings and to make other decisions of substantial legal significance. That covers filing a personal injury claim for a child hurt in an accident, representing the child in a probate proceeding, signing a binding contract on the child’s behalf, and consenting to a settlement. The phrase “substantial legal significance” is drafted broadly.
Consent to Marriage and Military Enlistment
Subsection (6) gives the sole managing conservator the exclusive right to consent to the child’s marriage and to enlistment in the armed forces. The marriage consent right is narrower than it once was in Texas: only emancipated 16- and 17-year-olds can legally marry, and they must provide proof of emancipation, so an unemancipated minor cannot marry regardless of parental consent. The enlistment right still matters when a 17-year-old wants to join a military branch, which requires a parent’s written consent.
Educational Decisions and School Choice
Subsections (7) and (8) put the sole managing conservator in charge of the child’s education. That includes choosing the school, handling enrollment, and deciding among public school, private school, and homeschooling. It also covers special education services and individualized education programs.
Federal law adds a wrinkle worth noting. Under FERPA, a school must give both parents full access to education records unless the school has been provided a court order that specifically revokes those rights.5U.S. Department of Education. FERPA – Protecting Student Privacy A standard sole managing conservatorship order does not automatically cut off the other parent’s FERPA access; to block it, the order has to say so.
Right to the Child’s Services and Earnings
Subsection (9) gives the sole managing conservator the right to the child’s services and earnings. Paired with subsection (4), it places control of the child’s income and support in one parent’s hands.
Acting as the Child’s Agent With Government Entities
Subsection (10) makes the sole managing conservator the child’s agent when a governmental entity requires the child to act, handling documentation, signatures, and applications tied to the child’s financial or legal interests. If a guardian of the child’s estate or a guardian ad litem has been appointed, that person handles estate matters instead. In most families, this is the parent managing insurance payouts and government benefit applications on the child’s behalf.
Applying for, Renewing, and Holding the Child’s Passport
Subsection (11) gives the sole managing conservator three passport-related rights: applying for the child’s passport, renewing it, and keeping physical possession of it. A U.S. passport application for a child under 16 normally requires both parents to appear in person or the absent parent to provide a notarized consent form. A sole managing conservator can bypass that requirement by presenting the court order granting sole custody to the U.S. Department of State.6U.S. Department of State. Apply for a Child’s Passport Under 16 Holding the physical passport adds a practical layer of protection when there is any concern about the other parent taking the child abroad.
A separate federal program can affect a parent’s own passport. A parent who owes $2,500 or more in past-due child support can be denied a U.S. passport.7Administration for Children and Families. Passport Denial Program 101
What the Possessory Conservator Still Has
Being the non-sole parent does not mean losing all parental rights. Section 153.073 preserves rights that every conservator keeps unless the court orders otherwise. The possessory conservator can receive information from the other conservator about the child’s health, education, and welfare, access the child’s medical, dental, psychological, and educational records, consult with the child’s physician, dentist, psychologist, and school officials, attend school activities, and be listed as an emergency contact.8State of Texas. Texas Family Code FAM 153.073 – Rights of Parent at All Times
The possessory conservator also keeps the right to consent to emergency medical, dental, or surgical treatment when the child faces an immediate danger to health or safety. This matters during visitation: if something happens while the child is at the other parent’s home, that parent can authorize treatment on the spot. The possessory conservator also retains the right to manage any portion of the child’s estate created by that parent or that parent’s family. The line the statute draws is between day-to-day decisions, which belong to the sole managing conservator, and baseline parental involvement, which belongs to both.
When a Texas Court Appoints a Sole Managing Conservator
Texas starts from the presumption that both parents should be joint managing conservators. A court appoints one parent as sole managing conservator only when the presumption has been overcome.9State of Texas. Texas Family Code Section 153.131 – Presumption That Parent to Be Appointed Managing Conservator The most common reason is family violence. If the court finds credible evidence of a history or pattern of abuse or neglect by one parent against the other parent, a spouse, or a child, joint managing conservatorship is not available.10State of Texas. Texas Family Code Section 153.004 – History of Domestic Violence or Sexual Abuse
Beyond violence, courts weigh factors from the Texas Supreme Court’s Holley v. Adams decision: the child’s own wishes, the child’s emotional and physical needs, each parent’s abilities, the stability of each home, drug or alcohol abuse, and prolonged absence from the child’s life. No single factor decides the case. The judge decides whether sole conservatorship serves the child’s best interest, which is the policy running through every custody determination in Texas.11State of Texas. Texas Family Code Section 153.001 – Public Policy
Changing the Order Later
A sole managing conservatorship is not permanent. Either parent can ask the court to modify the arrangement, but the requesting parent has to show that modification serves the child’s best interest and that at least one of three grounds exists: circumstances have materially and substantially changed since the order was signed, the child is at least 12 years old and has told the judge in chambers which parent they prefer to designate their primary residence, or the sole managing conservator has voluntarily given up primary care of the child to someone else for at least six months.12Texas Legislature. Texas Family Code Chapter 156 – Modification
Most modification fights turn on the material and substantial change standard. A parent who has completed drug treatment, kept stable housing, or otherwise addressed the problems behind the original order has a real path to seek a change. A parent who simply disagrees with the sole managing conservator’s decisions, or who wants to relitigate the original trial, will struggle to clear the threshold. Courts are cautious about disrupting a child’s stability without clear evidence that the change benefits the child.